Democratic (Party) Direction

They're not crackpots, unless you think most of the white (and white-adjacent) people in this country are "crackpots". That is the problem.

I'll tell you what, if Warren runs and loses I'll believe Clinton's gender is the primary source of antipathy towards her.

Relatedly, didn't Corbyn and his platform convince quite a few UKIP folks to embrace the progressive left?

It's not an easy thing to gauge. Weren't there always coziness to Wall Street criticisms from the left about O during his actual administration? They maybe weren't resonating as big because the optics/landscape is really completely different now wrt party battle lines. I don't know if that can be too diminished as a factor.

Relatedly, didn't Corbyn and his platform convince quite a few UKIP folks to embrace the progressive left?

― a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.), Wednesday, August 2, 2017 10:55 AM (eight minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

no. it seems many ukip "went home" to tories while labour gains were primarily non-voters and the young

Corbyn didn't get as many UKIPs as some would think; most of them voted for Tories, because Brexit has taken Tories rightward enough to eat UKIP. So much of 'who voted Brexit' tries to pin it on provincial downtrodden types but that allows rich golf-club bigots in the Home Counties (and their counterparts in the regions) to go unexamined. But bigot trade unionist uncles etc. probably voted Labour because voting Tory is anathema to them.

The 'no one cared about speeches BEFORE' is a pretty hollow argument, given how modern a concept it is (Ford being the first to really make a real career of it) - since Carter didn't really partake, that makes Bill and Obama the only two Democratic Presidents of the speaking fee era.

Alright fuckers just because I gave money during the election doesn't mean I need four reminders to sign Barack's birthday card

I mean seriously, if I need him I can reach him on his cell

lol those fuckin emails drive me crazy

"You DIDN'T wanna sign?!"

thanks for building that strong party, 'Racky

The 'no one cared about speeches BEFORE' is a pretty hollow argument, given how modern a concept it is (Ford being the first to really make a real career of it) - since Carter didn't really partake, that makes Bill and Obama the only two Democratic Presidents of the speaking fee era.

The logic of this minus the partisan purity test is still uh, not logic

Most people upset at Obama and the Clintons' speaking fees already hated Dubya and expected the worst of him in every possible regard (and were likely too young to remember Reagan and HW).

Of course, you also have articles from the left and otherwise talking about and decrying the practice well before the 2016 primary:
http://www.salon.com/2013/07/17/the_buckraking_practices_of_hillary_clinton_and_8_other_political_heavies_partner/
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/weekinreview/09seelye.html
http://people.com/archive/eight-days-in-japan-earn-ron-and-nancy-2-million-now-thats-reaganomics-vol-32-no-19/

Hillary speaking to Goldman Sachs in particular being an issue is entirely a product of the post-Great Recession political mood and the push on the left for Democrats to be less beholden to Wall Street.

is there anything to the chatter that O and co. want to run some Bain Capital goon?

Deval Patrick, former Massachusetts governor

If you value your sanity, I recommend not reading the comments on the Politico article where that came out yesterday.

Can we please stop forgetting that Hillary won the popular vote by nearly 3 percentage points, though? Any time. Ready when y'all are.

in trying to verify that (it would be nice if there were a source other than Politico) the next story was O jabbing Romney for his Bain tenure in 2012

can we not rehash the popular vote thing for the love of god, no one has forgotten

I realize this is a rich request as I will fully cop to being the sad king of rehashing shit

lol @ describing Deval Patrick as "some Bain Capital goon" as if that is the sum total of his identity and with zero knowledge of what his job at Bain actually is

That was all I knew of him when I asked the question.

If opponents can convincingly draw a line btwn him and subprime loans that could be a problem, I would think.

It seems weird to follow American politics and not know who Deval Patrick is!

lol @ describing Deval Patrick as "some Bain Capital goon" as if that is the sum total of his identity and with zero knowledge of what his job at Bain actually is

the depressing thing is that he would be a great candidate and this is exactly how he's going to be smeared if he does run

Like, I would say, if you can name 50 Democrats, I would expect Deval Patrick to be one of them, not that I think naming 50 Democrats would be a good use of your time.

uh how do you go to bain after public service and not think "GOODBYE, SERVICE, BEEN REAL!"

I mean all I really care about is, is dude gonna be pro single payer and taxing the fuck out of the rich or not

xp lol true

I don't remember much about Patrick aside from Mass governor and not super popular at the end of his terms, but his exact job is doesn't seem all that important in an atmosphere where finance connections were a major campaign negative (primary and general).

As centrists say that progressives must accept reality and vote for the party's candidate no matter what in the face of what the GOP has become, the center must accept reality that they have to make that candidate somewhat palatable to the progressives.

Patrick is a great guy but was just an okay at best governer; I would not be surprised if his experience there pushes him away from running for President. I'd say overall Romney's term had more positive outcomes but that was largely due to a Democratic state senate nonstop pushing him in the right direction.

Patrick did a lot of hustling to get a Wynn casino built about 10 minutes north of Boston (and about 5 minutes from my house) which is either going to be great or a disaster.

His job at Bain is to identify and fund businesses that have a positive social impact, as profiled here:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2017/07/17/patrick-revels-role-developing-new-social-impact-bain-fund/hWtzrhYvIBPWVPL0UGKBqM/story.html

I'm curious about his time at Coke, I remember reading about the supposed targeted killings in Colombia when I was younger and the Wikipedia entry's section on it is pretty vague

the center must accept reality that they have to make that candidate somewhat palatable to the progressives.

this is otm, but i'm not sure where this line is. who are the viable candidates that the twitterati haven't already raked over the coals for one reason or another?

The thing is all anyone has to judge these people on right now is their CVs. When any of them actually start saying where they stand on things, those could potentially shift, I'd imagine.

Their CVs include a record of their actions when they have held public office so I'm not really seeing a problem here.

Those CVs don't necessarily reveal anything about their take on health care, campaign finance, national defense, any number of other things, esp for people who didn't live in the respective states in which they held public office

and of course it makes sense to not have stances on that stuff yet as it's Stupid Fucking Early.

When I'm hearing about candidates to consider, I think it's a good idea to seek out the opinions of people from whichever candidate's state etc.

Can we please stop forgetting that Hillary won the popular vote by nearly 3 percentage points, though?

and that and $2.75 will get her to her next paid speech

What ever could be the answer to this mysterious question posed by Ryan Cooper? A real head scratcher...

Why leftists don't trust Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and Deval Patrick https://t.co/vAP95n6DGZ pic.twitter.com/dhZPvBPgGc

— ryan cooper (@ryanlcooper) August 3, 2017

did you even read it or did you just see an easy opportunity to snark

you mean, like, black leftists who've been leading critics of them?

the first leftist critique of kamala harris i read was super racist so i assume it proceeds from there

The Cooper article doesn't even mention her treatment of trans inmates, which has been the main thing I see people mentioning in their critiques

(There's also that prison labor business but I understand that was "lawyers from her office" and not Harris herself so there's some grey there.)

who are some examples of people that leftists trust? Glenn Greenwald? That worked out well for Reality Winner I guess

I read that article and it is dumb as fuck

otm

If there were a US equivalent to someone as left as Corbyn or Melenchon that would be something they might rally around more happily, but that doesn't seem likely. xxp