Democratic (Party) Direction

(and to be clear I can't wait for her to get out of a leadership position, all reports from former staffers to volunteers say she's not the person any Our Rev enthusiast would ultimately want running the show)

The silent majority who are down with centrists are white and lazy or rich enough not to care.

Silent majority the largest collection of straw man in human discourse iirc.

Shouldn’t Turner’s having refused to endorse the candidate who was running against the fascist president mean everyone is too embarrassed to be associated with her now? Isn’t there something inherently wrong if that’s not currently the case? If she was good at getting people elected, even herself, I could see letting that slide possibly.

ny mag piece saying warren is the leader of the left flank of the dems? that seems... uhhh a unique take. certainly a prominent voice, but-

Elizabeth Warren, Leader of the Persistence
Rebecca Traister on how the Massachusetts senator has emerged in the past few weeks as the de facto leader of the Democratic Party, and the candidate-of-the-moment for 2020

https://www.thecut.com/2018/07/elizabeth-warren-fight-to-defeat-trump.html

it's not at all clear who the leader of the party is right now, because there isn't one. Nominally it's Schumer and Pelosi.

Shouldn’t Turner’s having refused to endorse the candidate who was running against the fascist president mean everyone is too embarrassed to be associated with her now? Isn’t there something inherently wrong if that’s not currently the case? If she was good at getting people elected, even herself, I could see letting that slide possibly.

― Nerdstrom Poindexter, Tuesday, July 24, 2018 9:23 PM (seven minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

who are you talking to

ny mag piece saying warren is the leader of the left flank of the dems?

lol i saw this magazine on my stairwell, the cover is that picture of warren in natick with the headline "front runner???" and it took me a second before i was like "... oh that's elizabeth warren! ...? sure, i guess!"

if warren was the 2016 nominee she would have won imo

She definitely should have run but it’s impossible to know the kind of narratives that take shape in an election to ever be confident about hypothetical candidates like that.

I don't think she would have won tbh

she's a good Senator, but her public persona is p much identical to Trump in the minds of Trump voters ("uppity lying scold of a schoolmarm tellin me what to do!") and I don't think the election dynamic would have changed much.

er identical to HILLARY in the minds of Trump voters

I could see her energizing the Dem base and not having the baggage that lends itself to division within the party as Hillary had.

No, she was definitely a woman.

And magically this was posted an hour ago.

Black voters made Doug Jones a senator and Barack Obama a president. More than 80 percent of black voters voted Democrat in every election since 1972. Without the black vote, the Democratic Party would be as impotent and powerless as Donald Trump in a threesome with Vladimir Putin and Nancy Pelosi.

Yet the Democratic Party only pays attention to black voters during election season. They spend the rest of their time courting and catering to the 49 percent. The independents and the undecided. The moderates.

The white people.

https://www.theroot.com/5-things-black-voters-should-demand-from-the-democratic-1827842891

Well yeah again I’m not confident about it.

I personally would have been a million times more enthusiastic about Warren than Clinton. She had some of the "you're getting screwed" attitude of Trump, but with actual policies that addressed the problems.

yeah but voters are stupid and don't care about policy!

also none of the stench of 'superpredators', voting for the iraq war and bill clinton. we can go on forever tho. =|

xp

i do think the obviously gendered and unfair "schoolmarm" aspect would have been a problem, but i also agree that her signature thing of going after "the banks" and visibly sticking up for regular people would have played well, and maybe helped her hold on to those states which went for obama in 2012 but trump in 2016. impossible to know of course. in practical terms, clinton's minuses with the left were probably canceled out by really massive enthusiasm on the part of those who did like her and wanted desperately to see her win. but maybe a candidate who didn't need to do that canceling-out would have had that many more organizers and volunteers ready to go door-to-door....

the other trick of these counterfactuals is that we're reaching back knowing that trump was the GOP nominee, and that clinton lost, neither of which was obvious to people considering a run back in 2014 and 2015. back then it was more or less assumed clinton would be the dem nominee and that the GOP would put up someone like rubio, and that would have informed the pros and cons of the sacrifices, headaches, and potential setbacks of mounting a failed run.

Warren is a marvelous Senate candidate.

Do you not want her to run in 2020?

next counterfactual scenario I read on a politics thread is getting FPed

Do you not want her to run in 2020?

is her Senate seat safe?

I mean one of the reasons I'm cool with Harris running is that the chances of the GOP taking one of CA's Senate seats are basically zero, and she's not the ranking member on any committees, etc.

I'd vote for John W. Davis in 2020.

lol

Davis, as a defender of racial segregation and state control of education, uncharacteristically displayed his emotions in arguing that South Carolina had shown good faith in attempting to eliminate any inequality between black and white schools and should be allowed to continue to do so without judicial intervention. He expected to win, most likely through a divided Supreme Court, even after the matter was re-argued after the death of Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson. After the Supreme Court unanimously ruled against his client's position, he returned the $25,000 (equivalent to $200,000 in 2017),[25] that he had received from South Carolina, although he was not required to do so, but kept a silver tea service that had been presented to him.[26]

I mean one of the reasons I'm cool with Harris running is that the chances of the GOP taking one of CA's Senate seats are basically zero, and she's not the ranking member on any committees, etc.

― Οὖτις, Tuesday, July 24, 2018 10:59 PM (thirty-five minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

curious how the state democratic party's lack of endorsement for feinstein affects the current race.. gonna assume incumbency is a hell of a drug and wins out against the current narrative of leftists gone wild and taking over the party. happy to be wrong..

is her Senate seat safe?

Massachusetts is about as safely blue as it gets, right?

Well there’s the specter of President Scott Brown

Massachusetts is about as safely blue as it gets, right?

Ask Martha Coakley.

Ah

I think either Warren or Sanders would’ve won because I suspect they would have been far more open to Obama’s proven tactical playbook, both by inclination and by default, meaning their campaigns would’ve prioritized face to face voter engagement in a way Clinton’s didn’t, which likely would’ve overcome Trump’s slim margins in the Midwest/ Great Lakes States.

come at me silby I can take it

Warren't voice does not straight up sound like Mom from Futurama, for one thing. Also, I haven't been seeing anti-Warren bumper stickers non-stop since literally 1992.

basically:

Cruz would have won this thing easily, just as would have literally any republican but trump. Even if he wins, we were lucky to have him be the candidate. I think Clinton is smart and qualified etc, but it was insane to nominate the most hated person in America

― Dan I., Monday, September 26, 2016 7:32 PM (one year ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I hate this thread

James Comey probably wouldn't have taken a steaming shit on anyone else's chances.

The fucking narcissism-of-small-differences self-punching bullshit everyone engages in while we imagine we’re actually one-upping those other inferior progressives who don’t get it like we do - trenchant pro tip, we have met the enemy and he is us! Fuck all.

Maybe we should put our money, our words, our time and and votes towards Democratic candidates

Losing keeps you pure.

i'm just not inspired to do any better

Losing keeps you pure.

― grawlix (unperson), Tuesday, July 24, 2018 9j

The GOP learned this between 1932 and 1968. It helped!

Roe vs Wade might be gone in the next 12 months and liberals are still discussing who should have won the 2016 primary.

Thesis statement for your blog post.

It might be called 'snark on the internet, infinitely more valuable than winning elections'.

Roe v Wade isn't going to be overturned, and none of the other court precedents protecting women's rights to an abortion are going to be overturned either. They certainly won't be by Kavanaugh.

I think I hate this thread too.

BREAKING: Lucy McBath wins Democratic nomination for U.S. House in Georgia's 6th congressional district. #APracecall at 11:05 p.m. EDT. #Election2018 #GAprimary pic.twitter.com/jQfDBIleeV

— AP Politics (@AP_Politics) July 25, 2018