2020 Democratic presidential primary

i dont discuss irishness with american ilxors, ye know it all already and are also mental to boot tbh

you'll forgive us, won't you, for being deranged at this late date

i tried to find the press release that i'm half-remembering but it's hard to google for and wading through the october 2018 thread to find it is too daunting. so nevermind i guess. the way it was getting discussed here rubbed me the wrong way was all - i remember it being a thoughtful and provocative argument, not someone willfully misrepresenting warren's position.

I remember thinking that about that letter. I have no wuartel with the people from the cherokee tribes who took issue with her. It’s more the way the whole incident has telephoned on down to now, where I think people are remembering it as worse than it was, I feel.

*quarrel not wuartel. Jesus.

She did claim native identity and used the DNA test to back it up.it was really shitty. Stop finding excuses for shitty colonialism

I’ll say even though she wasn’t claiming tribal identity and the misinformation about that is frustrating, it’s fair to say she should have met w tribal leaders beforehand anyway and coordinated the response w them since the Trump attack line she was responding to isn’t solely about her and her family but implicates that community in a big way.

She did claim native identity and used the DNA test to back it up.

citation needed

http://www.criticalethnicstudiesjournal.org/blog/2018/12/19/syllabus-elizabeth-warren-cherokee-citizenship-and-dna-testing

xp - how do you distinguish between "tribal identity" which was my terminology and I intended to mean 'membership in a tribe', and "native identity" which was your term? What does "native identity" even mean?

What does sophistry mean

Your citation specifically regards her "claims to Cherokee ancestry", which is a rather broad way to state her claim that one specific ancestor of hers was identified as Cherokee in her family lore. Transmuting that into claiming a current and inclusive "native identity" doesn't seem accurate at all.

What does sophistry mean

Words often have shades of meaning and nuance. I am being as clear about these as I know how to be. You are being unclear, and when challenged to clarify you are being evasive.

She did this in the form of a video, check 4:22 in https://youtu.be/RHzbdZuVyAM

U guys are all talking about some bullshit donald trump wants us to talk about. Good job everybody.

Sweep sweep

that's a good one. can you moo?

Xxpost Not really.

Warrens ad was emptyness personified. She's actually pretty good on the policy front is the shame of it, but she's just built to lose

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dv4ocvcUYAM-YBT.jpg

tbf he could be so beaten by that point that any Democrat wins but idk

those captioned photos are gross

Well of course they are, thats the point. This is why we need a candidate that doesn't think they can play that game, just sticks to policy and messaging and doesn't think that somehow they can get in the ring and wrestle with Trump

Hey did you make an intentionally bad meme to illustrate that point for everyone? Please just say that you made it anyway. Don’t say “no I found it” even if that happens to be true.

I can ask a moderator for it to be deleted, turned into a link or moved to right wing cartoon thread. Turned into link is probably best but can go with any

how do you do fellow brawlers, lets spar. really?

i’m not voting for someone because i think they can “get in the ring and wrestle with trump.” That’s just such a bleak attitude and also something for the strategists to figure out, not the voters.

In other news jay inslee is running for president on a climate change platform. I don’t see myself voting for him, but seems useful to have someone in the ring with that as their #1 priority in terms of influencing the platform.

Never mind i misread your post, anvil

we were bored New Year's Day, eh

I am reading Rebecca Solnit's fb where someone is talking about schoolmarm/Warren comments. Ha! "I don't believe in the death penalty, except for that remark. As we're governed by a quivering pile of putrescent lard."

...let's concern-troll the hell out of Warren by pretending that we're just worried about OTHER PEOPLE being raging misogynists subjecting another woman candidate to inane criteria, insults, dismissals and condemnations we would never try out on a man!

Otm

I still laugh at Kamala Harris lacking "executive skills" or whatever that puerile shit was.

If Sanders, Warren or Gillibrand get the nomination, it'll be fun to watch conservative "never Trumpers" squirm and prevaricate in their endorsements.

How many of them supported hillary? I remember them prevaricating then, saying they’d vote for mcmuffin or whatever.

fwiw warren was the biggest "underperformer" in the midterms among incumbents, according to 538

Warren is the first big name for 2020, but I find her underperformance as an incumbent in 2018 really worrisome. If you're losing support among your own constituency how can you win the country? https://t.co/SkvUVX7Iel pic.twitter.com/Dux7ZfeBKU

— Sarah E. Frostenson (@sfrostenson) January 2, 2019

(i'm just highlighting the chart, not frostenson's commentary (which makes some sense, but i'm pretty sure there are lots of examples of politicians doing well on a national scale while simultaneously losing ground among their own constituency. that scenario could be caused by the almighty triangulation strategy, for example)

She did not really lose ground, though. She won by 8 points in 2012, and 24 points in 2018.

24 points is also exactly the margin Ed Markey won with in 2014. I don't really get that chart.

"I still laugh at Kamala Harris lacking "executive skills" or whatever that puerile shit was."

I was just relaying what someone who had to work with her office when she was DA claimed (he works in DNA testing).

Yeah, I wasn't blaming you, I remember it was from a dude that had worked for her. You can tell him his criticism was inane.

Oh correction, he worked with her office.

xpost frederik

She underperformed 538’s “expected margin” for her in 2018, which was calculated individually for each candidate and takes into account all sorts of things that i can’t easily copy and paste using my phone right now

She did not really lose ground, though. She won by 8 points in 2012, and 24 points in 2018.

― Frederik B, Wednesday, January 2, 2019 10:02 AM (forty-one minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

24 points is also exactly the margin Ed Markey won with in 2014. I don't really get that chart.

― Frederik B, Wednesday, January 2, 2019 10:05 AM (thirty-seven minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the margins are considered in the context of the political climate. having the same margin in a year that is much better for democrats overall means something different than a neutral year or smaller lean dem year

Baseball guys get this stuff.

it’s a park adjustment haha

I just invented a new word: sabersplaining.

I guess there is both a park and league adjustment

It’s not a prediction, it’s a projection

If she’s the best candidate she should be supported anyway.

Even if people hate her for dumb reasons.