2020 Democratic presidential primary

old man o'rourke had better be more careful standing on all those high surfaces, if he falls and breaks his hip he's done for

https://images.app.goo.gl/VToQdYqakHRcBXdt7

Could’ve sworn I saw that Biden was out but I must have been dreaming.

"He faced anti-gay hecklers at two events, including in Des Moines where a man in the crowd shouted ‘remember Sodom and Gomorrah!’ just after Buttigieg talked about marrying his husband, Chasten, who attended the event.

“The man kept shouting but the crowd chants of ‘Pete! Pete!’ drowned him out. Buttigieg calmly looked on as security escorted away the individual. ‘The good news is, the condition of my soul is in the hands of God, but the Iowa caucuses are up to you,’ Buttigieg said to laughter and cheers.

“Two days after officially entering the presidential race, Buttigieg was expecting 50 people at a Polk County meet and greet. As RSVPs rolled in, organizers moved it from a small gym at Franklin Junior High to the large gym, to an auditorium and finally moving it outside. A good thing: a stunning 1,650 people showed up in the end.

“It isn’t just the number of people that stands out: Buttigieg has yet to staff up with organizers in Iowa, so this turnout was mostly organic. Buttigieg spoke to a progressive Iowa group in December and has visited the earlier this year but this crowd was exponentially larger.”

I'm not entirely over Pete but I'm not sure about letting our first First Gentleman be named fucking Chasten

Sanders's program is just not that different from what Democratic voters and politicians stump for anyway

this seems...not true? or at least, if they're stumping for it now it's because he pushed them in that direction (at least re M4A)

also, i too thought i had heard biden was out but apparently was dreaming too

the whole "college should be free thing" was definitely different than what democratic voters/politicians stumped for as recently as 2016. that may have changed now, as more of the primary candidates have been adopting something approaching his positions, or at least indicating that they support the goal. but i'm not sure it's the positions of rank and file democrats who aren't running for president.

same goes for a number of other prominent positions sanders took in 2016

...iirc.

Could’ve sworn I saw that Biden was out but I must have been dreaming.

― don't mock my smock or i'll clean your clock (silby), Wednesday, April 17, 2019 10:57 AM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Bet you saw something along the lines of:

Biden isn't running, Assad and Putin meet, plus more of today's top headlines: https://t.co/G65R9HWfuG

— The Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) October 21, 2015

But without the date and pic.

that was a communications misunderstanding - biden had declared that he would not run as in he would not be jogging that day. definitely still running for president though

xpost tombot by far Kamala Harris has the best logo.

Inslee on Schulz:

Everybody that can string two words together knows the only consequence of his candidacy would be opening the window of possibility to Trump’s reelection. It’s just, there’s no evidence whatsoever to support that as a rational decision, except wanting to lead to the more probable reelection of Donald Trump.

Presumably you’ve had some sort of relationship with him in the past, as a business leader in the state?

Minimal. He has never really engaged in public policy in my state. AWOL — almost totally — from almost anything having to do with democracy or policy in our state. Doesn’t even vote over half the time. Didn’t vote in the last — we had a school election, to help fund schools! Here’s a guy who wants to be president of the United States who didn’t even deign to vote, what, five weeks ago? Yeah! We had a school bond issue — we’re trying to build schools — here’s a guy who says he wants to be in education, he’s going to reform America and bring a new politics, and the son of a gun doesn’t even vote. What type of embarrassing thing is that? You want to be president and you don’t even vote? You know, that’s just for the little people. In Howard’s life, voting is just for the little people. I don’t think his candidacy is going to soar.

Trump probably never voted either.

wrote himself in probably

Ok so these are pretty nice: https://design.peteforamerica.com/team

I thought this was pretty good, although I don't know that Henwood is giving Warren enough credit on the environment: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/04/elizabeth-warren-transparency-markets-2020-campaign?fbclid=IwAR3BK0DS8j1hStYIYp4VfnXuBJkVKWvcK5jNY9Cy-LEK-K-DTclZ3ua-B6o

She’s not losing. She’s being actively cock blocked by the media. It’s not happening. It’s done. https://t.co/UeaGk882pT

— Eileen Myles (@EileenMyles) April 18, 2019

Some truth in that I think, but her path is surely being blocked by Bernie, not Beto and Mayor Pete? I think her only real route forward is if somehow Bernie drops out and she picks up his voters. I like her well enough, she would be my second choice, but its not a given she would pick up Bernie votes either if he were to drop out for some reason (though I think she should).

but of course the media aren't supporting her, why would they? They prefer narrative to substantive policy, and she wants to tax the owners than most of the others, so she needs grassroots to make up for it, and she doesn't have that either

fbclid=IwAR3BK0DS8j1hStYIYp4VfnXuBJkVKWvcK5jNY9Cy-LEK-K-DTclZ3ua-B6o

america's sweetheart nathan j robinson offers a comprehensive look at warren's (largely v good!) policy proposals here

Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign is not picking up much momentum, but she is consistently producing the most worthwhile and interesting policy proposals of any candidate. Seemingly every week, Warren comes out with a new Big Idea, and they’re all provocative and worth debating. In a country that had intelligent and substantive political media, Warren would be leading the conversation. Sadly, we live in the United States, so our media are discussing Pete Buttigieg’s socks.

Here’s the New Yorker on a Warren speech:

“Let’s start with our values here. And that is: in the richest country in the history of the world, people should not be sleeping on the streets because they don’t have money.” Warren paused for applause before adding, “And I’ve got a plan.”

It’s that last bit that sets her apart. Warren has plans! The list of Excellent Ideas coming out of the Warren camp just grows and grow—on April 11 she released her corporate profits tax plan and on April 15 she released her Public Lands plan

Petri had a pretty otm satire piece about everyone loving and wanting policy and substance but oh no, not Elizabeth Warren's policies. Not those.

this piece on andrew yang from the verge is why tech reporters should be banned from talking about politics

Yang has been campaigning for the Democratic presidential nomination all year, but audiences like this have only started to show up in the past couple weeks. The tipping point was an appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast in February. It was a deep, analytic, two-hour interview, which is catnip for Rogan’s Reddit-centric audience. Yang’s pitch was simple: automation is destroying American jobs, and we need a president with some kind of answer. If you believe that, the robot-obsessed startup guy could be your only option.

Yang’s answer looks a lot like socialism, although he doesn’t use the word himself. The centerpiece of Yang’s campaign is a $1,000 monthly check to every person in America, paid for with a Nordic-style Value Added Tax. That’s normally called a basic income, although the Yang campaign calls it a “freedom dividend,” since focus group testing found the idea was more popular in the language of corporate ownership. Left-wing think tanks like the Roosevelt Institute and Data for Progress have been pushing a basic income for years as an alternative to the current labyrinth of federal aid programs, but Yang is the first presidential candidate to build a campaign around it.

Yang predicts an epidemic of depreciating human capital hitting profession after profession until society disintegrates, overwhelmed by the sheer volume of human despair.
"“The end state looks unthinkably terrible.”"

It’s grim, with obvious echoes of Marx (who was writing about automation too). But where Marx saw a struggle between discrete classes, Yang sees a tidal wave hitting group after group in sequence. In his reading, no one is safe and we’re all in it together. “Relying on the market is going to get more and more destructive as it zeroes out more and more people,” he says, “unless we come together and build a different kind of economy as fast as possible. And the first concrete step in that direction is to give everyone $1,000 a month in cash.”

fuckin owning the means of production, how does it work

The thing that makes me most happy about the forthcoming Sanders presidency is that there should be a big chance of Warren getting a cabinet position and kicking ass at that. And then a man can get the credit for her work. Sigh.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4by7CNW0AAz3a8.jpg:large

*unzips*

The Nathan J Robinson piece was fine until the end when he abruptly decides to point out that even though Warren easily has the best and most thought-out plans of anyone in the race, she has no chance of beating our boy Bernie and thank fuck for that!

NJR gives his game away right here:

I’m not much of a policy nerd myself

It's fine if that's true, but he almost seems proud of it.

The thing that makes me most happy about the forthcoming Sanders presidency is that there should be a big chance of Warren getting a cabinet position and kicking ass at that.

Fred... OTM

although obv not counting any chhickens before etc

I think it's beyond foolish at this point to express confidence about who the nominee is going to be in 2020, let alone the President. Maybe there are only 5 or 6 legit contenders but feeling like any of them are a safe bet seems premature.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/17/kamala-harris-leads-campaign-money-race-1280546

donor class might be coalescing around Harris after all

not surprising. christ, we really are going to re-live 2016 aren't we? except this time the "Bernie vs. Woman Whose Progressivism is Suspect" will have the added kick of involving a woman of color. can't wait!

replace "suspect" with "non-existent beyond recent public statements made while campaigning for a position of incredible power" and I agree but that's a bit unwieldy

The thing that makes me most happy about the forthcoming Sanders presidency

https://i.imgur.com/1ZfRvu6.jpg

Mayor Pete's design elements/merch were mentioned earlier so here's a neat thread that drills into the finer points of that stuff

A few things about @PeteButtigieg's branding, because (ahem https://t.co/7KKj9qjzoO) indeed, I still have thoughts about political branding!https://t.co/0rlCS6azYp

— Lindsay Ballant (@lindsayballant) April 16, 2019

can i 3-d print a dream of a better tomorrow

now convinced that buttigieg would get destroyed in a general election https://daringfireball.net/linked/2019/04/17/pete-for-america-design-toolkit

im most surprised that the mayor of south bend would choose a color-scheme so similar to the university of michigan's

ur familiar with Notre Dame colors y/n?

Bernie really should head Dept of Labor.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/17/kamala-harris-leads-campaign-money-race-1280546

donor class might be coalescing around Harris after all

― Simon H., Thursday, 18 April 2019

She makes most sense, especially given its likely to come down to head to head vs Bernie. If it ends up being vs Warren then Beto might me a more suitable choice, but that looks unlikely, and it doesn't really look like Beto is going to get any momentum, whereas Kamala's potential looks a lot more solid.

since day 1 I always thought she made the most sense as the establishment pick. only timidity could make one prefer Beto or Biden.

unique way to spell "sexism" but survey says it's a go

ur familiar with Notre Dame colors y/n?

― Larry Elleison (rogermexico.), Thursday, April 18, 2019 10:50 AM (two hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

hey man, blue and metallic gold is TOTALLY different from maize and blue

pic.twitter.com/GapSOgoNTW

— Bacon Grease (@T_Joad1) April 18, 2019

extremely cursed image

powerful people in cars getting coffee, starring nathan fielder

don’t follow the money

One way to think about the 2020 primary is to ask yourself: Who would the plutocrats least want? https://t.co/ltKPxGXlA8

— Anand Giridharadas (@AnandWrites) April 18, 2019

that pete number

No redactions here! NEW NATIONAL POLL:

2020 Democratic Primary (incl. Biden/Abrams):

Biden: 21%
Sanders: 20%
Buttigieg: 17%
O’Rourke: 9%
Warren: 8%
Harris: 7%
Abrams: 4%
Booker: 4%
Klobuchar: 2%
Yang: 2%
Gabbard: 2%

(n=2518, national likely 2020 Dem. primary voters, Apr 12-15)

— Change Research (@ChangePolls) April 18, 2019

Wait, Mayor Pete is a Phish fan?! Ugh.