2020 Democratic presidential primary

She admonished AOC specifically for violating norms of conduct within the caucus, not anything policy-related. Which is generally her m.o.

Policy-wise when it comes to public statements she sticks to promoting bills that have followed the normal course of legislative business and have the support of the majority (if not the entirety) of the caucus. Party infighting is generally blown out of proportion by the press and always followed by statements from party members about their support for and appreciation of Pelosi. Jayapal, AOC, for ex both did this after having spats between aides that went public.

de blasio appears to have no interest whatsoever in actually running a city, and i've heard people who've worked with city government say he's a terrible manager. running for president when he has no chance is complete vanity -- he's trying to get out of doing his current job while angling for something bigger (and getting party insiders paid to advise him)

the subway isn't his fault, but nor has he been able to use whatever clout he has to make anything better

the whole thing about him being driven 14 miles to work out in a gym in park slope is silly, but a better politician would neither do it nor allow it to become attached to him

i'd still vote for him over cuomo tho

i know im from tx! and tx gop continues with the same. greg abbott won reelection for governor hugely despite a poor showing from the zodiac killer against bob o'rourke. abbott has balanced the whole border security shit with "my wife is mexican-american, im not like THOSE republicans".

Abbott also let Lt. Governor Dan Patrick carry the Trump water during the election.

xxp OK fine, but why be mean to a bunch of kids who come to your office to express their concerns?

look those kids need to learn how to keep a caucus together someday

Btw, AOC staffer that started the shitstorm w his stupid tweet has quit: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/455996-ocasio-cortez-chief-of-staff-to-leave-her-office

that doesn't seem like the correct order of events

>@DemSocialists will not endorse another 2020 Dem candidate (cough Warren cough) if Sanders loses the primary. By no means a unanimous decision. One delegate opposing rez said, "Trump is too dangerous to take cards off the table right now." He lost the argument. #dsacon2019

— Greg Krieg (@GregJKrieg) August 2, 2019

That seems an extremely supportable position given that she is not a socialist, will have the DNC’s endorsement, and every DSA member that’s in favour of her will still be free to campaign and organise for her anyway.

Bernie’s not a socialist either nyah WGAF

he's just not "a capitalist to his bones" no matter what his book sold

I would have been absolutely shocked to see the DSA support Warren given that she stood up and clapped when Trump said the US will never be a socialist country during his state of the union.

I knew he was self-funding but seeing it in print is so much funnier

lol check out the top donors to this fucking clown’s PAC pic.twitter.com/M7cH4fZpP5

— chris (@MuellerDad69) August 3, 2019

Delaney owes his political career to one of the most gerrymandered districts in america, and he still almost lost to alt right psycho Dan Bongino in 2014

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland%27s_6th_congressional_district

Not endorsing a Warren candidacy would be a great way for DSA to complete marginalize themselves again

They're 60,000 people in a nation of 320m+, and leftists to boot. They are already marginal by every conceivable definition.

But yeah, they should definitely endorse someone who would never publicly accept or acknowledge their support in a bid to launch themselves into mainstream acceptance, which is definitely just around the corner.

If we were going to play along with Fred's logic
DSA membership after endorsing Kerry & Obama: 4000
DSA membership after not endorsing Clinton: 30000 and climbing

Lol, they endorsed Kerry and Obama, but won't endorse Warren?

lol Fred u fuckin eejit

Fred being either disingenuous or ignorant up in here. The DSA has completely different leadership and membership now than it did pre-2016. Bernie's run infused the previously moribund organization with tens of thousands of new, young members with higher standards and much different ideas about strategy.

Is this your first time meeting Fres

d

not a day goes by where he doesn’t feel like he’s smarter than everyone else on here

good morning!

I doubt not endorsing Clinton in 2016 won’t have the same effect as not endorsing Warren in 2020. It seems pretty clear to me that for starters, Bernie has much more respect and admiration for Warren.

What kind of impact does a DSA endorsement, or lack thereof, have on US elections?

zero

tens of thousands of new, young members with higher standards and much different ideas

Every generation gets its own "Nader supporters".

I don’t think the DSA sink to that level

A good chunk of them don't even care about electoral work.

Not endorsing a Warren candidacy would be a great way for DSA to complete marginalize themselves again

Every generation gets its own "Nader supporters".

Aggressively dumb, kudos.

I lived through the Bush presidency, as over a hundred thousand were killed, millions became refugees, zero progress was made on the climate crisis, just because Nader drew at least a few thousand progressives away from the the Dem ticket in Florida.

I'd love to live in a proportional voting system, where there's a viable party giving a voice to most points on the multidimensional poltical spectrum. Alas, we live with 18th century political technology, and in the general, we can either support the least bad major party option, or in effect support the worst.

i would assume the majority of ppl posting here "lived through the bush presidency" given that it ended slightly over a decade ago

i seriously doubt even a single person will change their voting behavior because DSA declines to issue a press release saying they endorse elizabeth warren

xp - "just because"

though if you do believe that the DSA endorsement will determine the general election, you could just make sure that bernie is the nominee

I doubt not endorsing Clinton in 2016 won’t have the same effect as not endorsing Warren in 2020. It seems pretty clear to me that for starters, Bernie has much more respect and admiration for Warren.

I doubt not endorsing Clinton in 2016 won’t have the same effect as not endorsing Warren in 2020. It seems pretty clear to me that for starters, Bernie has much more respect and admiration for Warren.

DSA didnt endorse Clinton

@bombsfall: can't believe a socialist org won't endorse a candidate who loudly identifies as a capitalist and who made a point of clapping in approval when the current president inveighed against the current rise of socialists in the US
― gbx, 3. august 2019 22:22 (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

Like, your argument literally is that she used the wrong words and clapped at the wrong time, and this is honestly the politics of a toddler. A socialist not endorsing Warren over Trump is a weird sectarian kind of socialists.

DSA didnt endorse Clinton

― Οὖτις, Saturday, August 3, 2019 7:27 PM (forty-one minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Yeah that’s what I meant.

Weird how "I'm not a socialist" are the "wrong words" for earning a, uh, socialist organization's endorsement.

I'd never even heard of DSA until recently and am still a bit shakey on what they are (ie: are they some kind of actual official group or some loose collection of idealogues like the Tea Party?)

They’ll endorse Bernie who is more or less as close to “socialism” as Warren.

oh it's actually the socialists I used to avoid on campus. thanks wikipedia.

Which really ain’t socialism at all.

Exactly

God only knows what kind of socialists and socialism would be acceptable.