2020 Democratic presidential primary

i think biden does much better with black voters than buttigieg

The only reasons Buttigieg is more electable than Harris are racism and sexism.

There's a good case to be made that the only reasons Trump was more electable than Hillary were racism and sexism.

watching buttigieg try to debate trump with smoothly delivered mckinsey wisdom sounds like living hell

I would rather vote for Hunter Biden than Joe or Pete.

What's Hunter Biden ever shown you?

People sure hate McKinsey here.

its bad

last week, the buttigieg suggested its poor oerformance in south carolina was the result of black homophobia, a conclusion derived from a single 25-person focus group.

anyway, yeah, looking forward to the unity https://t.co/nZYjpHuf3M

— b-boy bouiebaisse (@jbouie) November 2, 2019

given that he's shorter than trump, i'd like to think that buttigieg has been preparing lo these nearly 40 years to break out the jujitsu on the debate stage

what could possibly maga more than trial by combat

great idea! let's drive a wedge between gay men and blacks!

if we wanted mckinsey we'd have voted for mitt

word

firms like mckinsey are used as blunt instruments by both private equity overlords and political appointees overseeing large government agencies to provide “objective third party” rationales for why we can’t have nice things. They are part and parcel of the new gilded age and should be trusted less than Matt Taibbi trusts the CIA

mookie otm

aimless dap

Pete sucks

Seems to me they are as bad as any corporation.

you’re right it’s all a wash

there are certain corporations that operate on tight margins and constantly have to fight for profit while satisfying union contracts and complying with regulations. They should all be like that

Some wonk-y evaluation of Warren's M4A financing plan. (Bruenig is a pretty hardcore Berner so keep that in mind, also there are graphs)

https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/2019/11/01/warrens-perpetual-medicare-head-tax-is-unworkable-and-bad/

In my experience senior executives hire McKinsey to lend credibility to what their subordinates have been trying to tell them for months, usually too late. The added bonus is you get a bunch of newly minted MBAs wandering the hallways getting in everyone’s way and asking stupid questions.

In my last encounter with them, they took all the work done by one of my smartest female colleagues, stuck it on a McKinsey PowerPoint template, and claimed several million dollars for showing it to the board.

Value Added

re:

Kind of hilarious that at this point the great hope of the major Dem donors is the mayor of the forth largest city in Indiana.

the town pete buttigieg has mayor'd for seven years has a population smaller than the 40th largest city in texas, and the 72nd in california. the fact that he ever entered this conversation is completely baffling

— Christopher Hooks (@cd_hooks) October 30, 2019

good grooming counts for a lot, I guess

I'll be surprised if his polling bounce ends up lasting.

don't what the polling bounce is, it's behind the 12,517 post fold

I like Harris a lot, she’s maybe not that politically savvy yet but is generous and gave a lot of the fundraising money left over from her last Senate campaign to support down-ticket democrats

Only two more months til the poll closes and we can start a new thread

the defining demographic difference at my caucus location in 2016 between Clinton/Sanders supporters seemed to be age more than anything else, and even that wasn’t that striking

a lot of the party wonk types, including the precinct organizers, were in the slim O’Malley minority in the room

Kinda doubt this will work, probably too late for her to pull votes from the left
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/468666-harris-swipes-at-warren-i-have-never-represented-a-corporation

If Harris believes that twaddle, she's a fool.

Its just opportunism

By which I mean I dont think she believes it, but pundits/consultants think voters might believe it since its a similar line to what worked against hillary

What twaddle are not supposed to believe? when Warren was hired by Dow Chemical as part of the defense team in a breast implant lawsuit it was actually to make sure that the woman who had been made sick by the implants were adequately financially compensated? yeah idk.

Well, I didn't know what to think, but if dsb is pushing it, it is definitely disingenuous crap

cool thanks, go ahead and make any sort of substantive point or just attack the messenger?

The only relevant attack on your message should be obvious: It's worthless without a link. It's so obvious I don't get why anyone would bother making it. And since you keep doing the same thing over and over, it's even less worth a damn to make the same obvious point over and over and over. So the most relevant thing is actually to say, that you're a shit messenger.

Like, 'you're not trustworthy' is actually a very good response, which isn't accurately responded to with the usual message/messenger cliché. Like, you don't actually deserve substantive counterpoints just by showing up and writing stupid stuff. Like.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/dow-breast-implant-case-spotlights-elizabeth-warrens-work-helping-big-corporations-navigate-bankruptcies/2019/07/15/06b0d676-82fc-11e9-95a9-e2c830afe24f_story.html?noredirect=on

“She was on the wrong side of the table,” said Sybil Goldrich, who co-founded a support group for women with implants and battled the companies for years. Goldrich said Dow Corning and its parent “used every trick in the book” to limit the size of payouts to women. The companies, she added, “were not easy to deal with at all.”
A person familiar with Warren’s role who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe litigation strategy said the future senator was part of a Dow defense team that had containing the company’s liability as a goal.

"deserve substantive counterpoints just by showing up and writing stupid stuff. Like."

Well, I didn't know what to think, but if dsb is pushing it, it is definitely disingenuous crap

― Frederik B, Saturday, November 2, 2019 3:55 PM (thirty minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

A+ good job

A defense: https://www.creditslips.org/creditslips/2019/07/elizabeth-warren-the-dow-corning-bankruptcy-nothing-to-see.html

I find there are times when "consider the source" has a value in making a judgment.

Did y'all know Warren was a Republican

holy shit

i just read the economist for the first time in a good while. they (always forget about how they DON'T sign their own posts like it's a fucking email) identify two "dubious philosophies" about warren's agenda. the first is "her faith in government as benign and effective."

the other dubious philosophy is a vilification of business. she underrates the dynamic power of markets to help middle-class Americans, invisibly guiding the diverse and spontaneous actions of people and firms, moving capital and labour from dying industries to growing ones and innovating at the expense of lazy incumbents. Without that creative destruction, no amount of government action can raise long-term living standards.

i feel like i just washed out my mouth with soap from the lobby bathroom of a private equity firm

Yeah, the wapo coverage has been bullshit all along, and widely mocked. So. Dsb vmic.

whereas "Credit slips" and some trial lawyer on twitter are excelent reliable sources. i don't know what vmic is? look I'm just a simple country not a lawyer but i think Warren working for Dow probably means she was working on their behalf and not the Victims.

Vmic = Very much in character. And you are pretty clearly misunderstanding what the story is if you think Warren was 'working for Dow'. They consulted her a couple of times on bankruptcy proceedings, as she was one of the biggest experts on bankruptcy law in the country.

are we discussing if "consulted for" or worked for are substantially different? "she was one of the biggest experts on bankruptcy law in the country." that doesn't necessarily seem like much of a plus in my book.

"she was one of the biggest experts on bankruptcy law in the country." that doesn't necessarily seem like much of a plus in my book.

would your opinion change if you knew what her views were on bankruptcy law, or who she was trying to help? or is just being connected to the topic at all a negative?

keep in mind that there are plenty of environmental advocates who are experts on fracking