Your next 2020 Democratic presidential primary thread: Now we're serious

xp probably thought he was some kind of gay blade

Unions who block universal benefits to protect their own private welfare states are killing the labor movement. https://t.co/o8YhvcL5Ec

— Doug Henwood (@DougHenwood) February 13, 2020

wow liz is sounding a lot like amy

it's all moot, says Ryan Grim (Intercept/Sanders stan):

Hey @Culinary226, check in with your government affairs people. There are not 60 votes in the Senate to ban the private health insurance you got in your union negotiations, nor will there be after the election. You're gonna be okay.

— Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) February 12, 2020

"You should vote for the guy whose signature policy is M4A because M4A has no chance of being enacted" is a weird pitch but OK

Yeah I think the much better argument is "not having healthcare as a bargaining chip actually harms the bosses and benefits unions."

which seems correct to me. The idea that having healthcare as a negotiating chip is good for unions somehow reminds me of the same flawed thinking that says it's good to have a mortgage for the tax breaks.

xp (I mean it's actually a very good general election pitch for anti-war, pro-choice, pro-LGBT Dem voters who don't want to ban private insurance when/if Sanders is nominated!)

What’s a good basic primer on ways to address healthcare as negotiated compensation for labor in the face of restructuring to governmental universal insurance?

there’s at least issues of the comparative coverage, and the value of the private coverage as compensation in contract, and i’m sure tons more-

the same flawed thinking that says it's good to have a mortgage for the tax breaks.

you'd be amazed how many people think this makes sense though

i dont mean “why is one better” as much as “how are people proposing to resolve.”

https://theintercept.com/2020/02/13/bloomberg-spending-local-state-campaigns/

Not sure anything this election cycle has been more depressing than Bloomberg's plan actually working as much as it is

Seeing loads of randoms falling for it, not paid micro influencers and not bots. Seems like everyone who spent the last 3 years calling trump Cheeto in Chief suddenly thinks bloomberg is the only one who can beat him

I’ve been contacted by numerous people about this. Do you know anyone who has been paid by the Buttigieg campaign to attend an event? Did you respond to the (since-deleted) craigslist ad below? Has the Buttigieg campaign contacted you about attending an event in exchange for $? https://t.co/KMsiDccmX6

— Colin Kalmbacher (@colinkalmbacher) February 13, 2020

c'mon.

Buttigieg campaign responds via email—says the craigslist ad was fake and notes that it was removed (checked and it was removed by the author):

“This was actually fake and taken down. Someone else flagged as well. Town hall is free and open to the public.”

Imagine that, a fake Craigslist ad.

We're about a month away from virtually every moron who spent the past four years on here complaining Bernie isn't "intersectional" enough to support, all lining up to back Bloomberg, the guy who ran an explicitly racist police state

— Will🧙‍♂️Menaker (@willmenaker) February 13, 2020

how hypocritical these idiots are hypothetically

ok I Do Not Like the media's rush to prematurely eulogize Warren's presumed-dead campaign. Nor do I like some folks in this thread's apparent eagerness to buy into (and therefore legitimize and reinforce) this self-fulfilling pre-obituary, thxbye

I realized that I was doing that, so I decided to throw some money her way yesterday.

well she's not done for but her showing so far has been poor enough that another candidate in her shoes may have dropped out after NH--plus she doesn't seem to have much prospect of improvement ahead. also her tendency to attack Bernie when the chip are down is bumming us out.

she doesn't seem to have much prospect of improvement ahead

You really don't think she's gonna do better in Nevada, South Carolina and on Super Tuesday than Klobuchar and Buttigeig? I do. She may not go 1-2 with Sanders, but she'll be up there. If she's not, I suspect she'll drop out then.

her tendency to attack Bernie when the chip are down

A. Examples please

B. When other candidates (Bernard included) are specific about their differences from other candidates, one hears something along the lines of "This is a one-winner contest in which it's kinda okay to try to draw distinctions between yourself and other candidates." Is Warren specifically not allowed to do so, or what?

quoting ballotpedia for reference:

Alabama
American Samoa
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Democrats Abroad
Maine
Massachusetts
Minnesota
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia

With both California and Texas—the two most populous states in the United States—holding their primaries on Super Tuesday, more than one third of the U.S. population is expected to vote on March 3.

I want Bernie to win those states but it would be nice to see a better finish for Warren as well, just to counter the narrative of the moderate vote beating the progressives. I don’t really see her having a path to victory though.

again, self-fulfilling. you (general "you") not seeing a path for her victory is actively affecting whether or not she has a path to victory.

True of every candidate, I know, but seems egregiously to be aimed at Warren specifically right now. Pppl saying "I don't think she can win" is part of making her not be able to win and this cycle is pernicious

ok

if bernie had gotten sub 10 percent in new hampshire I'm sure warren supporters would not be calling for him to drop out.

YMP is otm insofar as this is how Chuck Todd create "winners and losers."

YMP it's about these recent instances where she's *not* drawing distinctions, though: disingenuously glomming onto Klob/Buttigieg attack line that Bernie is "my way or the highway," and today's (?) oppoortunism re: Nevada culinary union and M4A.

It's hard to sqaure this campaigning with last year's, when she was actually making thoughtful distinctions

Lord Alfred, yes plus "the story needs to change." We can't have a still-viable Warren candidacy PLUS a surging Klobuchar or Buttigieg candidacy. That would be too many things.

xp Well, I get that, and maybe she’ll get some momentum in the next couple states and have a good debate performance (my hope is that she talks a ton of shit to Bloomberg), but it’s felt like her campaign has been stagnating for months. Anyway I don’t support her mainly because I think she has really bad political instincts and should not be running against a president who seems to operate entirely on instinct.

from the NYT story about Bloomberg's profligate spending:

For a rally in New York City in January, Mr. Bloomberg rented out the very same Times Square hotel ballroom in which he had celebrated one of his mayoral victories, with a D.J. presiding and wine and beer and goat cheese puffs on hand for all.

At a Philadelphia rally last week, more than 1,000 people were offered cheese steaks, hoagies and platters of honey-coated brie, fig jam and gourmet flatbreads. Michael Dacosta, who was posted up at one of the drinks stations, raved about the selection, expressing regret that he had eaten at Papa John’s beforehand. “I think it’s classy,” said Mr. Dacosta, a New Yorker who’d paid $55 to have “Let’s Get Bloomin Again” embroidered on his bomber jacket but also grabbed a “PA for Mike” shirt.

“He’s generous,” Mr. Dacosta said, as colorful lights projected Mr. Bloomberg’s name on a wall of the National Constitution Center, where the rally was held. “I feel like it’s a nightclub in here. This is what he needs to get people going.”

The fanfare has also drawn some who don’t plan to vote for the billionaire. “Don’t get me wrong, I like Mike Bloomberg,” said Ramon Vivas, who attended Mr. Bloomberg’s Miami rally in January and wore one of the free shirts bearing that message, along with two Bloomberg buttons. “But I don’t think he’s going to get the nomination, and I support Bernie.”

I like the idea of Bloomberg campaign as homeless shelter.

I saw an image of an MSNBC NH voter poll asking them if they felt Warren was well-positioned on the issues - something like 44 and 43% each on "too liberal" and "not liberal enough", 7% "about right". Seems to sum up her campaign's woes in a handy nutshell.

Man, it sure doesn't take much to buy a vote, huh.

sushi and craft beer

I've watched a lot of presidential campaigns since 1968, when I was old enough to have a basic understanding of and interest in them. Thirteen of them, to be exact. However strong and admirable a candidate Warren appears to those of us who pay attention and like what she has to offer compared to the remaining field, her results in Iowa and NH, coupled with her current standings in polls of NV and SC, and national polls, put her in a hole it would take a miracle to dig her out of.

By branding herself as the 'more pragmatic far leftist' she became the second choice of the left wing of the party behind Sanders, and placed herself somewhere down the preference list for moderates, too. Instead of picking up most of HRC's 2016 coalition, most of them have apparently gravitated to Klobuchar or Buttigeig instead, based on how they triangulate the female vs. male, left vs. moderate, and who-can-beat-Trump equation.

Under the current rules, there is no way to translate that kind of broad second-place support into positive votes as long as the slightly-more-preferred choices remain in the race. A century ago she could have hoped for a deadlocked convention to turn to her as the compromise after five or six inconclusive ballots. That will not happen. She's knocked down now and without several upset wins on Super Tuesday, she's out. She was my first choice, but that and five bucks will get you a latte.

where do you live that a latte costs five bucks

I see you picked up on the most important detail.

gentle teasing, Aimless

is that cheap or expensive to you?

that's canada pricing

the price of a Starbucks latte in Alberta.

Fuck Will Menaker

a latte is only $4.25 (canadian) at the bougie gentrification spot by my place

And every other white guy thinking 'intersectional' is something neoliberals say

that and a $1.50 will get you a bowl of praxis

the fact is there's no candidate that can appeal to both the left-wing of the party and the fearful olds/"moderates", and every candidate that's tried to do this has (mostly women, interestingly) has faltered

Otm imo. That imaginary candidate could take the party permanently to the left, and position it to destroy the Trump movement. But the olds/moderates are too stubborn for that to happen. They are going to be destroyed by the Sanders movement, and they are going to deserve it. Imo.

should be noted that minorities got shoved aside by the Ds with breathless ease during this go-around. at least Sanders might offer them some hope of helpful policies as opposed to 'everything was going fine until Trump arrived'. I hope some serious olive-branches are extended to that part of the party before November.