2020 Democratic presidential primary

which she did because of the pure evil in her heart, whereas the good stuff was all just done to appease voters

bizarre to me that people hold it against an elected official for accurately representing the desires of their constituents. that is the fucking job

if that's the job then basically no one is doing it? public opinion on many issues is consistently well to the left of most liberal orthodoxy as we literally just saw w. the AOC tax kerfuffle

I'm impressed that silby got Jay Inslee on this poll two full years ago

bizarre to me that people hold it against an elected official for accurately representing the desires of their constituents. that is the fucking job.

― Οὖτις, Friday, January 18, 2019 12:05 PM (thirty-two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

…is it? I don't think of it that way

xp local bias

like it was blatantly knuckleheaded of me to miss Gillebrand

*Gillibrand

if that's the job then basically no one is doing it? public opinion on many issues is consistently well to the left of most liberal orthodoxy as we literally just saw w. the AOC tax kerfuffle

lol @ equating public opinion with legislating. I know you know this but... the only person representing the entire country is the President, and yes he is doing his level shittiest. But everybody else represents *specific sets of the population* and for the most part Senators and Representatives do that very well, which is (broadly speaking) why they win re-election. If they don't represent their constituents they lose office

that's fine but to say they're "accurately representing the desires" of constituents rather than "doing an acceptable job based on what people generally perceive as being possible within the restraints of the current political system" are different statements

anyway

No one will confuse Gillibrand’s rhetoric with Warren, the other senator in the race right now. “Your economy only grows when you right-size immigration.”

— Dave Weigel (@daveweigel) January 18, 2019

are different statements

are they?

imo yes but let's not bore everyone with this all day

Yeah, forget everything I ever said about KG up thread. She's decided her path to the nomination is a total disimpassioned centrist voter who doesn't exist in the party primary. Great strategy 👍

anyway

No one will confuse Gillibrand’s rhetoric with Warren, the other senator in the race right now. “Your economy only grows when you right-size immigration.”
— Dave Weigel (@daveweigel) January 18, 2019
― resident hack (Simon H.), Friday, January 18, 2019 1:08 PM (three minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

in fairness a replier says that's from 2006 and that she's recanted

https://t.co/rpGbyMVmNv pic.twitter.com/sCBGaZjql9

— Matthew Whelan (@sullivanst) January 18, 2019

i personally don't really forgive that kind of stuff but ymmv and maybe you weren't called a fucking refugee as a child by your peers

yeah I got mixed up cause Wiegel had just been posting current quotes. anyway yeah it's a shitty thing to say and to have to explain/walk back.apologize for

Shakey I don't agree with your oft-repeated thesis that seems to be basically elect anyone with a (D) after their name and they will somehow read your (and the rest of the voters of your district) mind and do your bidding once elected. Seems way more reasonable to me to vote for the person who has held and continues to hold views with which you agree.

Maybe you think opportunists are better at negotiation?

Or are you just arguing for calling your representatives more?

lol the "right-size immigration" quote was in fact from today apparently

Today! I was right next to her.

— Dave Weigel (@daveweigel) January 18, 2019

fuck

ugh, that's bad

o
pen
bor
ders

*clap clap clapclapclap*

being anti immigration is shitty but plz let's not forget that she used the word "rightsize"

talk about corporate Dems

i mean the idea that there should be a limit on immigration and that number should be finite is not a completely indefensible position, but expressed in that kind of language and with her history she honestly seems like a MF with some dark secrets

She was pro “abolish ICE” iirc

Shakey I don't agree with your oft-repeated thesis that seems to be basically elect anyone with a (D) after their name and they will somehow read your (and the rest of the voters of your district) mind and do your bidding once elected...

Good congressional representatives listen to their constituents. That's the job, representing the people in your district, state, whatever. every single one of them knows this is their number one priority, because they know who votes them into office. If they are bad at managing their constituent interests, handling complaints, responding to inquiries, etc., they tend to get voted out. that's all I'm saying. And that's what you want - a rep that listens to the voters! One that doesn't is either dangerous (ie, says one thing to get elected, then takes office and does some totally different stuff because of "deeply held beliefs", for ex.) or stupid. So it's weird to criticize someone like Gillibrand for representing a fairly conservative District by saying shit that would appeal to that District and getting an A+ rating from the NRA or whatever. Those aren't things I like about her, by any means, but y'know, I think it's pretty clear that's why she did it. And now that she represents a different constituency, she's saying and doing different things. There's nothing inherently wrong with her changing her positions to suit her constituency. I know if I vote for someone for President my number one priority isn't that they agree w me about everything in their heart of hearts, it's that they will do what the voters tell them to. That's how representative democracy is supposed to work.

Or are you just arguing for calling your representatives more?

absolutely! This is always a good idea.

xp

I prefer heart-of-hearts agreement. Much harder to corrupt!

so you never would have voted for FDR or LBJ eh - ie a plutocrat and a thoroughly corrupt racist, respectively - who nonetheless passed the most significant liberal legislation ever and basically reshaped America.

Probably not in the primary!

^^^

especially since if we ARE trying to get the other politicians to shift in the wind, a strong primary showing by a candidate w/ different positions is one lever to make that happen. it's not a super reliable level sure but c'mon, makes more sense than voting for the person who's further from your values and hoping they'll realize how conflicted you were about it and change their positions despite winning in a landslide.

this is why we should all be rooting for an absolute ideological bloodbath and encourage as many distinct candidates to enter the fray as possible imho

(just not Hillary lol)

right-size immigration

the kind Goldilocks chose

Goldilocks got eated doe

Granted that it shouldn’t even require a response but this is pretty good

Here is Kirsten Gillibrand's full response to an Iowan's question about calling for Al Franken to resign after a series of allegations were leveled against him: pic.twitter.com/VUWfm29rgp

— Dan Merica (@merica) January 19, 2019

I like that statement

Good statement but I hate that we're still at the stage where you have to insert some anecdote about being a parent in order to make this sort of statement palatable to the pricks

She didn’t have to. If she was cool she’d just say “fuck everyone, i advocated what i thought was best. No one forced franken to resign.”

The “fuck everyone” part is key

Here's Cory Booker at a charter school rally in New Orleans today, testing out what sounds like a stump speech, quoting poetry and talking about his father. Needless to say he's one of few prospective 2020 Dems who would keynote a charter rally right now https://t.co/r0boPKntbM

— Eliza Shapiro (@elizashapiro) January 18, 2019

Same lines he did at Netroots. I snoozed there too.

getting the feeling this crowded field is gonna thin out pretty quickly

can someone put AOC in a flash-forward machine

Weigel's further coverage of Gillibrand events in Iowa has been more reassuring. That "right-size immigration" shit was a huge gaffe, but perhaps all is not lost.

there's of course the MSM horse-race coverage which considers actual policy a subsidiary issue

I just googled "right-size immigration," and apparently Gillibrand has been using that line for more than a decade. I found examples from 2007, 2009, and 2018. My guess is that it's such a stock phrase for her at this point that she hasn't stopped to reflect on how it sounds in 2019.

harris

here we here we here we fuckin go

lord

I'm running for president. Let's do this together. Join us: https://t.co/9KwgFlgZHA pic.twitter.com/otf2ez7t1p

— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) January 21, 2019

tbh if I were a betting man my $$ would be on her at the moment

I don't get how it happened, but somehow that's become the conventional wisdom in my twitter feed as well.