Showing posts with label amy klobuchar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label amy klobuchar. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 3, 2020

Biden Had a Heckuva Night



It sure looks like South Carolina had more of an effect on this race than I had thought, resulting yesterday in Senator Amy Klobuchar dropping her campaign (when she had sounded very fired up still on Sunday), and then Biden received a triple endorsement: Klobuchar, Buttigieg (whom Biden likened to his son, Beau), and Beto O'Rourke. That's not all:

All day Monday, the campaign pushed out one endorsement after another: 100 leaders in Massachusetts, 30 officials in Virginia, former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, major congressional leaders in Texas and California, local leaders in North Carolina, Tennessee and Arkansas. Biden's sudden resurgence — his ability to at least partially clear the field and coalesce support — could prove to be a major turning point in a volatile 2020 primary.

I think SC basically was a "proof of concept" behind the idea of Biden's campaign, and lots of Democrats would like to get on to the business of beating Trump. To me, that's pretty understandable. We just have to see what today brings.

UPDATE: Right now, I'm just rooting that this cat has a very poor showing:




"Behaved?" Like they were kids or something? Behaved! But also because he is a Republican.

Sunday, February 16, 2020

OK, Bloomers

I've been noticing a silly argument on Twitter that I won't link to, because it is silly: whether "Bernie bros" will put people "on a list" if they support or work for former Republican NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg. Whatever that list might mean, I really don't think people in this country can get shut out of working for campaigns or commenting on politics based on their previous support. My goodness, Jill Stein supporters manage to get attached to Democratic campaigns today, don't they? And the mainstream media doesn't look like it will ever give up it's love affair with Republican-lite/moderate Democrat cross-overs. For the unity!

But let's get real, the country will not be unified over Mike Bloomberg. Sure, he's got a whole lot of money and his ads do nail Trump right in his vanities and failures. But that doesn't equal a plausible Democratic candidate against Trump (it may even have some drawbacks as an outside antagonist, as I hope to demonstrate). 

In the past, I've blogged about my support of the Occupy Wall Street movement, Black Lives Matter, and the Me Too movement. If a Democratic candidate does not have a good record with, or can't demonstrate fundamental understanding of, the impact of economic inequality, the wealth gap, the failures of the system to protect consumers against fraud and predation in ways that harm economic security and mobility (as well as the way it intersects with racial inequality); if a candidate does not have a good record with, or can't demonstrate fundamental understanding of, the impact of racial inequality especially as it has related to the tools of the criminal justice system being used as a weapon against black bodies especially; and if a candidate does not have a good record with, and can't demonstrate fundamental understanding of, the ways men in power deploy misogyny and exercise their privilege against both women and men in sexualized ways, then, this party should not want them. 

Tuesday, February 4, 2020

Bailey Warren Just Won the Caucus



Now, you can say, "How is that? Last I heard, Pete Buttigeig declared victory." And that would be a thing....he did. But just listen to my reasoning here:

Math didn't win in Iowa (Yang). Organization didn't win in Iowa (Sanders). Experience didn't win in Iowa (Biden). The plan didn't win in Iowa (Elizabeth Warren). And common sense sure didn't win in Iowa (Klobuchar). And you can't just congratulate a clusterfuck and decide it stands for a species of win, Mayor Pete.

So, it's looking to me like the whole darn thing went to the dogs. And Bailey is a very good boye.


UPDATE: But, no joke, this process is classist, sexist and ableist, and relies on people without kids or with guaranteed childcare, people who don't have work commitments they can't back out of, etc. It's a dopey process that shouldn't ever come down to "the handful of hardheads that can stay as long as it takes" and "some kind of app and the backup app both of which could be as buggy as a cowflop in July."

Tuesday, January 14, 2020

This Debate Could Have Been Better With Seasoning



I know, you know, the world knows, the exchange above is going to be the topic after the Warren/Sanders build-up, right? But I have to say, I'm feeling for Steyer a bit here. "Oh hi guys, great debaaaaa...." Timing, right? I guess a mic probably has picked up what was said (and Steyer was right there) but I'm not reading a lot into the exchange. People aren't really the body language experts we think we are.

I think CNN had a problem with asking questions in a way that didn't sound a little loaded. Asking Bernie Sanders how he won't bankrupt the government wasn't just loaded, but actually doesn't really reflect how government debt works, and also doesn't reflect how things like health care provide a net benefit to society and reduce costs along the way. I'm not sure what would help them not be that way.
I think Warren and Klobuchar did especially well, and think that Warren pointing out that both of them were effective campaigners and also calling out the CNN moderators for the topics not handled were highlights.

I cannot believe, however, that after all my pissing and moaning about how crowded the stage used to be, that I'm now "pouring one out" for the folks not up there. But of such is life.


TWGB: It's Raining Shoes!

  It certainly has been a minute, hasn't it? So, what brings me out of self-imposed blogging exile, if not something very relevant to my...