Friday, January 31, 2020

The *Updated Election 2020 Update: Attack of the #NeverBernies

Millennials form human shield around Bernie

No need to expend many pixels on the latest smear (though if you blinked, you might have missed it); here's the debunk in a five-count thread.

Here's what's so remarkable about the age in which we live.

And no story is complete without a little snark.

You simply cannot be up to date without being plugged in (and Facebook ain't where it's at).  This full episode unfolded, was punctured and deflated, and then mocked within 24 hours.

Tune in tomorrow to AM Joy and see if he's right.

Biggest shock of my week was the Texas Lyceum poll.

My dreams seem to be turning into reality.  Trying hard to curb my enthusiasm (Shelly Kuffner is outlying there for me.)

-- I'm devoting more of this week's Update to the folks running for the White House who simply don't get enough publicity.  Let's begin with the US Green Party and to a lesser extent Howie Hawkins, whom I believe will be the nominee.  The GPUS posted a rejoinder to the call from nine people --including Noam Chomsky -- to stand down in 2020.  Background from Louis Proyect:

On January 24, an open letter appeared on various leftist websites urging the Green Party to follow a “safe states” strategy in the 2020 presidential elections. It argues that if Howie Hawkins or any other Green Party candidate runs in contested states such as Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan, there is a danger that he or she would steal votes from the Democrat. Needless to say, if that candidate is Bernie Sanders, there will be that much more pressure on the Greens to tamp down their campaign.

Although formulated as recommendations to the Greens in general, the open letter is actually a polemic against Howie Hawkins’s CounterPunch article “The Green Party Is Not the Democrats’ Problem.”

There's much more there, but before you go ...

(At the risk of repetition: I'm #BernieorBust, which is to say more specifically #BernieorYellowVests in Milwaukee this summer, and #BernieorGreen if he gets cheated out of the nomination again.  I like the Green Party and many of its candidates and will vote for them if they don't make it plainly impossible -- just as with many Democrats and damn near every Republican and Libertarian.  Party affiliation and identity politics mean nothing to me.  Policies exclusively.)

Now you can finish reading Louis Proyect for the full story.  He (mostly, with the conditions expressed above) speaks for me.  Couple more things.

And from Howie himself:

I'm grinning in anticipation of the pending "Jill Stein" recriminations.  Maybe someone will Photoshop Howie's head onto her body at that dinner table with Putin and Mike Flynn.

Direct your questions to the comment box.  Please don't bother with any #VotePooNoMatterWho, #RussiansHackers, and related Re-Insist-Ants nonsense.

-- Rocky de la Fuente, and everybody in his family, appear to be morons.  I have no clue any longer as to what his strategy to be nominated for some party, any party's president may be.

-- The latest in town hall and debate news:

How may times must it be said?  #CNNisTrash

-- And briefly, the straggling Donkeys, but first: This Week in Joe Biden Lies.

By this time next week, Klobuchar is on the sidelines with Delaney.

-- Though says there haven't been enough Iowa polls -- and the ones there have been may be of low quality due to our ever-changing lifestyles --  by these indications both Yang and Tulsi appear to be encouraging their supporters to move to Bernie as second choice next Monday night.  Biden seems to be striking out in these same efforts.

Update: Amy Minnesota Nice might be making an upward move in the Hawkeye State, according to the same fellow at 538, but all of this cautiousness and anticipation for more polling seems like a hedge against more of the kind of damage they self-inflicted from 2016's debacle.

-- A few words about Money Bags.

Why is it that the Jackasses still bitching about Bernie "not being a Democrat" don't ever mention the decades Bloomberg was a Republican?  This is his record:

  • Endorsed George W. Bush and spoke on his behalf at the RNC
  • Endorsed Susan Collins
  • Endorsed Scott Brown over Elizabeth Warren
  • Endorsed Pat Toomey, giving him credibility with enough suburban moms in 2016 to cost Katie McGinty the election

By these actions alone he has completely prevented meaningful gun safety legislation, as well as any of the other democratic reforms he claims to care about.  And yet ... Democratic 'consultants' are cashing his checks by the assload.

"Welcome to politics", Cillizza?  This is the politics we're ending when Bernie gets elected.

Update: The DNC just let this oligarch buy his way into the presidential debates.

-- Desperate times call for desperate measures, and BootEdge is desperate.

"I hear Vice President Biden, saying that this is no time to take a risk on someone new," Buttigieg said. "But history has shown us that the biggest risk we could take with a very important election coming up is to look to the same Washington playbook and recycle the same arguments and expect that to work against a president like Donald Trump, who is new in kind." Earlier this month the Biden campaign released an ad in which a narrator tells voters, "This is no time to take a risk."

Buttigieg then went after Sanders.
"Then I hear Senator Sanders calling for a kind of politics that says you got to go all the way here and nothing else counts," he said. "And it's coming at the very moment when we actually have a historic majority, not just aligned around what it is we're against, but agreeing on what it is we're for."


Buttigieg then continued with the thrust of his argument: The debate between Biden and Sanders, the two Democrats leading in most statewide polls in Iowa, are too focused on the past.

Yeah, Pete doesn't want to hear about anybody's past.  Especially his own.

I'd rather Sneaky Pete stay in the race awhile longer, as I feel his supporters fall in behind Goofy Old Joe once he falls out.

-- Elizabeth Warren did have a nice moment at the impeachment trial.

"The question from Sen. Warren is for the House managers," Supreme Court Justice John Roberts, who is presiding over the trial, began.

"At a time when large majorities of Americans have lost faith in government, does the fact that the chief justice is presiding over an impeachment trial in which Republican senators have thus far refused to allow witnesses or evidence contribute to the loss of legitimacy of the chief justice, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution?" he read.

The question appeared to create discomfort for Roberts, whose role as the trial’s presiding officer requires him to read senators’ queries aloud — even those raising questions about potential damage to his own legitimacy, or that of the judicial institution he has assiduously sought to shield from the political fray.

It was unclear if the question was a dig at Republican obstruction, Roberts’s unwillingness so far to take a position in the witness fight or both.

Who's ready for a little snark?

No comments: