Home2020 Elections10/16 Afternoon/PM OT

Leave a Reply

Photo and Image Files
Audio and Video Files
Other File Types
37 Comment threads
28 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
7 Comment authors
magsviewLieparDestinpolarbear4orlbucfanwi61 Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Probably getting only worse


Top Democrats said a meeting with President Trump and top Republicans on Turkey disintegrated Wednesday, as the president doubled down on his decision to withdraw troops from northern Syria, a decision that has now been condemned by a bipartisan resolution in the House, and by several Republican senators.

“What we witnessed on the part of the president was a meltdown, sad to say,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters on the White House driveway after meeting with the president. She later told reporters that she believes “we have to pray for his health because this was a very serious meltdown.”

During the meeting, which lasted less than 45 minutes, the president insulted Pelosi, according to top Democrats who said the president compared ISIS to communists and suggested Pelosi would approve of that.

“He was insulting, particularly to the speaker,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said. “He called her a third-rate politician. … It was sort of a nasty diatribe, not focused on the facts.”


Not a parody letter


No wonder she looked pissed.


IN TYPICAL DEBATE prep, candidates try to game out what questions might come from moderators, and what attacks might come from rivals, to have responses at the ready.

But there are always moments that are impossible to anticipate. It’s unlikely, for instance, that anyone on Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s prep team had considered the scenario that arose Tuesday night: What if former Vice President Joe Biden angrily takes credit for your signature achievement?

After Biden said on stage that he was the only one who had gotten big things done, Warren noted that she had ushered into being the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, over the objections of Wall Street and many in her own party.

Biden objected. “I agreed with the great job she did, and I went on the floor and got you votes,” he said, his voice raised, pointing at Warren. “I got votes for that bill. I convinced people to vote for it. So let’s get those things straight too.”

When Warren was asked to respond, a look of anger washed over her face. She paused, and said, very deliberately, “I am deeply grateful to President Obama, who fought so hard to make sure that agency was passed into law, and I am deeply grateful to every single person who fought for it and who helped pass it into law.”

Biden, however, was not one of those people, according to numerous sources who were involved in the fight over the CFPB’s creation. He did, however, offer Warren a verbal pat on the head at the end of the exchange on Tuesday. “You did a hell of a job in your job,” he said.

“Thank you,” Warren deadpanned.


The columnist is a libertarian but she’s right here


Though her fans will probably bridle at the observation, Tuesday’s Democratic presidential debate made it clear that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) is not really a health-care wonk.

Warren’s appeal to voters is as the thinking man’s Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Among a certain sector of the electorate — highly educated, urbane, prone to reading “explainers” — the pedantic glamour of the Harvard professoriate blurs her radical edges and limns her most pedestrian pronouncements. These are the sort of people who praise Warren over Sanders because she really knows her stuff.

Yet consider her answer on Tuesday night when Marc Lacey, a New York Times editor, asked her about health-care insurance: “You have not specified how you’re going to pay for the most expensive plan, Medicare-for-all. Will you raise taxes on the middle class to pay for it, yes or no?”

The former professor sounded like a freshman who hadn’t done the reading. Warren ambled between heart-tugging anecdote and amiably unobjectionable generalities — “Look, the way I see this, it is hard enough to get a diagnosis … what you shouldn’t have to worry about is how you’re going to pay for your health care after that.” She didn’t attempt to answer the question, except to insist that the only people who will pay for her new plan are the rich and big corporations. As real wonks know, that math doesn’t work.



But in spite of his recognition that we face “big issues,” for Buttigieg, this need for healing actually argues for tempering our policy ambitions. Buttigieg basically said just this, noting that we should not attempt Medicare-for-all because after Trump, our country will be “horrifyingly polarized,” and expanding Medicare voluntarily can achieve universal health care without further exacerbating that polarization.

In short: Too much ambition means more division, and we’ve already got as much of that as we can take.

It’s hard to overstate how fundamentally different a reading that is from that offered by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). She declared that the only way Democrats can beat Trump is by “addressing head-on” the fact that “the wealthy and the well-connected have captured our democracy.”

That’s a fairly direct indictment of the caution offered by Buttigieg — and Joe Biden, whose agenda is somewhat more liberal than is commonly acknowledged, but who nonetheless is making his No. 1 mission to “restore” the country’s unity after Trump’s racism tore it apart.

If anything, Bernie Sanders went even more decisively in that direction. He argued that the way to end the “hatred” and “division” inflicted on the country by Trump is with …
… an agenda that works for every man, woman, and child in this country rather than the corporate elite and the 1 percent. A progressive agenda that stands for all is the way that we transform this country.

Transforming the country, Sanders noted, means dealing with the stark facts that “87 million Americans are uninsured or underinsured,” that “half of our people are living paycheck to paycheck” and that we face “the existential threat of climate change.”

It’s often suggested that the fundamental divide among Democrats is between those who see Trump as merely a passing aberration — after which something resembling normalcy can be restored — and those who see him as a symptom of much more deeply rooted systemic problems with our economy and democracy.

But the divide might be better expressed this way: It’s between those who think the deep ferment of the moment calls for a combination of some sort of unspecified unifying salve and a promise of minimal post-Trump disruption, and those who see it as an opportunity — to jolt Americans into an awareness that things are so badly off track that we need to try something much bigger.


Maybe those against M4A should watch the Voyager episode “Critical Care” and be placed as the bureaucrat the Doctor infected with a terminal disease and lowered his treatment level to get his point across about medical care for all. To me this episode represents what millions of Americans go thru concerning their health care.


yep. 👍🦜🦜

keeping the status quo, as Pete wants, is part of what’s causing this deep division most people on Medicare realize they are getting a lower tier of care than people in private insurance. We wait longer for procedures done by doctors with less experience, often.And so on. A tiered system is what is breaking this country in half.


most Americans don’t need a jolt and if they had been reporting on Bernie honestly and with half the admiration they give the other candidates, he’d be leading by a mile. Most people want what Bernie wants but are convinced that he is a bad vehicle to get there and that some of the other candidates want exactly what he does. The only people needing a jolt are those in bubbles, perhaps like the writer.


Hubby is convinced the Bernster is too old. He supports just about all his issues but not his age. Oh well.



Mehdi Hasan, let’s begin with you. Your overall impression of the debate, what you felt was most important, talked about and not?

MEHDI HASAN: Well, let’s start with not, Amy. A three-hour debate involving 12 candidates, and we didn’t get a single question on the climate crisis, which threatens our future on this planet. We didn’t get a single question on racist voter suppression, which threatens democracy in this country. We didn’t get a single question on kids being abused and caged at the border, which is perhaps the single biggest human rights crisis in this country right now. We didn’t get a single question on the war in Yemen, where the U.S. is directly involved in the killing of children, not indirectly as it is in Syria, which was talked about a lot. But we did get a question about Ellen and George W. Bush. So, there was a lot missing from the debate.

But what you just played there, just now, I think, was the most important part of the debate for me, because I’ve been astounded that Joe Biden has been considered a front-runner in this Democratic presidential race so far. I hope, after last night, we can end this idea that he is a front-runner. Elizabeth Warren went in as the new front-runner. I think Biden has to be taken out of the top three. My colleague Ryan Grim has talked about his “sunsetting incoherence” that we see on nights like this. Normally he spends the first hour, at least, strongish and then fades over the course of the night in the previous three debates. Last night he was weak from the get-go. He couldn’t even answer a basic question about his son, which is the most important or biggest story in American politics right now. He rambled. He stuttered. He stumbled. He confused “thirdly” with “secondly.” He confused Iraq with Syria. He talked about abolishing the capital gains tax, when he meant he wanted to raise it. And as you saw in that cringeworthy clip a moment ago, he shouted at and patronized Elizabeth Warren. I think it was a disastrous night for Biden. We saw Pete Buttigieg come out swinging, trying to take the Biden, quote-unquote, “moderate mantle.” But really there should only be two front-runners right now: Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, both of whom were very strong last night. And it was a very good night for Bernie Sanders. Who can believe that he had a heart attack only two weeks ago?

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Well, Kate Aronoff, what’s your biggest takeaway from this debate?

KATE ARONOFF: I mean, I think Mehdi really said it, right? There was no discussion about the climate crisis. Candidates, especially Bernie Sanders, kept trying to bring it up, reliably, in every question and work it into questions that, you know, kept sort of ignoring this huge issue. And it’s irresponsible. I mean, The New York Times and CNN should be ashamed of themselves, frankly, for doing this. You know, we have — we saw a few weeks ago climate strikers, or grade school children, who are giving up their recesses, their lunches, everything, to plan climate strikes, because they know the Earth will be a very different place within their lifetimes. And the Earth already is a very different place for very many people. And the fact is that the climate crisis is not an issue neatly defined; it is the terrain on which all politics in the 21st century will play out. And to ignore that fact, when we have, you know, discussion of such interrelated things as foreign policy, is obscene. It’s obscene. And the fact that CNN, all of the major networks reliably run ad content from fossil fuel companies, including last night, or from climate-denying organizations, is just unconscionable, and they should really sort of take stock of.



Other donors though are not as optimistic, and stress that the current cash-on-hand situation puts pressure on them, along with the campaign, to have a successful fourth quarter.

“He needs a big fourth quarter to be properly positioned going into the actual caucuses and primaries,” a leading Biden financier explained. “Only thing our donor base can do is drive in more dollars. At this point the low hanging fruit has been harvested and we have to dig deeper,” this person added.

“It’s all going to count in the fourth quarter. If he doesn’t have strong numbers, he’s f—ing done,” said another fundraiser helping Biden behind the scenes.

Another fundraiser explained that Biden’s lack of cash going into the fourth quarter could put him at a “handicap” for the primary states. “We all thought he would be better than this,” this max contributor said.

Still, skeptical bundlers of Biden’s are pointing to data they say is a question mark: where are they going to acquire the big checks of $2,800 now that many in their networks have maxed out. The $2,800 sum is the most an individual can give directly to a campaign in each election cycle.

Since he entered the race in April, Biden’s campaign has seen an influx of large individual contributions. Out of the $36 million it’s raised, 64% was from large donations, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. Meanwhile, 35% of donors have given $200 or less. Compare that with Warren, who has caught up to Biden in the polls but also has at least 53% of her donors giving her less than $200. She finished the third quarter raising just more than $24 million and has $25.7 million on hand.


Mayor Pete may be on the rise, which is more of a threat to Warren and Biden because their bases overlap.


Bernie’s $620,000 ended at midnight. I’m sure there was a lot more today after the big endorsement announcement


Plus how much of that 1 million came from a super pacs/big donors/the healthcare industry.

Skip to toolbar