HomeUncategorized11/6 News Roundup & Open Thread

Leave a Reply

Photo and Image Files
Audio and Video Files
Other File Types
80 Comment threads
82 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
12 Comment authors
magsviewwi61Aint Supposed to Die A Natural DeathTorabsNYCVG Recent comment authors

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

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

I actually wouldn’t call it surging either—more like rising, which is just fine right now. My problem is that most don’t even say that and ignore that Warren has been going down lately. Also they have no problem with Buttigieg “surging” when he’s really stuck in single digits everywhere but white Iowa where he has been spending much more money than anyone else.

Also I like to hear that Bernie has a bump in any poll. The last Monmouth poll in September is the one that had Warren leading 28 to Biden’s 25 with Bernie at 15.


Sen. Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign is accusing the media of ignoring his “surge” in the polls as the Vermont independent looks to stage a comeback.

Sanders has jumped in new surveys of New Hampshire, with the latest CNN–University of New Hampshire poll finding him with the lead in the Granite State, which he won with 60 percent of the vote in the 2016 Democratic presidential primary. Sanders has also seen a small bump in some national polls and surveys of Iowa, although he does not lead anywhere else.

The Sanders campaign is fuming at the media, alleging the political press is playing favorites, particularly with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg (D), who for weeks have won headlines about how their campaigns are rising in the stretch run to Iowa.

In the past month, Warren has slid in the RealClearPolitics average of national polls off a high of 27 percent down to 20.6 percent currently, only 4 points ahead of Sanders, as she has faced tougher media scrutiny and questions about her “Medicare for All” plan.

Sanders has seized on the opening to draw contrasts between himself and Warren on health care.

“I think that [Warren’s plan] would probably have a very negative impact on creating those jobs, or providing wages, increased wages and benefits for those workers,” Sanders told ABC News over the weekend.

“I wouldn’t use the term ‘surging’ [for Sanders] but I’ve got a national poll coming out … that suggests there could be a small bump,” said Monmouth University pollster Patrick Murray. “However, the overarching finding is uncertainty in the entire field, which is why all the polls have very different results right now.”

Sanders’s allies, meanwhile, say the media’s “Bernie blackout” is real and that their supporters feed off the notion that they’re being written off by the establishment and political press.

“Generally speaking, media folks don’t bother to read and don’t care or understand policy, so you then have talking heads on cable news blathering on about nonsense,” said Jonathan Tasini, a progressive strategist and Sanders supporter.

“That ignorance then feeds a bias against truly revolutionary ideas because, as an example, most college-educated media folks took an Economics 101 class which told them how wonderful the ‘free market’ and ‘free trade’ are, so they are hard-wired to oppose Bernie’s basic philosophy,” he said.


Here’s an example of Warren “surging“. Bernie has 28, Warren 22, and Biden 16 in this Mid-October poll. Their last poll was March, which had Bernie 31, Biden 20, and Warren 4. Yes obviously Warren has come a long way since then, but this tells us nothing about what’s been going on lately. For all we know she could have gone all the way up to 25 in September and is now receding.


A new poll of young voters finds that Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts is gaining quickly on the Vermont senator in the Democratic primary race, challenging Sanders among a voter demographic he dominated in 2016.


how does he fume, i wonder? 😂



Sanders clearly understands that the problem is the “inhumane, unacceptable and unsustainable” status quo, which takes a toll on both Israeli and Palestinian lives. The current blockade of Gaza perpetuates a vicious circle of hate and violence on both sides of the fence, that could go from bad to untenable in a matter of months. The changes we need are urgent.

Sanders’s position uniquely reflects compassion and solidarity with Gaza — something that is critically needed, yet virtually unseen amongst the other Democratic candidates. But he also expressed a desire to make Gaza more livable, a message which demonstrates great care for Israeli lives as well; this care comes from a deep understanding that the blockade disempowers everyone except militants and proponents of violence.


Meanwhile, at the other end of the scale.


The Bush administration condemned the Israeli government’s policy of extra-judicial killings, which a report from the United Nations noted “are grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 147, and of international humanitarian law.”

On Capitol Hill, however, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee defended Israel’s use of these assassination squads, saying, “I don’t believe this is a policy of assassinations” since “there is [in] effect a declared war.”

His name was Joe Biden, a senator from Delaware, future vice president and currently a leading contender for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.

A look at Biden’s Senate career has shown repeated occasions in which he has co-sponsored resolutions and issued statements defending Israeli attacks against civilian targets in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and Lebanon as legitimate self-defense. Biden has defended Israel despite well-documented reports by human rights groups that Israel had engaged in serious war crimes.



It also has some problems.

One, as I wrote Friday, is that its budget assumptions might not be very realistic.

Another, deeper issue—which a number of writers, not to mention Warren’s primary rival Bernie Sanders, have pointed out—is that the centerpiece of her proposal is fundamentally unfair to many businesses and workers. It’s specifically a raw deal for companies that already offer their employees generous insurance, as well as for low-wage workers, who would somewhat indirectly shoulder a disproportionate share of the burden from the tax scheme she has concocted.

But that leaves another issue: Even when it’s fully phased in, Warren’s plan is still pretty unfair to low-wage workers.

As Matt Bruenig of the People’s Policy Project has explained, Warren’s Medicare fee is basically a “head tax,” meaning that companies pay the same amount for each worker. Starbucks would send Washington $19,600 for its barista and $19,600 for its CEO. What this means is that low-wage workers see a much, much larger share of their potential compensation devoured by health care costs than high earners. It also warps the job market by making low-wage labor relatively more expensive for companies to hire, which makes it harder for some people to find work. With a health care head tax, you’re basically doubling the cost of hiring a dishwasher.

This is, unfortunately, more or less how our current employer-based insurance system works, since private insurance premiums aren’t really connected to what workers earn. Warren isn’t creating new problems so much as replicating ones that already exist. But almost no economist would structure things that way if they were starting a system from scratch. That’s not just me talking by the way; the Berkeley economists Gabriel Zucman and Emmanuel Saez, who have advised Warren on her wealth tax proposals, said the same in their recent book. “No government would out of the blue impose a poll tax to fund health care; it would be a crushing burden on moderate income families,” they write. (A “poll tax” is their very euro term for a head tax.)

Sanders has tried to make hay of this. He’s pointed out that his payroll-tax approach is more progressive, which is true—faced only with a 7.5 percent levy, a Starbucks barista would pay much less for health care under Sanders’ system than the CEO would. And Sanders’ approach isn’t just more economically equitable: It might also make more plain economic sense, since it wouldn’t make low-skill workers vastly more expensive to hire.


Sounds like Liz’s plan is similar to a flat tax which the rich FRighties and craporate white collar crooks love. Just another GOPuke Lite scam. T and R, LD!!


Meanwhile, war has broken out at DK between Warren and Biden supporters over the candidates’ latest statements. Basically “Warren is a condescending, out-of-touch elitist” and “Biden is running in the wrong primary”. It’s nice to be on the sidelines for this slugfest. 🍿🍿🍿


Skip to toolbar