HomeUncategorized3/18 News Roundup & Open Thread – Sanders Schedules A San Francisco Rally, Former Prosecutors Rebrand Themselves as Progressives to Win Elections & More

Leave a Reply

Photo and Image Files
Audio and Video Files
Other File Types
58 Comment threads
62 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
11 Comment authors
wi60polarbear4EyeRoundmagsviewpolarbear4 Recent comment authors

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

newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Don midwest
Don midwest

this might have been posted, but anyway

Why Bernie Sanders is the only candidate going directly after Trump

a friend who ran for US house 50 years ago was paid a visit during a speech by the head of the DNC. His only suggestion was to not say his opponent’s name so much so it would not reinforce it.

Roger Stone 40 years ago or so told his friend running for top office in HS to not use his opponents name at all.

Roger Stone gave that advice to several winners of presidential elections

Is this the common opinion of establishment politicians? Don’t say opponent’s name?

Or are other president candidates chicken



Pete Buttigieg is a millennial who wants to become the most powerful man on the planet. But the 37-year-old isn’t that delusional guy at your office who thinks his idea for a start-up is going to spare him the monotony of working for a living. The two-term mayor of South Bend, Indiana, and Afghanistan veteran is exploring a run for president, and although he’s very much a long-shot candidate, the Democrat’s campaign just said he cleared a fundraising threshold to qualify for June’s first official DNC primary debate. That means even if he doesn’t make any noise in the Iowa caucus or New Hampshire primary, Americans may soon be hearing a lot more from a young person who entered the prime of his professional life in the aftermath of the financial crisis.

With that in mind, Buttigieg called me up from South Bend last week to talk about one specific issue: the student debt crisis. We chatted about how he might work to revamp the system if elected, including where he stood on everything from the relatively radical idea of debt cancellation to the need for states to step up and fund public education like they did in the past.



Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, said Monday that “objective evidence” suggests that President Trump is sympathetic toward white nationalists and that his unwillingness to forcefully condemn those views is “dangerous to the government.”

The comments of Ellison, a Democrat who now serves as Minnesota’s attorney general, came in response to Trump’s contention last week that white nationalism is not a growing threat, despite the embrace of such views by the suspected gunman in the deadly mosque shootings in New Zealand.

“I think sometimes you simply have to yield to the objective evidence, and that is it points to [Trump] being sympathetic to that point of view,” Ellison said on CNN, before referencing a white-nationalist rally in Charlottesville in 2017.


The orange imbecile is simply a very nasty cherry on top of an even more malignant sundae. Said sundae took 50+ years of careful planning and scheming to make. T and R, BNR/LD!! 🙂



But our president has a very specific way of organizing these horrific events in his mind. He has no problem calling Muslim extremists “terrorists.” And he is more than willing to say that a mentally ill black man had premeditated and coordinated an assault. But he will not admit that white supremacist terrorism even exists.

He literally can’t say the words. He issued a routine statement about thoughts and prayers in the wake of the Christchurch massacre. But when asked whether he viewed white nationalism as a rising threat worldwide, he replied:

“I don’t really. I think it’s a small group of people that have very, very serious problems. I guess if you look at what happened in New Zealand, perhaps that’s the case. I don’t know enough about it yet.”



Bernie Sanders has not changed much. Like a firmly planted tree, he is as committed to racial equality as he was when he was arrested in anti-segregation protests.

That’s not a problem. What may be a problem is that he is committed to it in the same way that he was in the ’60s, when to be for racial equality was to be for racial integration.

For Sanders, the problem is that at least in some factions of the political left – mostly but not entirely on college campuses – a neo-segregationist viewpoint has replaced the “black and white together” approach of the past.

This is intellectual and cultural segregation; no one has proposed separate water fountains. Even the one-race-at-a-time “safe spaces” only for black students (and now some only for white students) are intended as temporary refuges, not permanent

Less temporary is the inclination to divide people – and to encourage them to divide themselves – into “identities” by race, gender, sexual orientation, and more. “Citizen” is rarely one of the identity options.

But identity politics is more open and more visible on the left, even the center-left. Rare would be the Democratic candidate for any office today who would dare say, “there’s not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there’s the United States of America.”

But he gets more animated when discussing income inequality, the plight of the low-income of all races, the predations of the ultra-rich. His campaign slogan is. “Not me. Us.” As in all of us, together, unmoved like that tree standing by the water.

At a certain stage, it’s hard to stop singing the songs you learned when you were young, especially when those songs are so good.



It was supposed to be a chance for Muslim and Jewish House Democrats to ease tensions and find common ground. It ended with one lawmaker in tears.

At a late-night meeting blocks from the Capitol, about a dozen lawmakers shared their raw experiences with bigotry and discrimination, hoping the stories would bridge the glaring interfaith divide. Suddenly, Rep. Dean Phillips, a Jewish Democrat, shattered a moment meant to be about listening and learning — not politics.

Phillips felt he had to address what had been unspoken for nearly two hours — the recent divisive remarks of Rep. Ilhan Omar, a Muslim who suggested American supporters of Israel have an “allegiance to a foreign country.”

Those kinds of remarks, Phillips said, represented “tips of the arrow” — small but devastating offenses that made Jews fearful of a rising tide of anti-Semitism. Phillips told his fellow Minnesota freshman that she had to apologize and said the group should publicly affirm Israel’s right to exist and protect itself.

His words stunned the three Muslim Democrats in the room, as well as some other Jewish members and third-party participants. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), a Palestinian American who does not support the existence of a Jewish-only state, grew emotional and started to cry as she spoke of her grandmother’s suffering in the West Bank at the hands of Israelis. “She would treat you like a grandson,” she said to Phillips, according to two people in the room.

The second gathering aimed at reconciliation broke on a bitter note.

The abrupt end to the March 5 meeting was a discomfiting moment in a previously unreported, behind-the-scenes effort inside the diverse class of House Democrats to foster tolerance amid the withering pressure of Washington.

Democrats’ convulsive efforts to respond to Omar’s recent criticisms of Israel have exposed ugly rifts in the party over religion and U.S. ally Israel that have boiled over on Twitter and in the public sphere. Those interparty fights have distracted from the party’s legislative agenda and fueled political attacks from Republicans, including President Trump.

It’s why Democrats on both sides have formed a small group to try to work past their differences. Success or failure of the private meetings could have an impact on the party’s larger effort to unite across schisms on race, gender and ideology.


I hope they’ve called in a top rate mediator.



The lawmaker who compared the Green New Deal to genocide last week has taken major campaign contributions from fossil fuel companies. Rob Bishop, a Republican congressman from Utah, expressed his opposition rather cryptically after a news conference in which Republican lawmakers called for hearings on New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez’s plan to address climate change.

“For many people who live in the West, but also in rural and urban areas, the ideas behind the Green New Deal are tantamount to genocide,” Bishop said. When a reporter asked him to elaborate, he said: “I’m an ethnic. I’m a Westerner,” and also: “Killing would be positive if you implement everything the Green New Deal actually wants to.”

The oil and gas industry has been Bishop’s top source of campaign cash throughout his career, accounting for $500,000 in donations, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. He has taken significant campaign contributions from oil and gas industry giants like BP, Anadarko, Halliburton and Chevron, according to campaign finance data from the political research organization MapLight.


Classic example of a FRightwing bought-off ahole.



That 1st Q fec report in April is going to be realllll interesting.


He probably waited so it would be big Monday news


He needed till Monday to shake out the couch cushions for loose change.


Looks like this is not verified. Sorry!


Just a thought:

Isn’t it funny that “white” people touting their European ancestry, and especially White Supremacists claiming Nordic roots, ignore the fact that those countries are social democracies?




O’Rourke could prove a useful cipher in determining where the Democratic Party really stands on health care. Almost every Democratic senator running for president has signed onto Sanders’s Medicare-for-all bill. Even though their commitment to the cause might be less than absolute (Sanders aside), that has left little distinction between the candidates on one of the Democratic Party’s biggest issues.

O’Rourke’s embrace of Medicare for America establishes a clearer demarcation — and a sharp contrast with his biggest fundraising rival. He and Sanders have proven themselves to be the most prolific fundraisers of the 2020 field so far.

The former Texas Congress member apparently decided it is better to position himself a little closer to the middle. As Vox’s Sarah Kliff reported last week, O’Rourke had embraced full-throated single-payer ideas in the past but modulated his position recently, saying he’s opting for pragmatism over ideological purity.

“If we become too ideological or too prescribed in the solution, we may allow the perfect to become the enemy of the good,” he told Iowa voters, according to the Texas Tribune. “And there are fellow American human lives depending on us finding a solution.”

For Beto boosters, this could serve as an example of his open-hearted but practical progressivism. For his detractors, it might demonstrate a vacuous candidacy founded more in charisma and vagaries than conviction and a sophisticated policy platform.


“Medicare for America?” That’s not Neera Tanden’s/CAP’s Medicare X. So what is it?


Turd Way/DLCrap wordspeak. Very disappointed with O’Rourke. @wi60: read about the horrendous flooding on the NE/WI border. Hope that doesn’t affect you and your family.


You shouldn’t be disappointed. His progressive punch score was 5 iirc. An f for his district. Better than Cruz. But not better than Bernie or Warren. Has disappointing like Obama written all over him.


No I didn’t effect me but one block away from my home the street had about 8″ of water across the road so just missed me. The football field pix I posted was about 7 deep in water or 3 feet from the cross bar. A lot of homes took major flood damage as a river runs thru downtown. The homes affected are in a low income area so its a safe bet no flood ins. Some basements had 3-4′ of water in them. Waiting to see if Evers declares a disaster for Fed help.
Thx Orl



Time to donate.



In any discussion regarding candidates, ask the person(s) you are talking to what their top five concerns are. Then show them the voting record of their chosen candidate regarding those concerns. It is called Inserting Reality into the discussion.



WaPo columnist channels Beto’s Vanity Fair piece


That’s what it’s all about, maybe. It’s not about me. I do happen to be the one who is running for president, but it could as easily be one of you. It probably is. If it appears to be me, standing here or on the cover of a magazine, that is just because — I don’t know. It’s my face and body and voice, but when we come together — I didn’t even prepare this speech, I feel like it’s being pulled out of me by some greater force, like a claw machine reaching into me and dragging out a prize, this speech, and you all were that claw.

I didn’t prepare that remark.

See, maybe I was born to do this. But not as born as you were, to do something even better. It’s not about me or my excellent and well-documented oral hygiene. It’s about all of us. Wanting to feel. Wanting to become. Wanting to shake it all about.

Maybe we just want to turn it all around. Maybe that’s what it’s all about? It could be. It could be.

Whenever Americans come together to do something, we can achieve something great. There is no noun we cannot verb, and no specific declarative sentence containing a policy recommendation that we can’t not utter! Yet. But maybe we will, soon. I just want to run a positive, inspiring campaign that is definitely for something, and I can’t wait, together, to figure out what that something is.

“I don’t ever prepare a speech,” he says. “I don’t write out what I’m going to say. I remember driving to that, I was, like, ‘What do I say? Maybe I’ll just introduce myself. I’ll take questions.’ I got in there, and I don’t know if it’s a speech or not, but it felt amazing. Because every word was pulled out of me. Like, by some greater force, which was just the people there. Everything that I said, I was, like, watching myself, being like, How am I saying this stuff? Where is this coming from?”

— Beto O’Rourke, in Vanity Fair




Ahhhhh, go it. He fancies himself as a Beat Poet or maybe Carlos Castaneda. He misses on all points. They had something to say.


More discussion of that Vanity Fair puff piece in this article


Lacking Obama’s compelling personal story and Clinton’s skillfully contrived folksiness, O’Rourke’s general pitch nevertheless has much in common with the one championed by the previous two Democratic presidents.

If some elite liberals are trying to get the rest of us excited by O’Rourke’s candidacy, then, one reason is that it conforms so closely to the mold of politics with which they’re most familiar and comfortable — a politics which is avowedly about very little but nevertheless inspires tremendous fervor among the devoted.

He is ideologically vague and deliberately so. He is politically ambidextrous, talking endlessly about the need for debate, compromise, bipartisanship, and reaching across the aisle. He combines high-minded sentiments about historical destiny with ethereal notions about hearing from all sides and taking seriously all points of view.

O’Rourke is therefore as much a brand and a product as he is a prospective national leader: an unfolding cultural narrative in which to become emotionally invested for mostly apolitical reasons, like the question of which team will win the Super Bowl or who will finally sit on the Iron Throne at the end of season eight. Fronting for an all-too-conventional style of Beltway politics, his personality is a tabula rasa upon which sundry groups in the Democratic coalition are invited to inscribe most anything they please and see themselves reflected. If we are to go by Vanity Fair’s account, his cultural tastes usefully align with those of several key demographics and are squeaky clean with just a wee bit of #Edge. Most important of all, he is adept at seeming to say a whole lot while actually saying very little, trading in substance-free feel-goodisms with the smarmy bravado of an over-caffeinated self-help guru or door-to-door salesman — a quality admired above all others in the gilded, marketing-obsessed environment of Washington D.C.

When politics has been stripped of program or ideological commitment — as it increasingly has been for many elite Democrats — all that is left is to recast the whole enterprise as a grand exercise in fan fiction: one that devotes tremendous energy to crafting a series of catch-all personalities who audition to play protagonists in the nation’s collective psyche. While meeting with students at the University of Texas at El Paso last year, O’Rourke himself in fact compared the battle against Trump to “every epic movie that you’ve ever seen, from Star Wars to The Lord of the Rings.”

For a privileged few, the 2020 presidential election may be just this: a notional spectacle whose stakes are so low that they can be communicated through appeals to mass-market fantasy. For the majority of Americans, though, the stakes are all too high, and there’s precious little time for another round of fan fiction.





Check out his “ask” at the bottom. He’s hoping his amount will be reported uncritically and it will spur lots of smaller donors.

I hope this is spread far and wide. Ya gotta laugh.


Again, don’t have verification, but seems real enough. The guy is an NBC political reporter. Huh.


Winner! Most obvious shill article of the day. The comments are pretty funny.

The Shill is this rag’s new name for me.


Warren on CNN town hall. I’ll look for it.

Newsweek: The free event went from open to the public to invite-only through a sign-up form. CNN confirmed it is closed to other media.



https://www.cnn.com/ this is the link and I’m watching it.


From the CNN Townhall with Liz Warren:


She also supports Conyer’s HB40 bill to have a commission on reparations.


Which has been sitting there forever. But it will win her s substantial following.

I hope she crowds out the pretenders


Yeah, I’d like to see the lane cleared of this guy:

Former Vice President Joe Biden, who is expected to soon launch a bid for the presidency, is reportedly considering selecting a running mate early in his campaign.

Citing Democrats familiar with Biden’s plans, CNN reported the possibility on Monday. An aide told the network that naming a running mate early would help Biden keep the focus on the Democratic goal of defeating President Trump in the general election.

Biden has discussed the possibility in conversations with advisers as well as with top Democrats and elected officials, according to CNN.

CNN noted that Biden stirred speculation last week by meeting with former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams (D). But the two did not formally discuss the vice presidency during that meeting, two people familiar with the meeting told CNN.

And also knock out others like Hickenlooper and Klobuchar, as well as the two of the coasters.


Would love to see Biden out. Pairing him with Abrams might just do enough for them, with some DNC help.


We’ll see how Beto lands on this. I think Obama has his back.


Too bad. Doesn’t sound like much of a fight for M4A , if the first thing is to protect ACA.


Yeah, it was a stair stepping answer.


I’ve been leaving it and going back to it and every time I go back it’s all ads.


Liz just hit Harris and Biden.


Sez White supremacists are a threat.


Here’s pretty much the entire town hall in a thread.



A lot more to it at the thread.

Skip to toolbar