HomeUncategorized5/29 News Roundup and Open Thread

Leave a Reply

Photo and Image Files
Audio and Video Files
Other File Types
43 Comment threads
53 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
10 Comment authors
OzoneTomwi60polarbear4WindDancer13Don midwest Recent comment authors

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

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Thank you jcitybone!

I left a couple of comments this morning at the bottom of yesterday’s thread-an interesting TOP straw poll and a good Bernie diary over there as well (including a shout-out from phatkhat).

Bernie is in Reno tonight.

The winnowing of the 2020 Dem field will begin in 3 months

The Democratic National Committee announced this morning that ABC-Univision is slated to host the third set of debates on Sept. 12 and Sept. 13 (if enough candidates make the threshold to require two nights of debates).

But here’s the hitch: To qualify for the third round of debates, candidates must hit 2 percent in four qualifying polls released between June 28 and Aug. 28.

That’s up from the current polling threshold of 1 percent.

And they will need to raise money from 130,000 unique individual donors — up from 65,000.

To understand how that new polling requirement will winnow the field, only nine Democratic candidates have hit 2 percent or above in just one of the last three qualifying national polls (Fox, Quinnipiac, Monmouth).

Those nine: Biden, Sanders, Warren, Harris, Buttigieg, O’Rourke, Klobuchar, Booker and Castro.



I agree there are far too many candidates, but I am bummed that this will make it totally impossible for Mike Gravel to participate. To be clear, I favor Bernie and Elizabeth, but Gravel has a necessary point of view that the DNC/MSM would really like to bury. So does Gabbard, for that matter, but she also has so much weird baggage that I’d rather hear the message from Gravel.


Did you see the straw poll over at TOP that I linked to at the bottom of yesterday’s thread? Gravel was in second place (behind Bernie) last I checked.

I’d love to see Gravel go off on foreign policy in a debate!


I still like Inslee even if he doesn’t make the cut.



Unfortunately there are a boatload of crazy X-Tian Fundie religious cults in that state that are screaming about the start of the End Times. 🙁




He repeated what he’s been saying all along: he did not exonerate the orange imbecile, and he threw it into the laps of Congress which has the responsibility to begin impeachment. Hear that, Pelosi?



But, but, he’s the ‘safe’ choice!

We ain’t got time for safe.






Biden Skips Campaigning To Hang With Big Donors Instead


The ‘unity’ issue viewed from the left.

Donald Trump’s Path to Victory

Fourth, Politico reports that pro-Trump PACs, like America Rising and America First, are spending millions “pursuing a strategy intended to pit Democrats against each other in a battle of progressive bona fides.”

Not that the Democrats aren’t already at odds. Party unity handwringers fear the Left won’t rally to the Democratic candidate should Sanders or Warren fail to secure the nomination. (Yes, in 2016, 12% of Sanders voters ultimately voted for Trump, according to the Cooperative Congressional Election Study. It’s a significant number, but less than the 25% of Clinton primary voters who voted against Obama in 2008.)

Another threat to unity comes from centrists who fume about Sanders at high-end donor soirées. The specter haunting these discussions is Howard Schultz, the plutocracy’s designated spoiler. As novelist Jacob Bacharach observed, the Democratic donor class is not so much worried that Schultz will sabotage 2020 as they are threatening to rally to Schultz themselves, and thereby hand the election to Trump.

A united and broad anti-Trump front will be essential in November 2020. To the extent that a handful of super-rich liberals jeopardize that unity, they should be named and shamed.



Ocasio-Cortez Defends Bernie Sanders After Politico Needlessly Bashes Him


Six Children Have Died While in ICE Custody – Why?





The news blackout is working. Harry gets a little extra in his paycheck from CNN for this drivel.


At first I thought that what you meant by, “The news blackout is working” was that my not watching MSM ‘news’ was working, and that maybe their viewership was down. Wishful thinking on my part I guess.

I do wonder, though, about that large 28% of support for Bernie from those who are paying ‘Little To No Attention’. Could that be a good thing?

Maybe those people aren’t paying too much attention because they know enough about Bernie from the last presidential cycle to support him without having to pay much attention this cycle?

And, also, maybe it could be viewed as a good thing (that people who aren’t paying much/any attention are supporting him) as an indicator of how the more casual voter may vote, and balance off some of the group who may vote for Biden mostly due to his recognition?

Not sure if any of that made sense, lol.


What my intention was to state that by the MSM giving only negative attention to Bernie while disregarding his positive positions is a type of blackout. It is completely the opposite for Biden where only positive mentions rule the day. This also happened to the numerous wannabes who were hyped before fading out.


This lack of coverage also applies to Tulsi and Mike Gravel. I think that the recent positive coverage of Warren is solely an attempt to siphon votes away from Bernie.


Yes, after I got over my wishful thinking I realized that you meant. But I’m not sure that Enten fully thought out the implications of the poll?

Don midwest
Don midwest

This may have been linked before, but important


But outside of the watch of the campaign’s top brass, a collection of activists working in the bowels of the campaign tested out a variety of experimental approaches to organizing, eventually producing a breakthrough that has been copied by organizers in Spain and the U.K.; helped elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Congress; and is now guiding Sanders’s 2020 campaign. Sanders built this movement, however, largely by accident.

Throughout his career, Sanders resisted hiring any more campaign or even congressional staff than absolutely necessary — and oftentimes less than that. Part of it was philosophical: Sanders for decades believed that staff were inherently corrupting of a politician, more likely to push him toward party orthodoxy, and undermine the iconoclastic independence he had nurtured.

His 2016 presidential campaign was no different — in part because nobody who wanted a future in Democratic Party politics thought they’d survive coming near his challenge to Hillary Clinton. Jeff Weaver, who left Sanders’s office in 2009 to run a comic book store, came out of retirement to work as campaign manager, but few others joined the official campaign.

“You have to remember in the very beginning, it was very hard for the Bernie campaign to hire pros,” said Becky Bond, an adviser to the 2016 Sanders campaign, “because it was just very clear that you’d be totally blackballed, not just from a White House or a federal agency job, but from any of the Democratic-aligned institutions. Even vendors who weren’t employed by the Clinton campaign didn’t want to work for the Bernie campaign, because they were worried about not getting business in the future.”

That meant that, by definition, the staff had to be filled out by renegades, people with activist rather than campaign backgrounds, and operatives accustomed to taking on the establishment. Claire Sandberg fit that bill. As a high school student, she was swept up in an illegal mass arrest at a protest of the World Bank and IMF in 2002 and used the settlement she got to launch a group in New York dedicated to banning fracking. Improbably, she won, and by 2015, was looking for her next thing. She reached out to everybody she knew who might have some tangential connection to the small circle of Sanders advisers and eventually connected with Zack Exley, who had been talking to the campaign about joining. The pair pitched themselves as a package deal, and Weaver bit. Exley was brought on as a senior adviser and Sandberg was made director of digital organizing. Exley also brought on Bond, his longtime friend and ally.

“The professionals that joined were really true believers, like me and Zack, and then we really had to fill out the ranks from the super volunteers who’d never worked in politics before,” Bond said. One of those super volunteers was Corbin Trent, a chef in Tennessee who sold his food trucks to volunteer for the campaign full time. He reached out to Exley about a job, and Exley, without a lot of other options, took a chance on him. Another was Saikat Chakrabarti, who’d been the first engineer, and the fifth employee, of the Silicon Valley firm Stripe but left it behind to join the campaign. A third was Alexandra Rojas, who Exley met as she organized community college students in Orange County, California.


I agree Don, it is important, and encouraging too. Because, for me at least, it showed that the establishment’s efforts to squash Bernie and his movement actually ended up making him/it stronger in the long run.

AND, it means that their current efforts to protect incumbents will most likely also backfire on them!

Bring it.



I imagine the Chait opinion piece will be forthcoming.

Joe Biden Wants to Destroy the Best Schools Poor Urban Kids Have

Name replacement mine.


Also, does that mean that Joe’s brother Frank isn’t the president of Mavericks High Schools, the Florida charter school chain any more?

In January 2017, Ohio-based “dropout recovery” chain, Bridgescape, purchased the six remaining Mavericks in Education schools in Florida. Bridgescape is operated by for-profit Edison Learning. According to the October 05, 2017, USA Today, Edison Learning’s “dropout recovery” schools are making money off of empty desks

As for Frank Biden: He is now known as “a former charter schools executive,” for example, in this January 07, 2019, Washington Examiner article about Joe Biden’s then-anticipated announcement of his 2020 presidential run

How convenient.


Mueller resigns, leaving a mess in his wake.

Special counsel Robert Mueller issued his first public statement on his investigation into Russian interference with the 2016 election, emphasizing one of the key points of his report: that his office did not conclude whether or not President Trump committed a crime.

In his statement, Mueller said his office could not bring criminal charges against the president because the team believed it to be unconstitutional.

“If we had had confidence that the president had clearly not committed a crime, we would have said so,” said Mueller, adding, “Charging the president with a crime is not an option we could consider.”

It would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge*,” said Mueller, further explaining the reasoning.

Mueller announced that he was officially resigning from the Department of Justice and returning to private life. He said this was his final statement on the matter, and any testimony he might give to Congress would not go beyond what was in the report.


* – what does that mean jcitybone?? You’re way smarter than me, so hopefully that makes sense to you.



It’s a start.


(“It’s a start”)–> Hopefully.

It does seem like there’s been a lot of talk lately about what a great money-making opportunity climate change presents.





That historically great economic growth that Trump keeps bragging about . . .

The average from 1960 to 2019 is 3.05%. Q1 2019 US growth was 3.20%. Historical! 56 countries beat that record, by the way (per the same site), with another eight only point 5 per cent behind.

Source: USA: Economic growth, quarterly





Israel goes back to elections as Netanyahu fails to form coalition

Exactly one month after the 21st Knesset were sworn in, a majority of the Knesset voted late Wednesday to disperse themselves and initiate an unprecedented repeat election on September 17.Exactly one month after the 21st Knesset were sworn in, a majority of the Knesset voted late Wednesday to disperse themselves and initiate an unprecedented repeat election on September 17.
The motion passed by a vote of 74-45.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu briefed the Likud faction ahead of the vote that he did not succeed in reaching a compromise with Yisrael Beiteinu leader Avigdor Liberman on the controversial haredi (ultra-Orthodox) conscription bill and also tried unsuccessfully to woo MKs from the opposition to join his government.

They have a chance at a redo and get “Netanyaboob” (Tip to Orl) out of office after all.



Gen Z, Millennials and Gen X outvoted older generations in 2018 midterms

Midterm voter turnout reached a modern high in 2018, and Generation Z, Millennials and Generation X accounted for a narrow majority of those voters, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of newly available Census Bureau data.Younger generations outvoted Boomer and prior generations in 2018The three younger generations – those ages 18 to 53 in 2018 – reported casting 62.2 million votes, compared with 60.1 million cast by Baby Boomers and older generations. It’s not the first time the younger generations outvoted their elders: The same pattern occurred in the 2016 presidential election.

Higher turnout accounted for a significant portion of the increase. Millennials and Gen X together cast 21.9 million more votes in 2018 than in 2014. (The number of eligible voter Millennials and Gen Xers grew by 2.5 million over those four years, due to the number of naturalizations exceeding mortality.) And 4.5 million votes were cast by Gen Z voters, all of whom turned 18 since 2014.

By comparison, the number of votes cast by Boomer and older generations increased 3.6 million. Even this modest increase is noteworthy, since the number of eligible voters among these generations fell by 8.8 million between the elections, largely due to higher mortality among these generations.Millennial turnout nearly doubled from 2014 to 2018Millennials, Gen Xers and Boomers all set records for turnout in a midterm election in 2018. Turnout rates increased the most for the Millennial generation, roughly doubling between 2014 and 2018 – from 22% to 42%. Among Generation Z, 30% of those eligible to vote (those ages 18 to 21 in this analysis) turned out in the first midterm election of their adult lives. And for the first time in a midterm election, more than half of Gen Xers reported turning out to vote. While turnout tends to increase with age, every age group also voted at higher rates than in 2014, and the increase was more pronounced among younger adults.Gen Zers and Millennials cast a quarter of all votes in 2018 midterm electionTogether, Gen Z and Millennials reported casting 30.6 million votes, a quarter of the total. Gen Z was responsible for 4.5 million, or 4%, of all votes. This post-Millennial generation is just starting to reach voting age, and their impact will likely be felt more in the 2020 presidential election, when they are projected to be 10% of eligible voters.

Millennials, ages 22 to 37 in 2018, cast 26.1 million votes, far higher than the number of votes they cast in 2014 (13.7 million).
Generation X, those ages 38 to 53 in 2018, cast 31.6 million votes – the first time they had more than 30 million votes in a midterm election. Their turnout rate also increased, from 39% in 2014 to 55% four years later

Baby Boomers, those ages 54 to 72 in 2018, had their highest-ever midterm election turnout (64%, the same rate as the Silent Generation) and cast more votes than they ever have in a midterm (44.1 million). Still, they had a relatively smaller turnout increase than the younger generations (53% of Boomers turned out in 2014). Overall, Boomers cast 36% of ballots in last year’s election – their lowest share of midterm voters since 1986 – because of mortality, while the younger generations are still growing due to naturalizations and adults turning 18.



Keeping us in the fold. Dammit.




toooo adorable.

btw, looks like the AOC thing is likely false.

Skip to toolbar