The Democratic Party, 2019

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Wed Aug 21, 2019 12:00 pm

JackRiddler » Wed Aug 21, 2019 10:03 am wrote:Also, do you have the DNC fundraising numbers for the last 10 years or so showing a recent spike so dramatic compared to prior levels that one can assert Trump is indeed an "incredibly lucrative" fundraising tool for them? I could believe it's true, but it's not certain. Trump is also an incredibly effective tool for demonstrating the DNC is fucking useless.

An important question. It would be fun to break that out, we used to have a board laying out the whole fundraising ecosystem for scorekeeping.

Offhand, this is about what I'm on: ... influence/

Scroll down a wee bit and there's a great graphic outlining the past 10. What stands out to me is the fact that 2010 (year of the ghost!) is still their high-water mark for mid-term fundraising. Those Tea Party days were heady stuff, also my introduction to the ecosystem of "splitting" donations as an accounting work-around. (And back-room negotiation.)

The article goes on to outline the DNC's current network of fronts:

Hillary Clinton’s JFC boosted the DNC’s revenue during her presidential campaign throughout the 2016 cycle, but the Democratic party currently lacks a clear front-runner to help raise funds for the committee. Still, the DNC’s clouded financial future does not mean the Democratic party as a whole is lacking in fundraising potential.

Although the DNC does not have comparable funding streams to the RNC, Democrat-tied “dark money” groups, including Majority Forward, and super-PACs such as Senate Majority PAC have gained prominence. A 501(c)(4) “dark money” group called Future Majority recently formed in an effort to provide strategy and messaging for 2020 Democrats in swing states — a role typically served by party committees.

The expansion of party-connected super PACs and associated “dark money” groups accepting unlimited donations have eclipsed the traditional national committees, which are still subject to contribution limits and mandatory disclosures.

And congressional committees such as the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee have become fundraising powerhouses in their own right. The DCCC raised more than $296 million in 2018, having steadily increased its contributions since raising $92 million in 2004.

So as ever, our nouns obscure as much as they explicate -- the DNC is not exactly the DNC, per se, anymore. Like so many other three-letter bureaucratic egregores, it is dissipating into ever more opaque, distributed legal fictions.

Strictly speaking though, I'm wrong. About the DNC having the horse sense to make money off Trump, that is. The 2014 mid-terms saw them raise $168m, and the 2018 mid-terms saw them raise $176m. That's a blip, not a trend.

(It's also not the whole story, either, because Team Blue is going just as hard on dark money operations as the GOP ever did now.)

And yet, there's been a tsunami of money raised, I know this because I still have friends paying mortgages off this shit. Where is it going? A lot it went to non-profits, apparently - ACLU has been having a record haul, Planned Parenthood has been keeping quiet about their fundraising success for obvious reasons, and groups like RAICES are seeing unprecedented numbers.

But I'm really curious now to take an afternoon with a pot of coffee and a clean desk and get refreshed on the DNC's dark money ecosystem. Thanks for getting that ball rolling.

And remember to donate directly and locally.
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
Posts: 10484
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby MacCruiskeen » Thu Aug 22, 2019 4:16 pm

^^"foreign interference in our elections". Yeah, right. A big bad furriner done it and ran away. A sly slanty-eyed Slav Bolshevik, presumably. :ohno:

US "politics" is water torture for the planet. Drip, drip, drip, the idiocy just never fucking ends.
"Ich kann gar nicht so viel fressen, wie ich kotzen möchte." (Max Liebermann, Berlin, 1933)

26 March 2020: US Space Force NatSec Rocket Launch
User avatar
Posts: 9876
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:47 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby MacCruiskeen » Thu Aug 22, 2019 4:21 pm

Clearly the Democrats' plan is to ensure that Trump gets a second term.
"Ich kann gar nicht so viel fressen, wie ich kotzen möchte." (Max Liebermann, Berlin, 1933)

26 March 2020: US Space Force NatSec Rocket Launch
User avatar
Posts: 9876
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:47 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby Grizzly » Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:09 pm

four more years of RUSSIA∀ISS∩ɹ 'ǝldoǝd ǝɥʇ ʇsol ʎǝɥʇ ʎɥʍ uo ʇɔǝlɟǝɹ ɹou sǝʌlǝsɯǝɥʇ ʇɐ ʞool ʇuoʍ ɯoɥʍ sʇɐɹɔoɯǝp puɐ ɹǝlǝǝɥM ʎɔɹɐW Please no.

After the 2020 Democratic National Convention (July 13-16, 2020) people will be told to hold their noses and vote the party line.


Hillary Clinton was in full control of the DNC a full year before the 2016 Democratic National Convention. ... nomination

“How in the world was Bernie Sanders supposed to have a fair chance if
Hillary was in full control of “the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised”? ”

[Side notes: six months after she lost the election Hillary Clinton founded Onward Together
a fund raising leech that was designed (we are wise to expect) to take over the fund raising
of emerging progressive groups.]

[Onward Together: “Onward Together is dedicated to advancing the vision that earned
nearly 66 million votes in the 2016 election. By supporting groups that encourage
people to organize, get involved, and run for office,
Onward Together will advance progressive values and work to build a brighter future for generations to come.” ]

[Laughter is an escape route from our lizard brain: ]


After the 2020 convention there will be much to hold our noses about.
You think 2016 was slimey? You ain’t seen nothin yet.

People were very upset about the super-delegate beast in 2016. To placate the outrage
the DNC offered a rule change – the super-delegates cannot be used in the first ballot.
This appeared like a huge concession as there hasn’t been a multiple-ballot convention since

“Suprise, surprise.” $They$ went out and found twenty candidates in order to assure a
contested convention and thus uncage the super-delegates.
You thought the plethora of candidates was merely a random clump? Feel the burn.

The 2016 Democratic National Convention caused outrage, thank goodness (snark) for Russiagate,
everyone could forget about the DNC treachery and blame Russia.

But if you think the stink from the 2016 Democratic National Convention was bad,
people are going to go absolutely ballistic after the 2020 Democratic National Convention.

Will people “fall in line”? Don’t give Democratic voters too much credit, I am betting
they will … fall in line.


(I am a Green Party voter)

Posted by: librul | Aug 22 2019 18:18 utc | 6
If Barthes can forgive me, “What the public wants is the image of passion Justice, not passion Justice itself.”
User avatar
Posts: 2878
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby Grizzly » Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:20 am

What's changed in YOUR lifetime??
If Barthes can forgive me, “What the public wants is the image of passion Justice, not passion Justice itself.”
User avatar
Posts: 2878
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby seemslikeadream » Sat Aug 24, 2019 10:26 am

Don't forget Rep Underwood didn't just unseat a 4-term Republican...

That same seat was obstructed by Dennis Hastert's nether regions for nearly 30 years before that.

This is more meaningful than anyone realizes yet.


endless fight against oppression and tyranny.

"When we die
We will die with our arms unbound"
Rep. Lauren Underwood

No person in America is above the law, including the President of the United States. My statement on an impeachment inquiry below.

U.S. Rep. Lauren Underwood Latest Illinois Dem To Support Trump Impeachment Inquiry: ‘This Is A Tragedy For Our Country’
CHICAGO (CBS) — U.S. Rep. Lauren Underwood, a Democrat freshman who flipped a traditionally conservative suburban district this past November, says she supports an impeachment inquiry against President Trump.

Rep. Lauren Underwood
No person in America is above the law, including the President of the United States. My statement on an impeachment inquiry below.
View image on Twitter

2:51 PM - Aug 20, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy

4,635 people are talking about this

In a Tweet posted Tuesday afternoon, Underwood said:

“No person in America is above the law, including the President of the United States. The Mueller Report lays out substantial evidence that the President’s campaign worked with a foreign adversary to influence an election.

“We need the information to better understand how our election was influenced by a foreign adversary to prevent it from ever happening again.

“I find it sobering that a lot of the conversation is being framed in terms of winners and losers. Let me be clear: No one wins when Congress is compelled to investigate impeachment or bring about articles of impeachment.

“This is a tragedy for our country.”

In November, Underwood, of Naperville, unseated GOP incumbent Rep. Randy Hultgren, of Plano, in the 14th Congressional District.

Underwood is the first woman and first minority to represent the rural and suburban area north and west of Chicago.

Other Illinois Democrats who back an impeachment inquiry are: Sean Casten, Jan Schakowsky, Bobby Rush, Robin Kelly, Danny Davis, Jesus “Chuy” Garcia and Mike Quigley. ... r-country/

this is what is happening at the DNC right now....thread with randon replies from random twitters
Evan Weber

BREAKING: The @DNC resolutions committee democratically passed a #ClimateDebate compromise resolution and it appears that @TomPerez is trying to kill it.

He says it would disrupt the process the candidates have agreed to. All the candidates want a #ClimateDebate.
11:47 AM - 24 Aug 2019
307 Retweets 665 Likes Dan BergerJ. Kim ChaixMattSnowOahuJonathan "Boo and Vote" CohntrevorPeter KohanDru Branchval loves calWilliam Spencer

Debate happening now. @Tinapo makes the point that @dnc members have never voted on the current rules.

Livestream here. Follow along: ... =e&sfns=cl

Larry Cohen, former @CWAUnion president, calling out the undemocratic nature of this process that @TomPerez has initiated.

The will of the committee is being disrupted.

This is very sad. This is not about one issue versus another. The resolution as amended would allow for all issues to host forums with candidates appearing side-by-side.

Wow. @sunrisemvmt just got a shoutout and thanks.

Whoa. Dewey Square Group, the lobbyist firm arguing against a #climatedebate at DNC today, was paid over $800,000 to successfully lobby for a coal bailout in…

Representative from Wyoming makes the great point that forums do not reach as many people as something with all candidates on stage simultaneously.

Youngest @DNC member @michaelkapp respectfully reminds @TomPerez that the Democratic Party should be bottom up, not top down. Members did not approve the current debate rules.

.@RepBarbaraLee says we need a #ClimateDebate and it must include people of color and environmental racism.

People speaking against include industry lobbyists (why are they allowed to be @DNC members), people speaking out that we need debates on other issues (agreed!)

Oregon Chair reminds us that all of the democratic candidates want a #ClimateDebate.

Member says we shouldn’t change rules midstream because it would create a battle between candidates…isn’t that what primaries are for? What do the other debates do?

LGBTQ activist @DNC member says that is her main issue but that climate change is the issue in which all other issues rest.

Representative from Missouri reminds us of the intersectionality of climate crisis.

.@YasmineTaeb giving powerful statement as Muslim immigrant on why the resolution as written should be approved. Climate change is important and also this new fuel would allow for other issues to organize forums as well.

Many people wondering why we’re pushing young people away?

Resolution 4 was a compromise from a full #ClimateDebate. It passed. Killing it now would be terrible for energizing young people to believe in @TheDemocrats.

.@TomPerez just gave an incredibly biased explanation of what is actually in the new resolution.

Very unfair that he wouldn’t let a proponent explain what is actually in it.

There it is. Push for @DNC to allow a #ClimateDebate strong-armed to death by @TomPerez.

Activists are chanting, “Failure of leadership.”

An understatement.

Isn't it obvious that it's the DNC's donors that don't want the climate debate?

The DNC donors are also the GOP donors

Shh... Polite people don't think about such things.

That’s doxxing!!!!!!!!11111 @neeratanden @HoarseWisperer @jess_mc @SallyAlbright

Man... it’s wild to see how inept DNC leader is at understanding our dire issues. It’s also gross he’s pitting activists against each other. All to protect bad candidates, and to not offend big oil donors. Its so transparent even when they’re trying to not be...

He's not inept its what he was hired to do. He entered the race for DNC Chair late with the backing of Obama and a lot of big money establishment support because it looked like Keith Ellison was going to win. He managed to squeek by Ellison and has been a corporate puppet since

A very good point!

Trying to prevent the climate debate from happening is sending the message that the Democratic Party doesn’t believe in climate change.

Tom Perez shouldn't be in the seat he's sitting in, when can he be removed ?

Tom Perez was put there by Obama. That's who he wanted as DNC chair after Wasserman Schultz had to reign. Perez was Obama's boy.

Get your yellow vests ready

I’ve got mine:

Tom Perez has got to go

Hey-hey, ho-ho ...

James Coleman Retweeted Mike Gravel
This tweet cannot be more relevant right now

Mike Gravel

fuck you @TomPerez

Dear @DNC
You want young people to vote? Then I suggest @TomPerez gets out of the way. Young people want the climate change debate.

Replying to @evanlweber @jjz1600 and 2 others
Tom Perez has been a disaster since the very beginning of his tenure.

Let it happen @TomPerez. Just back away

@TomPerez You know what else is disrupting? #ClimateChange i think formalities need to be reconsidered in this case. This is a serious situation and a large majority of the Latino population really cares about this issue. In fact, we live it every day. @GreenLatinos


@TomPerez must go. Resign. The situation is to serious for this BS to continue. Again. Resign.

If only Pete Buttigieg had won the election for DNC Chair. Maybe this whole unnecessary mess wouldn’t have happened because a climate debate might’ve been built into the schedule from the beginning.

He just doesn't want the Biden Bot breaking down on stage

happily married to bae! Yee-en Nunb

He means "disrupt the process of his wealthy benefactors"

.@TomPerez -- If Dems want my vote @DNC better debate this most critical issue #ClimateCrisis facing all living beings b/c I'm already f**king pissed w/ @SpeakerPelos &
@HouseDemocrats for their failure in re #ConstitutionalCrisis & not holding public #ImpeachmentHearings
Does the Democratic Party literally no longer care or stand up for those suffering... immigrants, refugees, vulnerable peoples, our very planet... ?!!! @TomPerez @DNC

Perez needs to go.

every dem candidate, since they have majorly supported and admitted to the importance of a #climatedebate, should be asked if they will run as independents if the DNC ignores grassroots & public & candidate shared motions

Brilliant! Alienate the voters you need even more. Only Democrats could lose this one!

Vote Tom OUT.

The #ClimateDebate is a matter of life and death for everyone alive. Let’s hope Tom resigns or dies.

Find out who the donors are, and boycott them. Find out who they lobby for, and boycott them. The only way to communicate with people willing to burn everyone else for profit is with money. obviously don’t want the young vote. Or the old vote. Or the middle aged vote. Guess we need to make a new party, one that actually represent people instead of corporations.

Usurp Perez!!!

Biden does not really want this debate

Ride this idiot out on a rail.

We know your wallet is bigger than your love for future generations (including your sons). You don’t have to be democratic or respectful. Just step aside.

Just exactly who is Tom Perez? It's time for a new person who will take on critical issues.

Replying to @evanlweber @GrassrootsJill and 2 others

gee tom it would really suck to "disrupt" the process for the precious nominees. Truly nothing worse than disrupting their process.

Every time I hear Tom Perez talk I throw up in my mouth.

That's why we didn't want him there.

WTF Tom Perez? I want a solid candidate conversation on climate change. DO IT!

We know Biden doesn't want a climate debate and Kamala tried to get out of the townhall. Perez is their catspaw. How can we expect either to act on the #climatecrisis if they are afraid to talk about it.

This is what corruption looks like The Dem establishment is complicit in the destruction of our environment

The DNC needs a purge ... 3221168128
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby Grizzly » Sat Aug 24, 2019 7:49 pm

Fuck the DNC and their ilk....

comment found in passing:
We'll find out in another two or three months. That's when folks will start paying attention. By all accounts, Biden's support is soft, and based on name recognition and Obama nostalgia. Though the fact we live in a society that has nostalgia for Obama isn't a great sign.
If Barthes can forgive me, “What the public wants is the image of passion Justice, not passion Justice itself.”
User avatar
Posts: 2878
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby Grizzly » Sun Aug 25, 2019 7:23 pm

Let's be clear out of the gate. I am NOT a democrat. Though I realize there are only two options coke or pepsi. Having said that, I am in pretty much full agreement with the following:
___________________________________________________________> NOT A RUSSIAN.

Sanders has been compromised since he endorsed Hillary Clinton™ in 2016;

Tulsi is the new revolution.

Tulsi Gabbard is the only candidate who would beat Trump:

Tulsi is a Democrat (meaningful to Democrats)

Tulsi is a woman (meaningful to some Republicans)

Tulsi is an active veteran (meaningful to some Republicans)

Tulsi is pro-cannabis Decriminalization (meaningful to some Republicans)

Tulsi is the one and only officially/actively advocating the end of Bush's multi-trillion dollar Wars of Terror™ (meaningful to most Independents)

Tulsi is the one and only officially/actively advocates auditing the Federal Reserve™ (meaningful to most conservatives)

Tulsi is the one and only officially/actively advocates dropping of all charges against both Snowden and Assange (meaningful to most progressives)

Tulsi is the one and only officially/actively advocating the audit the Federal Reserve™ (meaningful to most conservatives)

Tulsi practices yoga (meaningful to me)

Republicans™ will usually vote Republican™

Democrats™ will usually vote Democrat™

Biden won't win-over any Trump supporters. Game Over. Welcome to Trump2020.

Unlike any other candidate, Tulsi Gabbard has what it takes to sway strategic pendulums.


Found here:

Last edited by Grizzly on Sun Aug 25, 2019 7:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If Barthes can forgive me, “What the public wants is the image of passion Justice, not passion Justice itself.”
User avatar
Posts: 2878
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Aug 25, 2019 7:50 pm

Libertarians (Ron Paul) love her ...Democrats not so much :)

Democrats do not have to win over any trumpies (they couldn't anyway) win the next election ...they will win by turn out, everyone that sat home thinking trump would never win ...........well they gave us trump

Who Is Supporting Tulsi Gabbard’s Candidacy?
Nancy LeTourneauAugust 23, 2019

Tulsi Gabbard is not going to be the Democratic nominee for president in 2020. At this point, her polling average at Real Clear Politics is 1.4%. Nevertheless, conservative media celebrated the fact that Gabbard won the online poll sponsored by Drudge Report after the first round of debates. Similarly, Gabbard won polls from both Breitbart and Drudge after her performance in the second debate. Those results were not replicated by any reputable polling firm.

Not long after the first debate, we learned what had prompted Gabbard’s success in those online polls.

Users from pro-Trump communities on 4chan and Reddit implored fellow members to vote for lower-polling candidates in online polls, specifically Tulsi Gabbard and Bill de Blasio, in the hours after Wednesday’s Democratic debate — a sign that digital manipulation efforts related to U.S. politics and elections remain very much alive.

Users on 4chan’s anonymous far-right /pol/ message board repeatedly posted links to polls across the web, encouraging one another to “blow the polls out” for Gabbard, the congresswoman from Hawaii who has developed a substantial support base among many of its users…

“GIVE HER YOUR POWER,” read one 4chan post from 1 a.m. Thursday, pointing to a screenshot of the still-active Drudge poll showing Gabbard leading.

Charles Davis highlighted some other Gabbard supporters.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is set to have lunch with a prolific conspiracy theorist who argues the mass shooting in Las Vegas was an intelligence operation meant to distract from the Harvey Weinstein scandal — and who is also, by far, the most successful digital fundraiser for her campaign, according to a recent announcement from the Hawaii Democrat’s presidential campaign staff.

In seeking the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination, Gabbard, while struggling to register in most polls, has attracted a good deal of support from the fringe of both the left and right, especially online. Even former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke tweeted his support. The congresswoman has repeatedly disavowed Duke’s endorsement. The campaign has, however, embraced some of its lesser-hinged fans.

As Davis suggests, Gabbard also garners support from so-called “progressives” on the left. In critiquing the slogan “Vote Blue No Matter Who,” Kathy Copeland Padden complained that, “the Democratic Party has no incentive to take the candidacy of Progressives like Sanders and Gabbard seriously, no matter how loud the people clamor for them.”

Another Sanders supporter, Michael Tracey, has become one of Gabbard’s strongest defenders. Tracey is one of those people who don’t fit nicely into a linear left-right political continuum. He has been associated with news organizations as diverse as The Young Turks and The Federalist. He garnered a lot of attention on Twitter when he made himself out to be the victim of this encounter with Representative Maxine Waters by claiming that it is “extremely suspect for a member of Congress to shove anybody.”

Tommy X-TrumpIsARacist-opher

Here's the full @MaxineWaters @mtracey interview. Sensitive viewers, you are warned.
Embedded video

6:22 PM - Jun 3, 2017
Twitter Ads info and privacy

2,089 people are talking about this

In other words, the label that might best fit Tracey is “shit-stirrer.” He not only denies Russia’s involvement in the 2016 election, but once suggested that if Russia did interfere, the American public should be thankful.

These days, Tracey is stirring up some shit that is reminiscent of a myth that was promulgated by Sanders supporters during the 2016 presidential primary: that the Democratic National Committee is rigging the game against Gabbard. At this point, the congresswoman from Hawaii hasn’t qualified for the September debate, with the deadline for doing so coming up next week. Even though the DNC announced the criteria to qualify for this debate back in May, Tracey is suggesting that it was rigged to keep Gabbard out. That message is now being picked up by right wing outlets like American Thinker.

Back in January when Gabbard announced her candidacy, I questioned whether Democrats could trust her. That was primarily based on her support for leaders like Syria’s brutal dictator Bashar al-Assad, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Egypt’s Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. Of equal concern is the fact that she has never denounced the leader of the cult in which her family participated during her childhood. There is also the fact that, while she and her supporters tout her as a progressive Democrat, her record in Congress says otherwise.

While I am sure that there are voters out there who genuinely support Gabbard, it is clear that they make up no more than 1.4% of Democratic primary voters. It is the people who are using her candidacy—with or without her consent—to foment disruption and chaos in the process of selecting a nominee that is cause for concern. ... candidacy/

The DNC rejects a climate change debate and puts virtual caucusing in doubt
Activists have called for a climate change debate for months. The DNC says one won’t happen, and raised new questions about changes to caucusing.

Anya van WagtendonkAug 25, 2019, 5:02pm EDT

At its summer meeting in San Francisco this weekend, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) addressed two things at the top of many voters’ minds: climate change and Russian interference in the 2020 election. The decisions party leaders made on both points frustrated activists and fellow Democrats.

Members on Saturday rejected a proposal to allow presidential candidates to participate in third-party debates, effectively ending hopes for a debate focused solely on climate change. Activists and presidential candidates alike had long called for a debate on the issue, and one candidate — former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke — called the decision not to have one “baffling.”

And in a move that, according to Bloomberg, incensed state party officials, the DNC announced it had commissioned a cybersecurity firm to hack its assets as a means of testing a virtual caucus system set to be used in contests in Iowa and other states next year. The hack was successful, casting doubt on the reliability of those systems, but state leaders claimed the test was unfair and a poor indicator of caucus security. Nevertheless, it raised new concerns about cybersecurity within a party still smarting from a 2016 email leak that sparked bitter acrimony during that campaign’s nominating process.

A climate change debate won’t happen

Members of the DNC voted 222-137 against allowing Democratic presidential candidates to participate in a third-party debate focused solely on climate change without facing sanctions from party brass. Currently, the DNC closely regulates how and when candidates can debate, and the vote gave it a mandate to continue doing so.

Had the vote gone the other way, candidates would have been allowed “to participate in multi-candidate issue-specific forums with the candidates appearing on the same stage, engaging one another in discussion.” This would have set the debate stage for the #ClimateDebate that environmental groups, notably the youth-led Sunrise Movement, had been advocating for — and that 15 candidates said they would be willing to participate in.

Top DNC officials, including Chair Tom Perez, were opposed to the resolution. Perez has repeatedly argued that no one issue should take precedent over another, and has said a climate debate would unfairly advantage Washington state Gov. Jay Inslee. Inslee left the presidential field last week, but had run as a single-issue candidate completely focused on climate change.

Supporters of a climate debate argued that the issue is serious enough to merit special treatment.

“If an asteroid was coming to earth, there would be no question about having a debate about it,” a DNC member said, according to the local Mercury News, which covered the meeting. “But with this existential crisis facing the world, we all sit and wring our hands.”

Protesters, many from the Sunrise Movement, interrupted the committee meeting where the proposal was being considered, chanting “We can’t wait!”

Although many Democratic candidates have said they support holding a climate debate, including Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders, most have so far been silent about the committee’s vote. On Saturday afternoon, Beto O’Rourke called the decision to vote down the debate “baffling” and “alarming,” however:

Beto O'Rourke

This decision is as baffling as it is alarming. Our planet is burning— the least we can do as a party is debate what to do about it. ... 98848?s=21
Edward-Isaac Dovere

in not at all a shock, there will be no DNC climate debate, after a vote just announced in San Francisco:

222 votes to not have a climate debate, 137 to have one.

4:41 PM - Aug 24, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy

4,093 people are talking about this

And Inslee, who is now running for re-election as governor, tweeted his support for the pro-debate activists:

Jay Inslee

Thank you to all the activists who have fought for a #ClimateDebate. You’re on the right side of history.

Together, we’ll make sure the Democratic nominee is ready to confront Trump on his disastrous climate failures and defeat this crisis.

Nothing is more important.

9:12 PM - Aug 24, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy

665 people are talking about this

Activists from groups like Sunrise Movement and Greenpeace have been agitating for a climate debate for months, and ramped up their activism after the issue of climate change received relatively little attention during the first round of Democratic debates — just fifteen minutes of airtime in four hours. They argued that voters deserve to know how candidates will address what they see as an existential threat to humanity.

And voters seem to be in their corner. Climate change has become a top concern for many Democratic voters. And as Vox’s Umair Irfan has reported, a climate debate would have presented an opportunity for voters to fully engage with the facts around the issue:

Climate change rarely receives a substantive prime-time policy discussion, so voters don’t often hear about it on television. A debate asking presidential hopefuls to walk through how they plan to cope with a warming world would be a public service and help educate voters who may not realize just how much a warming world will impact agriculture, the economy, health, and national security.

But as Irfan noted in another report on the issue, the vote, and ultimate defeat, of the proposal to hold a climate debate reveals a broader conflict among Democratic politicians over how central to make climate within their policy-making process:

The argument over whether or not to hold a climate change debate is a central question in a larger discussion among Democrats over how to combat climate change. Should it be the centerpiece of policy-making, or should climate considerations be an element of other issues of concern?

We’re seeing this play out in how Inslee’s climate strategy compares to that of Warren. In the proposals she’s released so far, Warren has addressed climate change through her plans for public lands, domestic manufacturing, and the military.

So do Democrats really need a climate debate, or can climate change be adequately addressed in other policy discussions?

That divide ultimately led to the DNC voting not to have a climate change debate, regardless of the grassroots and presidential campaign activity around the issue.

Hackers create new questions about virtual caucusing

The DNC also spent time at its meeting addressing cyber threats, but seemed to have arrived a few conclusions. The organization’s e-mails were compromised during the 2016 election by Russian actors, and it hopes to avoid any interference in its upcoming primaries and caucuses.

To that end, the DNC revealed it is concerned over upcoming virtual caucuses after a cybersecurity firm it hired to locate vulnerabilities within its system was able to hack into its teleconferencing system as well as the networks of the Iowa Democratic Party and Nevada Democratic Party, according to Bloomberg News.

Both Iowa and Nevada hold caucuses rather than primary elections; the DNC told all states that hold caucuses they were expected to use a “virtual caucusing” system to make caucusing — the process of sitting in a room and choosing one’s preference for party candidate — easier for those who cannot show up to physical caucus sites, as Vox’s Eric Kleefeld has written:

In previous election cycles, caucus participation was limited to people who physically showed up at the local caucus sites. This campaign cycle, however, the party will allow for participation online or by phone in what is known as a “virtual caucus.” Those who participate in the virtual caucus will decide 10 percent of awarded delegates, with 90 percent of the delegates being decided by in-person attendees.

In theory, virtual caucusing should help the party reach a different type of voter. According to Kleefeld, a June Des Moines Register/CNN poll found that in Iowa, “prospective virtual caucus voters currently have lower education levels than the prospective in-person voters” and “potential virtual caucus-goers are also younger than in-person attendees.”

However, if the network used for the virtual caucuses is compromised, so is the virtual caucusing enterprise. According to Bloomberg, state parties expected to receive party approval of their virtual caucusing setups this weekend. Now the DNC is working to allay internal concerns in advance of the launch of the first caucuses in February.

But many state party officials reportedly expressed outrage over the hack, and as Bloomberg’s Tyler Pager reports, they also expressed frustration with how the DNC has implemented this change to how caucusing has always been done:

Caucus-state officials offered a litany of complaints: That the DNC created the rules about absentee participation without considering how the states should achieve that goal; that the DNC offered little help in devising a virtual system, what state officials called the most significant change in caucus procedure since modern caucuses began in 1972; and were slow to raise concerns about security.

State party officials also argued that the networks that were hacked were not good stand ins for the virtual caucus systems they are building; they claim, for instance, that their telephonic caucuses cannot be compared to the teleconference system the security firm breached.

The DNC has reason to be concerned about cybersecurity. As a population of state delegates have been reserved for the winner — or winners — of the virtual caucuses, any interference could skew who becomes the Democratic nominee for president.

And security officials like former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats have warned hostile foreign actors will try to meddle in the 2020 election. In fact, Coats told the Senate Intelligence Committee earlier this year that those actors will likely work to influence the contest in ways we’ve not yet seen: “We expect them to refine their capabilities and add new tactics as they learn from each other’s experiences and efforts,” he said.

The DNC doesn’t have long to shore up its cybersecurity concerns; the first caucuses begin in six months. In the meantime, it has good reason to find and patch up — or to scrap entirely — any potentially vulnerable component of their nominating process. ... -committee
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby Elvis » Mon Aug 26, 2019 12:16 am

Grizzly wrote:Sanders has been compromised since he endorsed Hillary Clinton™ in 2016;


Aug 4, 2016 - Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, one of Bernie Sanders’ top surrogates, says she’ll vote for Hillary Clinton in November. The Hawaii Democrat told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, “Given the remaining choices, like Bernie Sanders, I will be casting my vote for Hillary Clinton.” ... /88071634/

Tulsi Gabbard will be the perfect running mate for Bernie Sanders. :thumbsup
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Posts: 6504
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby RocketMan » Mon Aug 26, 2019 7:06 am

There is really very few reasons in leftist Realpolitik terms to be majorly leery of Sanders and Gabbard... Most of them boil down to not very rational aesthetics and internalized Dem centrist propaganda IN MY OPINION.

Even Gabbard, with her quite off stances on Palestine and American military is LIGHT YEARS AHEAD of all the others, excepting Sanders.

Warren is a centrist mole if I ever saw one.

Shame on anyone who supports anyone but Bernie in the primary. All other options lead to the continuation of the chaotic, fascistic Trump status quo or an installation of a Corporate Centrist Dem who will not take on any major, world-destroying interests whatsoever.

-I don't like hoodlums.
-That's just a word, Marlowe. We have that kind of world. Two wars gave it to us and we are going to keep it.
User avatar
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:02 am
Location: By the rivers dark
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby JackRiddler » Mon Aug 26, 2019 9:23 am

Elvis » Sun Aug 25, 2019 11:16 pm wrote:
Grizzly wrote:Sanders has been compromised since he endorsed Hillary Clinton™ in 2016;


Things would be so much better today if the right-wing Democrats' claim that Sanders was responsible for electing Trump was not an absurdist peak of the Sour Grapes School of art but actually true. Even better if he hadn't tried the Ds in the first place! He should have gone third party, got his 1.1%, and have been completely forgotten by now. We'd still have so many wonderful Trotskyist and other True Wine splinters to choose where to spend our idle talk-time complaining about the Fucking Democrats and testing out our manifestos. There'd be no Our Revolution or Justice Democrats, no "Squad," no idle talk of Medicare, and Neera's people would be cruising easily to a Kamala-Beto ticket for the Trump-Pence-GOP machine to annihilate. Afterward they'd shake hands, and though this would be something like a Fourth Reich, at least we could all finally agree on the right external enemy. World Wars V through VII would be fought against both Russia and China. God, it had been so obvious all along! Why didn't we see it earlier?

We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
Posts: 14791
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby RocketMan » Tue Aug 27, 2019 7:28 am

This is nauseatingly fascinating. How low can this ossified, disgusting, regressive party go? ... ssion=true

Dianne Feinstein Isn't Sure She Wants Susan Collins to Lose

Throughout the Trump presidency, the Democratic leadership has begged progressive activists to appreciate the limits of their party’s power, and the wisdom of its strategic judgment.

When immigration advocates demanded a prolonged shutdown to secure protection for Dreamers in January 2018, the Establishment explained that such a gambit would do more to hurt their party’s red-state incumbents than to break the president’s will. When “the Resistance” read the Mueller Report as an airtight case for impeachment, Nancy Pelosi’s allies reminded their co-partisans that the Senate would never vote to expel Trump from office — but a Democratic push for impeachment just might keep him there until 2025, according to polls and historical experience. And when “the Squad” opposed new funding for Trump’s migrant “concentration camps” (in the absence of sweeping reforms to the administration’s asylum policy) this year, Democratic leaders insisted that such a stance would only deepen detained immigrants’ deprivation while muddying their party’s message.

And they may have been right. American politics is a messy and stupid game. Progressive voters are systematically underrepresented by our electoral institutions. Democrats really do need to worry about alienating the tiny, bizarre fraction of the electorate that still isn’t sure what team it’s on. Sometimes, maximizing policy gains does require tempering one’s demands. As the German sociologist Max Weber wrote in “Politics As a Vocation,” “You got to know when to hold ‘em, know when to fold ‘em; know when to walk away, and know when to run.”

Still, strategic capitulation to injustice will always be a bitter pill. If a party’s leadership expects activists to accept such prescriptions, it must preempt the suspicion that its appeals to pragmatism are just fig leaves for ideological disagreement, personal spinelessness, or moral indifference. Which is to say: The party leadership must demonstrate a commitment to maximizing its share of power, and using that power to advance its self-professed ideological goals to the greatest extent possible.

Alas, Senate Democrats have been demonstrating the very opposite. In fact, some members of Chuck Schumer’s caucus recently suggested that they are more invested in remaining friends with Susan Collins than in securing the opportunity to govern. As Politico reported Monday:

Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), who endorsed Collins in 2014, won’t say whether he will do so again. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) endorsed Collins, earning himself an angry call from Schumer.
“I can’t believe everyone’s so damn hypocritical. She’s the one person I work with all the time,” Manchin said. “Why would you not expect me to do that?”
“Yes,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), when asked if she’s conflicted. “I’m very fond of her. I consider her a friend. I trust her. I believe she’s a good senator.”

King is technically an independent, even though he caucuses on the left side of the aisle. And Manchin needs the Democratic Party a lot less than Democrats need his vote. So, while their derelictions of duty here are lamentable, they don’t necessarily reflect a broader pathology within the Donkey Party. But Dianne Feinstein represents one of the bluest states in the union. She is a senior member of the caucus with extensive clout and enviable committee assignments. She has no business being “conflicted” over next year’s Senate race in Maine, nor publicly vouching for Susan Collins’s credentials as “a good senator.”
-I don't like hoodlums.
-That's just a word, Marlowe. We have that kind of world. Two wars gave it to us and we are going to keep it.
User avatar
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:02 am
Location: By the rivers dark
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby Sounder » Tue Aug 27, 2019 4:43 pm

Hillary will run again. She was partying in the Hampton's last weekend. The Epstein thing does not concern her in the least.

The vids (evidence of crimes against children) are in safe hands.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Posts: 3957
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Democratic Party, 2019

Postby Cordelia » Tue Aug 27, 2019 5:17 pm

Sounder » Tue Aug 27, 2019 3:43 pm wrote:Hillary will run again. She was partying in the Hampton's last weekend. The Epstein thing does not concern her in the least.

The vids (evidence of crimes against children) are in safe hands.

Funny, you posting that; I talked to a friend just today who said the same thing (but added "She'll win."). I said "She won't run; she's pregnant :wink (never mind, Claire Underwood prepared us in the last season of House of Cards) .


In the Hampton's ... ptons.html

Isn't there a deadline to enter?
The greatest sin is to be unconscious. ~ Carl Jung

We may not choose the parameters of our destiny. But we give it its content. ~ Dag Hammarskjold 'Waymarks'
User avatar
Posts: 3559
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 7:07 pm
Location: USA
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests