All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!(Part II)

[ZombieHavoc]

Does it matter where it came from ? Cash is cash.

Nope, but the Bernie crowd was super sore that Beto raised more money the first day and determined to convince everyone that Big Oil and whoever else footed the majority of that bill. So in this world of political team sports, it makes me laugh when they were wrong.

Bernie had more people donate, but it's obviously not like some huge company came in an bought Beto on day one and gave him that 6.1 opening day number.

[jetengine]

Oh so one of Betos Negatives is he's 'Too corporate' ?

[ZombieHavoc]

Oh so one of Betos Negatives is he's 'Too corporate' ?

Corporate, milquetoast and "White Obama" I guess is another thing I've seen that is considered negative. Oh, and Not Bernie.

[PaulBullion]

One interesting thing that someone I know pointed out about O'Rourke's fundraising numbers elsewhere...

Whatever source you didn't provide for that quote was wrong, of course.

[TheDarman]

Corporate, milquetoast and "White Obama" I guess is another thing I've seen that is considered negative. Oh, and Not Bernie.

As a person who loved Obama (and, given he’s the most popular Democratic politician in the nation and in the party) calling O’Rourke “White Obama” might be a bit of a misfire. And it seems to tie part of Obama’s identity to his ethnicity and implies his success was more because of his skin color than accomplishments and policy ideas, so it stinks a little bit there.

[jetengine]

As a person who loved Obama (and, given he’s the most popular Democratic politician in the nation and in the party) calling O’Rourke “White Obama” might be a bit of a misfire. And it seems to tie part of Obama’s identity to his ethnicity and implies his success was more because of his skin color than accomplishments and policy ideas, so it stinks a little bit there.

I mean didn't his skin colour help his initial election at least a bit ? Like 5% ? Or were the Black community uncomfortable with him ? I mean I've heard claims Obama was "Too white" which didn't make much sense to me.

[TheDarman]

I mean didn't his skin colour help his initial election at least a bit ? Like 5% ? Or were the Black community uncomfortable with him ? I mean I've heard claims Obama was "Too white" which didn't make much sense to me.

Let’s put it this way: the difference in the percent of the African American vote between Obama and Clinton was noticeable but not large enough to account for his win ultimately in the general. In the primaries, he actually had to overcome concerns, even among African American voters in the South, that they weren’t shooting themselves in the foot and getting a Republican instead, who they knew was worse on all social issues than Clinton. (Ahh, to be back in the pragmatic days of primary elections.) Ultimately, it was his ideas, optimism, and magnetism that got him the wins in both the primary and the general.

[aja_christopher]

"Ignore the divisive tactics. Vote Democratic in 2020. Period."

-------

"I could say something positive about almost every candidate

Warren might be the best policy mind in the senate, if not in a generation

Sanders has brought much-needed attention to how inequality will increase if left unattended

Beto is an amazing political talent, and inspired people with positivity in these toxic times

Klobuchar easily speaks to midwestern Democrats because she understands how rural America felt left behind after the Great Recession

Harris has built an incredible campaign built off grass roots support in almost no time flat. She’s a killer, and that’s super helpful in the general

Mayor Pete is the future. He’s brilliant. I don’t know if he wins this round, but his star is only rising from here

Booker’s believe in radical compassion is the perfect salve for the most toxic time in or country since the 60s, if not the civil war

Biden: Like Klobuchar, Biden understands how to talk to regions who feel left behind from globalization - which is something few candidates can do

Delaney: most organized, thoughtful policy platform of anyone other than the possible exception of Warren. It’s clear he thought immensely about it.

Castro: showed how impactful HUD can be while at its helm. Understands better than anyone the affordability crisis in American cities

Gabbard: she gets hate here for her foreign policy views, but her domestic agenda is laser focused on economic and social justice.

Gillibrand: her focus on sexual assault in the military has made a genuine impact. The armed forces are more serious about combating the issue than at any point in their history

Hickenlooper: For a guy with face-blindness, he’s super empathetic. Spends time on issues that usually fall through the cracks like homelessness

Inslee: focused on climate change more than anyone else, which might be exactly what we need with the limited time we have to make course corrections

Even looking at the ones with basically no shot, they’re decent people with a good mindset

Meesam: don’t know him really, but wants to be focused on reducing student debt, which is holding many young Americans back from buying homes, contributing from pensions

Williamson: oh boy. This is pretty deep. But you want to know what, she’s done a lot of advocacy work around AIDS, related to women’s empowerment, etc. we need more people who are enacting positive change in their communities

Yang: an unconventional policy platform filled with ideas that work well overseas (VAT tax) and that are worth exploring during our rapidly changing times (universal basic income)"

https://old.reddit.com/r/politics/co...128000_donors/

[numberthirty]

Whatever source you didn't provide for that quote was wrong, of course.

Everyone except you seems to be aware that the articles from that day were pointing out that there was not a breakdown on the day that number was released.

Which would be the only reason that an actual breakdown would even be news days later.

Go back, and take a look.

Just about any article from the day the total was released should work.

[numberthirty]

As a person who loved Obama (and, given he’s the most popular Democratic politician in the nation and in the party) calling O’Rourke “White Obama” might be a bit of a misfire. And it seems to tie part of Obama’s identity to his ethnicity and implies his success was more because of his skin color than accomplishments and policy ideas, so it stinks a little bit there.

Just to point this out, it seems like someone mentioned Harris being called "White Hillary", as well.

Which I have yet to actually see with my own eyes anywhere.

This could be the same sort of thing.

[numberthirty]

Since I don't believe anyone has mentioned this, it might not have made much of an impact in the national news. Disappointing, but unfortunately not a real surprise.

("Supreme Court" being "Illinois" and not "United States")

https://wgntv.com/2019/03/19/supreme...quan-mcdonald/

Supreme Court rejects bid to re-sentence Jason Van Dyke in Laquan McDonald case

[numberthirty]

Oh so one of Betos Negatives is he's 'Too corporate' ?

For reference...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.875549d2f1ca

Beto O’Rourke’s political career drew on donations from the pro-Republican business establishment

Once O’Rourke got to Congress, he made cleaning up corruption in government a priority. He stopped taking money from political action committees after his first term, promised to support term limits for members of Congress, and sponsored bills to provide partial public financing for campaigns and limit donations to national party committees.

At the same time, O’Rourke continued to receive large amounts of money from employees of companies run by major donors. Employees of one of his father-in-law’s former companies, Strategic Growth Bank, including Sanders himself, gave $57,400 during O’Rourke’s 2014 and 2016 House campaigns. Employees of El Paso-based Western Refining, including its chairman, Foster, gave $10,600 in 2014.

Hunt Companies’ employees, including Hunt, gave $60,300 to O’Rourke in the 2014 and 2016 cycles, more than the employees of any other business, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

O’Rourke worked in Congress to promote a military funding issue that directly affected Hunt’s business. Hunt Companies boasts of being the nation’s largest builder and manager of privatized military housing in the country. In 2015, the Obama administration persuaded Congress to cut troop stipends for those units.

Until then, troops who lived in the privatized units on bases would receive a monthly stipend equal to their projected rent. But when the cuts became law in 2014, the stipend was to be gradually reduced. As a result, providers of base housing were faced with either reducing their rents and losing revenue or risking the loss of tenants by asking soldiers to pay out of pocket.

In response, Hunt Companies’ lobbyists billed $380,000 in 2017 and 2018 for work that included contact with Congress on military housing and defense appropriations issues. During this period, O’Rourke’s office listed restoring the money for privatized housing as the 13th of 15 priorities in an internal database shared with Republican leaders, according to a person familiar with the work of O’Rourke’s congressional office.

With the support of Republican leaders of the House Armed Services Committee, who had opposed the initial housing stipend cuts, the defense spending bill that passed in 2018 included an increase in funding for privatized housing that the Congressional Budget Office estimated would cost taxpayers an additional $2 billion between 2019 and 2023. O’Rourke voted for the bill, which President Trump signed.

O’Rourke’s spokesman said Hunt played no role in O’Rourke’s support for the measure.

“These cuts would directly and adversely impact access to housing for service members and their families at El Paso’s Fort Bliss and other large military bases across Texas,” Evans said.

[numberthirty]

Does it matter where it came from ? Cash is cash.

Nope, but the Bernie crowd was super sore that Beto raised more money the first day and determined to convince everyone that Big Oil and whoever else footed the majority of that bill. So in this world of political team sports, it makes me laugh when they were wrong.

Bernie had more people donate, but it's obviously not like some huge company came in an bought Beto on day one and gave him that 6.1 opening day number.

From said article...

The Texan said he received 128,000 "unique donations," which could mean that some individuals donated multiple times.

That sticks out a bit.

A hundred thousand less donations, and they are using the term "Unique Donations".

[aja_christopher]

"Polls show Bernie Sanders popularity among all voters is plummeting"

"One of the arguments Bernie Sanders' fans made during the 2016 Democratic primary was that he was more electable than Hillary Clinton. His favorable ratings with the general electorate were far higher than Hillary Clinton's. Indeed, Sanders maintained fairly high favorable ratings with all voters as late as 2018.

Sanders' popularity among all voters seems to be declining considerably in the last few months, however.

Our new CNN poll puts Sanders favorable rating at 46% compared to an unfavorable rating of 45% among registered voters. This is only the latest poll to have Sanders at basically even in his net favorability rating (favorable-unfavorable). A Quinnipiac University poll from late December gave the Vermont senator a net favorability of just +2 points. An average of all recent polls put Sanders' net favorability at about -1 points.

Compare that to where Sanders was at the end of his 2016 presidential bid. Sanders had a 59% favorable rating to 36% unfavorable rating among all voters in a CNN poll taken in June 2016. Sanders was able to hold onto much of his popularity through last year. A CNN poll taken in early December 2018 gave him a +13 net favorability rating with all voters. A Gallup poll in September 2018 had him at a +15 net favorability rating with all adults.

So, what's changed? I'd argue that Sanders was benefiting from not being in a competitive campaign. (Former Vice President Joe Biden, who has garnered the most support in general election polls among the Democrats, may be benefiting from a similar effect.) When you're not being thought of a viable threat to win a party's nomination, opponents tend to lay off. The last time Sanders was thought of as at least a minor threat to win the Democratic nomination was in March 2016. His net favorability rating back then among all voters was +3 points in a CNN poll.

The good news for Sanders is that his net favorability rating is at about the same level as the other people who have declared their candidacy for the Democratic nomination. Most of these other candidates, however, are relatively unknown. At least at this point, it's not the case that Sanders is less electable than the average Democrat. It's just that he cannot make the case that he is more electable based on national polling.

Sanders, though, may have to convince Democratic voters that he electable. In our poll, just 30% of Democratic voters believe the party has a better chance of winning the presidency with him than someone else as the nominee.

The vast majority, 59%, think they have a better shot of winning with someone else."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/20/polit...ing/index.html

[Tazirai]

Just had to make one last post.




W.Va. Senator Joe Manchin Only Democratic Senator To Not Endorse LGBT Bill

U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin is the only Democratic senator who did not co-sponsor an LGBT anti-discrimination bill.

The Register-Herald reports 44 Democratic U.S. senators and the two independent senators that caucus with them have signed onto Senate bill 788. The bill sponsored by U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon would add LGBT protections to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Fair Housing Act of 1968.

Manchin did not sponsor a similar proposal in 2017. A spokeswoman for his office declined to comment to the newspaper.

West Virginia’s other U.S. senator is Republican Shelley Moore Capito. She also did not co-sponsor the bill.

One of these people is not a REAL Democrat.