All Purpose News and Politics Thread Part IV: The Center Cannot Hold

[numberthirty]

Plus, the idea that someone would want to hold someone's feet to the fire for an issue stance from over a decade ago that they've been able to evolve on, clearly... While simultaneously asking people to ignore the votes from more than that time ago from the candidate they like on other issues... Well, that would be a double standard.

But there's another thing on this Democratic primary I want to bring up.

Like, I remember in the 2008 election, seeing one CBR poster absolutely torch people for supporting Barack Obama because he wasn't as gay-friendly as Hillary Clinton. He was ready to hitch his wagon onto Sarah Friggin' Palin for a while as a positive influence, because he was still salty about the primary and she was a female VP candidate to be excited about (who also isn't at all what you'd ever want on LGBTQ issues).

Fast forward a few years, and the "anti-gay" Barack Obama's administration was fighting for the rights of transgender kids to use the bathroom of their sexual identity, and lit the White House in rainbow colors to celebrate Obergefell v. Hodges. And declared Stonewall a historical site. Etc. Etc.

So when I'm seeing people go after candidates in this primary, We need to see not just who they were then, we need to see who they are now, and who they will be. We want to see what actual results they've produced as politicians in their time in office. We want to see them inspire the people, and speak truths about this country. And ask yourself, in the moment, are they actually going to be able to accomplish what they're talking about, or is it just empty bulls***?

We got a lot of primary ahead of us. But we should at least be wise enough to not get gaslit by the same people who helped that happen four years ago.

Dude, that she has changed her position ain't the issue.

It's the "Night"/"Day" difference. That's where you have to start asking yourself "What Gives?"

While it is decent that she finally seems to be for a more logical approach, it's hard to look at "Ridiculous..." from back then and not second guess if it is a true indicator of just how progressive her politics actually are.

[PaulBullion]

Remember how four years ago there was this guy on CBR's political discussion who couldn't let go of the fact that Hillary Clinton once was on the board of Wal-Mart in 1990, and raved about that quarter-century year old business arrangement as if it should disqualify her in the Democratic Primary?

I wonder who that was.

It's not the same person who keeps bringing up that Kamala Harris' husband once did legal work for Herbalife, is it? (Or for that matter, that her husband's work... his work as a lawyer representing a client is suddenly the "shady connection" to beware.)

As far as can see, there isn't even evidence that he personally worked on the Herbalife cases, but I might be wrong. I don't care nearly as much about the issue as #30, because I am not desperate to tear Kamala down.

[numberthirty]

Remember how four years ago there was this guy on CBR's political discussion who couldn't let go of the fact that Hillary Clinton once was on the board of Wal-Mart in 1990, and raved about that quarter-century year old business arrangement as if it should disqualify her in the Democratic Primary?

I wonder who that was.

It's not the same person who keeps bringing up that Kamala Harris' husband once did legal work for Herbalife, is it? (Or for that matter, that her husband's work... his work as a lawyer representing a client is suddenly the "shady connection" to beware.)

Sure, he "Once Did Legal Work..."(which, for clarity, no one has said)

- https://www.venable.com/about/news/2...ing-director-w

Venable Names Douglas C. Emhoff Managing Director, West Coast and Mitchell Evall Partner-in-Charge of its Los Angeles Office

Los Angeles, CA - August 13, 2015

Venable LLP announced this morning that Douglas C. Emhoff, former Partner-in-Charge of its Los Angeles office, has been named Managing Director, West Coast with oversight over the firm's current offices in Los Angeles and San Francisco. Mitch Evall has assumed the position of Partner-in-Charge of the Los Angeles office. Jim Nelson will remain as Partner-in-Charge of the firm's growing San Francisco office.

In a memo to the firm, Chairman James L. Shea noted that Mr. Emhoff joined the firm in 2006 as one of the founding Los Angeles office partners, and has served as Partner-in-Charge of that office for the past eight years while continuing to build his business and entertainment litigation practice. During that time, the office has experienced significant growth and is now nearly 70 attorneys in litigation, entertainment, labor and employment, corporate, real estate, intellectual property, bankruptcy, tax and estate planning. Doug also helped found the San Francisco office in 2013, and will continue to serve clients from both California offices.

[worstblogever]

As far as can see, there isn't even evidence that he personally worked on the Herbalife cases, but I might be wrong. I don't care nearly as much about the issue as #30, because I am not desperate to tear Kamala down.

I wonder if "maybe her husband worked on a law firm that had Herbalife as a client" is as damning as when John Adams got torched for representing the men from the Boston Massacre, and still become president. Guessing not.

Odd that they never seem to bring up Jane Sanders and Burlington College, since shady business dealings of spouses are suddenly relevant to finding the best candidate. Welp, guess I went and spilled the tea.

Either they both matter, or neither matters. The actual answer is "neither matters".

[numberthirty]

As far as can see, there isn't even evidence that he personally worked on the Herbalife cases, but I might be wrong. I don't care nearly as much about the issue as #30, because I am not desperate to tear Kamala down.

Yeah...

He just got moved a ways up the chain while his wife wasn't giving his firm's client the grief that other folks(Lisa Madigan, for one) were.

As for the "#30 is desperate to tear Kamala down..." bit...

- https://www.reuters.com/article/us-h...99H14Z20131019

Latinos urge California attorney general to probe Herbalife

Latino civil rights activists on Friday appealed to California’s attorney general to probe the marketing practices of Herbalife as the nutrition and supplements company hosted a sales event for thousands of Latino distributors.

Dozens of protesters with signs saying “Stop Exploiting Us” stood outside the Los Angeles convention center to urge Kamala Harris, the state’s attorney general, and Bob Lee, the Santa Cruz District Attorney, to investigate what they call predatory business practices and review how the $6.7 billion company targets minorities.

“We are asking Attorney General Harris to help us protect vulnerable, low income Latinos and other minorities from these schemes that have cost people their life savings,” said Angelica Salas, Executive Director, Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Dude, that she has changed her position ain't the issue.

It's the "Night"/"Day" difference. That's where you have to start asking yourself "What Gives?"

While it is decent that she finally seems to be for a more logical approach, it's hard to look at "Ridiculous..." from back then and not second guess if it is a true indicator of just how progressive her politics actually are.

See the thing a lot of people don't get about the appeal to Bernie Sanders isn't simply that he is a progressive. It's that he's consistently held some of these views and has been speaking on these topics for decades upon decades. People who are for his platform don't have to concern themselves over whether he's going to get in office and all of a suddenly become really moderate or abandon fighting for those positions. They don't have to worry that he'll try to pass legislation and then make a bunch of olive branches to Republicans that undermine the whole thing or that he'll turn a blind eye to campaign donations and Wall Street deregulation. And considering that we've recently seen some of that happen, it's a bit of a concern to people.

And people like (who I will continously harp on) Gillibrand and Booker who magically moved to left since 2016 have major questionmarks about words vs actions.

If you want a purely progressive candidate your best chances in order probably go Sanders, Warren, and then Harris in that order. With Warren you are conceding foreign policy a bit, with Harris you have her prosecutorial record that raises questionmarks. Everyone else in the field either is moderate, has no shot, or doesn't have much credibility even if they are trying to give lip service to it.

Personally I think Warren is the best because she actually has buy in from some establishment Democrats and will be able to more easily get legislation through. Also she has more detailed plans

[PaulBullion]

Yeah...

He just got moved a ways up the chain while his wife wasn't giving his firm's client the grief that other folks(Lisa Madigan, for one) were.

To paraphrase Spike-X: I hope you didn't pull a hamstring there.

[numberthirty]

See the thing a lot of people don't get about the appeal to Bernie Sanders isn't simply that he is a progressive. It's that he's consistently held some of these views and has been speaking on these topics for decades upon decades. People who are for his platform don't have to concern themselves over whether he's going to get in office and all of a suddenly become really moderate or abandon fighting for those positions. They don't have to worry that he'll try to pass legislation and then make a bunch of olive branches to Republicans that undermine the whole thing or that he'll turn a blind eye to campaign donations and Wall Street deregulation. And considering that we've recently seen some of that happen, it's a bit of a concern to people.

And people like (who I will continously harp on) Gillibrand and Booker who magically moved to left since 2016 have major questionmarks about words vs actions.

If you want a purely progressive candidate your best chances in order probably go Sanders, Warren, and then Harris in that order. With Warren you are conceding foreign policy a bit, with Harris you have her prosecutorial record that raises questionmarks. Everyone else in the field either is moderate, has no shot, or doesn't have much credibility even if they are trying to give lip service to it.

Personally I think Warren is the best because she actually has buy in from some establishment Democrats and will be able to more easily get legislation through. Also she has more detailed plans

Again, look at the debate and how she framed Biden.

Once you've done that, apply the same logic she used to her just letting an outfit that took plenty of Latinos to cleaners totally skate while other state's enforcement folks were putting the screws to said outfit.

Would she give herself the benefit of the doubt?

[numberthirty]

...

Personally I think Warren is the best because she actually has buy in from some establishment Democrats and will be able to more easily get legislation through. Also she has more detailed plans

On this...

I think Warren honestly probably has the best pitch for John/Jane Public. It's not by a mile, but she probably just edges out Sanders.

[worstblogever]

Sen. Warren has the edge over Sanders because she's logged more actual legislative accomplishments towards a financially progressive agenda than Sen. Sanders in a third of the time.

[numberthirty]

Sen. Warren has the edge over Sanders because she's logged more actual legislative accomplishments towards a financially progressive agenda than Sen. Sanders in a third of the time.

That is an important distinction to you.

I have my doubts about how important it is to the entirety of John/Jane Public that will make up the electorate come a general.

That she has a roadmap for where she wants to go will probably trump what she has done.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Nancy Pelosi Emerges As Unexpected Villain At Netroots Nation

Activists are furious that she has publicly criticized progressive members of the House Democratic Caucus. Can't say that came as anything in the way of a surprise. Nancy needs to realize progressives are part of the show and not piss them off. Meanwhile, Pelosi is pissing off people in other ways....

**********

Democrats Continue Search For The Smoking Gun They Already Have

Nancy Pelosi insists on more investigations, even though she thinks Trump has committed crimes. It appears to me Pelosi is dragging her feet on impeachment, fearing it could backfire on Dems at the ballot box next year.


**********

‘Fake Christian’ Trends On Twitter As Critics Skewer Chilly Mike Pence At Migrant Center

“Your beliefs don’t make you a better person, your behavior does,” one foe tells the vice president who considers his Christian faith a “dominant” influence in his life. As far as I know, Jesus wouldn't approve of putting kids in cages. Just saying. Meanwhile, more disgusting behavior from Red Grant:

Mike Pence ‘Can’t Account For’ Photo Of Dismal Migrant Detention Center Conditions


**********

Senator Ted Cruz Slams Tennessee Day To Honor KKK Grand Wizard: ‘This Is WRONG’

Nathan Bedford Forrest Day recognizes a man known as a Confederate general, slave trader and white supremacist leader. Hmm! I wonder who's side Trump will come down on? I'm guessing he'll agree with Governor Lee, after all, Dolt45 needs those white supremacist votes.

**********

A Massive Blackout Hit Manhattan And New York Did Its Thing

A power shortage forced thousands of people into the streets of Manhattan. Then the singing began. Super cool!

[jetengine]

Bernie is a less sucsessful Corbyn and Corbyn has somehow made anti-semetism a hot topic in the Uk, a nation thats spent the last twenty years giving more of a **** about Muslims then jews.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

I think you are both valuing different variations of the same thing. Warren having an actual roadmap makes her appealing because there's something substantive behind her words (hence thirty liking her) and she has a track record of getting things done which shows that she should have the ability to be effective while in office and not get stonewalled like some other Presidents (hence WBE liking her). She plays well on mixing both theory and practice.

Personaly I think beyond that, I think Bernie's viability freaked out so many establishment Democrats that it shifted the Overton window and made Warren more appealing to them. If for no other reason, that Warren coexists more within the Party structures than Bernie does. Bernie's biggest problem to me is that I could very easily envision a scenario where he wins the Presidency but then the Party doesn't back him because they view him as a bit of an outsider (and quite frankly bad blood over 2016) and then you wasted a term of a Progressive President with Party infighting. Warren will have immediate buy in from the Party and she'll be able to get them all to go all in to back some type of signature legislation.

[numberthirty]

I think you are both valuing different variations of the same thing. Warren having an actual roadmap makes her appealing because there's something substantive behind her words (hence thirty liking her) and she has a track record of getting things done which shows that she should have the ability to be effective while in office and not get stonewalled like some other Presidents (hence WBE liking her). She plays well on mixing both theory and practice.

Personaly I think beyond that, I think Bernie's viability freaked out so many establishment Democrats that it shifted the Overton window and made Warren more appealing to them. If for no other reason, that Warren coexists more within the Party structures than Bernie does. Bernie's biggest problem to me is that I could very easily envision a scenario where he wins the Presidency but then the Party doesn't back him because they view him as a bit of an outsider (and quite frankly bad blood over 2016) and then you wasted a term of a Progressive President with Party infighting. Warren will have immediate buy in from the Party and she'll be able to get them all to go all in to back some type of signature legislation.

When it comes to "Not Being On The Same Page..." in the party, people need to just accept the fact that it is already there.

Look at the stories that WestPhillyPunisher just posted.