Kasich and Sanders to join forces for a night of unity at Democratic convention

[brooklynite]

Last edited Fri Aug 7, 2020, 05:42 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: Politico

Bernie Sanders and John Kasich will share a night in the spotlight, and both Clintons are slated to have prominent speaking roles at the all-virtual Democratic National Convention in less than two weeks, multiple people familiar with the plans told POLITICO.

Others who've been tapped for coveted speaking slots during an event that's been shrunk down to eight prime-time hours over four nights are Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Jill Biden. And it goes without saying that the party's two most popular figures, Barack and Michelle Obama, will be featured prominently.

One source said Kasich — the former Republican governor of Ohio and a major critic of President Donald Trump — would appear on the same night as Sanders early in the week in a demonstration of unity. The duo would be designed to showcase a broad anti-Trump coalition that is backing Biden.

Democrats are also reaching out to well-known military veterans and Republicans known for their national security expertise for a portion of the convention devoted to foreign policy.



Read more: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/08/07/who-will-speak-at-dnc-392533

[DeminPennswoods]

1. Kasich

He supports exactly the same policies enacted under Trump. I personally do not want to "make nice" with reactionaries like Kasich even if they are "never Trumpers".

[Mike 03]

2. Yeah, let's replace him with Steve Schmidt.

Schmidt is a mesmerizing speaker who will decimate Trump and make a passionate argument for Biden, while showing the world many Republicans have repudiated Trump.

[DeminPennswoods]

3. Schmidt would be awesome

Whenever he goes off on Trump, the righteous indignation comes through loud and clear.

[we can do it]

8. Exactly. This asshole wanted to gut state pensions.

[Jose Garcia]

70. Trump is in favor of expaning Medicaid under Obamacare?

[JI7]

78. You don't want to win Ohio ? Why do you think this is about making friends

and not winning winning an election ?

[DeminPennswoods]

81. Biden's not winning Ohio

I live right near the PA/OH border. Ohio is not a diverse state at all outside of Clev. The state is full of blue collar and other aggrieved white folks who will never vote for Biden. And they are not going to be watching Kasich give a speech at the Dem Natl Convention.

Unless Kasich plans to knock on doors in Ohio for Biden, he's useless.

[RhodeIslandOne]

90. Obama won Ohio twice

Sherrod Brown won his re-election comfortably in 2018.

A moderate Dem like Joe Biden can win against an unpopular Trump. I can't imagine the red rural areas are going to rush to the ballot box like they did in 2016.

[JI7]

93. And Biden was a big reason he won there

But Ohio has turned more conservative but either way you don't want to give the state to Republicans without a challenge.

[Progressive Jones]

100. Ahem... there are plenty of blue collar, aggrieved white folks who are lifelong Dems.

I'm one of them.

[Steelrolled]

102. I hope you're dead wrong.

Since 1944, Ohioans have sided with the losing candidate only once – opting for Nixon over Kennedy in 1960.

Edit for bad grammar.

[diva77]

85. Seems to me the Lincoln Project has its tentacles creeping into sacred Democratic territory -

Weaver of LP worked on Kasich's 2016 campaign.

[Hortensis]

101. Building a big, sweeping, GOP-smashing alliance is good!

And critically necessary. I despise Kasich too, but a lot of MODERATE CONSERVATIVE/RIGHT-LEANING SWING VOTERS will listen to and be reassured by him.

This on the right, while on the left Sanders rallies insurgents to battle the enormous RW threat.

And there really are people out there who in 2016 liked both of them a lot more than Hillary, so pairing them probably has building a synergy in mind. Whatever. Round 'em up, guys.

All to the good.

[obamanut2012]

4. Ugh Ana Navarro or Nicole Wallace would be so much better

Kaisch is an LGBT, women-hating wingnut.

[lark]

5. Hmm, I wonder if the Harris spot isn't a giveaway of the VP choice?

Hmmm? Guess I could say the same thing for Warren, but I just don't think it will be her, so yeah, cherry picking. Of course, the VP could be someone no listed on purpose? Can't wait for the news about the top of the new administration starting 1/20/21.

[Laelth]

6. Interesting that Kamala has a slot.

Does that imply that she WILL NOT be the VP candidate? Or does it imply that she WILL?

The VP candidate will have to speak at some point, obviously. If Harris has already been given time to speak, I am inclined to believe that she WILL NOT be Biden’s VP pick. That’s supposed to be a surprise, isn’t it?



-Laelth

[brooklynite]

19. Presume that all Presidential candidates have been given a speaking slot...

...if one of them becomes VP, the schedule will be adjusted accordingly.

[NurseJackie]

7. More drivel from that awful "H.A. Otterbein" gal at Politico.

Both Clintons are in, but it’s unclear whether Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez-Cortez will have a speaking role.

Oh good grief! Both Clintons are "in" but AOC's fate is unknown? THAT is article's the sub-head? Otterbein is obviously implying that she's being "snubbed," right?

Or, the "both Clintons" characterization also suggests a belief that "one-Clinton would be okay, but BOTH Clintons? Well that's just a bridge too far! Especially if it means that someone else can't also speak."

As if it weren't already obvious enough by the HUGE photo...she's mentioned by name EIGHT times. Why? What good purpose does it serve for "H.A. Otterbein" to try to stir-up discontent by trying to put everyone on an equal footing with PRESIDENT Bill Clinton, and with our previous nominee SECRETARY Hillary Clinton? Seriously? (Also, why try to denigrate Bill Clinton with a not-so-subtle reference/reminder of Monica Lewinsky.)

Progressive activists said she would help energize the base and bring young people behind Biden.

Clearly, these activists have no clue what the "base" means... they are using that term incorrectly. In reality, the "base" are already energized. That's because the "base" are the individuals who ALWAYS vote for the Democrat. The base don't need to be energized, or cajoled or flattered. We'll be there to support our party EVERY TIME.

Besides... if there are "young people" still out there who aren't voting for Biden (or if they're not yet motivated) then essentially they're a lost cause anyway. As a party, we cannot afford to spend any more time on them. We have precious little time remaining, and that time needs to be focused on getting the MOST NUMBER OF VOTES possible (not trying to soothe and console and validate the far left.) Sorry, that's just the way it is.

We have just two hours per night. I think we're going to be much better off using that time to gain the votes of hundreds of thousands of MODERATE voters and NEVER-TRUMP REPUBLICANS. Why ignore a LARGER group of voters (or risk alienating them) by instead chasing a much, much smaller group of unmotivated or undecided "young people"?

It's just more of Politico's "Democrats in Disarray" bullshit. It's writing like that (and use of the phrase "got-axed'') that reveals H.A. Otterbein's inability to be impartial and avoid rhetoric like that. It's a clear indicator that the writer is pushing the narrative that some individuals are "entitled" to speak (or that they were originally asked) even if it means that others like Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton must "get-axed" instead.

Fact of the matter is this: it's definitely NOT going to be like any other convention. In consideration of the COVID-19 crisis and dangers, and also considering the time constraints there will be MANY high-profile Democrats who are not invited to speak. Reality.

Biden's campaign is doing what's NECESSARY. Why does H.A. Otterbein characterize it "making ruthless cuts" ... obviously implying that the Biden campaign is making rushed and unwise decisions that lack pity or compassion. Why is she to subtly portray the Biden campaign as engaging in snubbing others that she feels are more deserving. Clearly, there are many time-constraints and other logistical concerns that must be taken into consideration. That's not the same thing as being snubbed.

Besides, Sanders and Warren will be speaking... that should be MORE than enough for the far-left members of the party. Remember, the convention is meant for a NATIONAL AUDIENCE. National elections are largely won from the CENTER. As a party, we need to stop "chasing" the far-left voters and instead focus on the moderate, centrist, independent and reasonable Republicans. That's what this convention will be about. The primary is over. We don't need to showcase our most-left politicians.

All I'm saying is that this convention is about BIDEN and it's about defeating Trump... in spite of the writer's efforts, it's not a convention about the far-left. --- Smart Democrats want to convince more people (from everywhere on the political spectrum) to vote for BIDEN and the Democrats. That's obviously the goal of the Biden campaign.

I trust the Biden campaign to make sound and wise decisions. Those who did not support him originally need to the same thing. So-called "journalists" like H.A. Otterbein need to get over the fact that Biden is not a far-left Democrat and need to stop getting so bent out of shape because he doesn't behave like one. They need to stop going to great lengths (as this article does) to create drama-drama-drama... or promote the "Democrats in Disarray" narrative.

Joe Biden and his campaign are out there trying to win a a national election during a very difficult and challenging time... and under nearly impossible circumstances. Yet all we see are people trying to denigrate him, and question his every move because of some obvious resentment that Biden is paying more attention to winning VOTES rather than appeasing only the far-left.

Get over it, Holly!

[JoeOtterbein]

9. Odd take on someone is only a reporter.

Sounds like you have something personal against her.

[NurseJackie]

12. Odd way to defend her by trying to make it about me instead.

[JoeOtterbein]

25. I worried about you. As an R.N. I'm sure you know that undo stress is...

...bad for you. And we need all the votes we can get in Nov.!

[NurseJackie]

27. This is not about me, Joe.

I worried about you.

This is not about me, Joe.

[JoeOtterbein]

42. Good. You seemed a bit stressed.

We will win if we care for each other. Unity will prevail.

[NurseJackie]

43. This is not about me, Joe.

You seemed a bit stressed.

This is not about me, Joe.

[JoeOtterbein]

45. Good.

Take care.

[NurseJackie]

46. This is not about me, Joe.

Good. Take care.

This is not about me, Joe.

[ehrnst]

89. Ad hominem attack, Argument by Repetition and Needling

Three in one.

Ad Hominem Attack:

Attacks don't have to be strong or direct. You can merely show disrespect, or cut down his stature by saying that he seems to be sweating a lot, or that he has forgotten what he said last week. Some examples: "I used to think that way when I was your age." "You're new here, aren't you ?" "You weren't breast fed as a child, were you ?" "What drives you to make such a statement ?" "If you'd just listen.." "You seem very emotional."

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#hominem

Argument by Repetition Fallacy:

Description: Repeating an argument or a premise over and over again in place of better supporting evidence.

Logical Form:

X is true. X is true. X is true. X is true. X is true. X is true... etc.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Argument-by-Repetition

Needling:

The Tactic of Needling occurs when one person tries to make another person angry rather than dealing with the issues being discussed.

http://www.seekfind.net/Tactic_of_Needling.html#.Xy4BoShKiM8

[JoeOtterbein]

91. Not if the person is already obviously "angry" about something that is clearly bothering the person.

Then it is called compassion.

[ehrnst]

95. You seem stressed. You should watch that - it's bad for your health.

I think that reporter is an grown adult and can take care of herself, knew what she was getting into writing for Politico about politics, and doesn't really need you personally going after critics.

I think that she would say the same to you about a protective reflex, and to calm down, she's fine.

[George II]

18. It's a collection of anecdotes, random quotes and lots of subjective opinion....

Once again trying to show how Democrats aren't all getting along.

[NurseJackie]

22. That's exactly right...

Once again trying to show how Democrats aren't all getting along.

That's exactly right. It's trying to stoke resentment and distrust.

It's a collection of anecdotes, random quotes and lots of subjective opinion....

And it's NOT just a "one-off" article that engages in this type of divisive speculation and rhetoric. This is actually a pattern of behavior from the illustrious H.A. Otterbein.

Politico has very low standards. I honestly do not believe that anyone else would hire her... even at a nickel-a-word.

[George II]

30. "Extra bonus: she doesn't live in a house with wheels." What's THAT supposed to mean????

Referring to anyone here?

[NurseJackie]

37. It's a swipe at me. I've made no secret about the fact that I live in mobile home.

Referring to anyone here?

Yes. It's a swipe at me. I've made no secret about the fact that I live in mobile home. This is well known. I'm not ashamed of where we live. (Actually it's a stationary double-wide... it's not a motor-home. But it was definitely "mobile" when it was being delivered.)

A certain individual (or two) has been called-out by me in the past for making broad-brush disparaging and insulting remarks about the or intelligence of people who live in "trailer parks" (or our lack of class.)

"Extra bonus: she doesn't live in a house with wheels." What's THAT supposed to mean????

Not only is it a passive-aggressive swipe at me... it's also directed toward anyone else who chooses to live in a mobile home (or who must live in a mobile home because they have no other choice).

It's ugly insults like that one that truly reveals who lacks "class".

[George II]

39. That's what I suspected. Shameful. Who gives a flying fuck where or how any DEMOCRAT...

...lives?

At least you don't revel in violent graphics of little girls being abused by grown men.

[JoeOtterbein]

47. I've been thinking of getting one that I can move somewhere safe...

...real fast!

[still_one]

79. +++

[JI7]

87. And this is supposed to be a "progressive" ?

[Devil Child]

68. I'm inclined to agree with you JoeOtterbein

Perhaps it would read differently if a certain reporter and DU poster didn’t have shared family names.

[NurseJackie]

74. I doubt it. People here are smarter than they're being given credit for.

Perhaps it would read differently if a certain reporter and DU poster didn’t have shared family names.

I doubt it. People here are smarter than they're being given credit for.

[LanternWaste]

84. And yet again, "you shine out like a shaft of gold when all around is dark..."

(John Cleese)

[Devil Child]

86. Thank you. That's beautiful to say and much appreciated LanternWaste.

I hope this Friday evening treats you well.

[GeorgiaPeanut]

50. +1

[George II]

10. Politico strikes again!

[NurseJackie]

73. The "Tiger Beat of the Potomac"

[Fiendish Thingy]

11. Anyone from the squad speaking? Nt

[NurseJackie]

13. Why should they?

[Fiendish Thingy]

16. Um, to reflect the voices of progressive young America

I mean, FFS, if Kasich gets a slot...

[NurseJackie]

20. Why is that important? Aren't they already supporting our nominee?

Um, to reflect the voices of progressive young America
I mean, FFS, if Kasich gets a slot...

Why is that important? Aren't they already supporting our nominee?

Everyone knows that in the modern era of televised National Conventions, it's basically a commercial FOR our party's nominee (Joe Biden) and FOR Democrats and FOR the Democratic party. We're trying to get as MANY votes as possible, and we're going to find the majority of those votes in the middle of the political spectrum.

I mean, FFS, if Kasich gets a slot...

Exactly! There's a very good reason that he "gets a slot." It doesn't make good sense to spend what precious little time we have trying to flatter and validate a group of voters who are already supporting our candidate. (They ARE supporting Biden, right? Right?)

And so---at his very late date---even if that particular group of far-left "progressive young America" voters aren't convinced to vote for Biden, then they never will be. The Biden campaign understands this and they'll will go with the odds and do what's necessary to get the MORE votes from the center (and cross-party voters from the "never-Trump" Republicans).

[Fiendish Thingy]

40. The convention's purpose isn't to convince people to vote for Biden, it's to generate enthusiasm

Which is the one area where Trump voters beat Biden voters.

IMO, AOC speaking for 15 minutes would potentially generate more enthusiasm among young voters, as well as free media coverage, than a one hour speech by Kasich.

[NurseJackie]

41. Why do those "young voters" need that type of validation?

Why do those "young voters" need that type of validation? Shouldn't they already be voting for Biden... by default... cheerfully... eagerly... and without needing to be validated?

Which is the one area where Trump voters beat Biden voters.

I do not know what this means.

IMO, AOC speaking for 15 minutes would potentially generate more enthusiasm among young voters, as well as free media coverage, than a one hour speech by Kasich.

Do we know that Kasich is getting one hour? That's HALF of a two-hour show. Where did you arrive at that?

I think it's important for the far-left folks to acknowledge the reality that the DNC will be featuring speakers who speak to a BROADER swathe of voters. The center-left, center, and center-right speakers will appeal to MORE voters. Putting AOC on stage will only appeal to a much smaller group of disaffected and disappointed left-wing voters.

And again, all I'm trying to tell you is that those voters should ALREADY be EAGER to vote for Biden. If they're still undecided, or still unmotivated, then Biden is making a good decision to cut his losses and focus his efforts on getting 30% of the middle instead of 5% of the fringe.

Biden knows what he's doing. I trust him. I trust my party.

[JoeOtterbein]

48. Everyone likes to be acknowledged.

It's a great motivator.

And we need every vote we can get in Nov!

[EllieBC]

49. To be fair

this is kind of the fault of anyone over 40. Sadly there are nearly 2 generations of people who have been raised to believe they must be enthusiastic to do anything, even the right thing. And if they aren’t enthusiastic (meaning there’s something for them to gain) they should just not waste their time.

[NurseJackie]

57. I blame youth soccer.

Everyone gets a trophy!

[EllieBC]

67. At least they finally found a good solution to that!

Where I am anyway. They have home teams which are just for fun and low competition. Rep or travel teams is hardcore and not everyone gets to do it!

[Fiendish Thingy]

54. If our voters were as "eager" as you think they "should already" be, they wouldn't need a convention

The DNC could just issue a press release with the delegate totals and platform and move on to the fall campaign, amirite?

Right now, most folks are distracted with just trying to survive, and could use a little nudge to focus their motivation.

AOC and the squad don’t represent the “5% of the fringe”; (assuming you are referring to the far left of the party that gave Sanders and Warren a large chunk of the primary vote). AOC and the Squad represent the youth vote- for the first time this cycle, Gen Z and the Millennials combined are the largest voting bloc, and boosting their enthusiasm is key to winning, regardless of your expectations of how “eager” they “should already” be.

Isn’t Kasich being given a keynote slot on one of the nights? Keynotes are typically at least an hour.

[NurseJackie]

56. Ridiculous. That's simply not true.

If our voters were as "eager" as you think they "should already" be, they wouldn't need a convention

Ridiculous. That's simply not true.

The DNC could just issue a press release with the delegate totals and platform and move on to the fall campaign, amirite?

No, you're no right. A televised convention is the equivalent of a national commercial that is intended to sway and motivate ALL voters, not just Democrats.

Keynotes are typically at least an hour.

This is not a "typical" convention. The "typical" daily six-hour televised feed is now down to TWO hours. He's not going to be given HALF of the allotted time.

AOC and the Squad represent the youth vote- for the first time this cycle, Gen Z and the Millennials combined are the largest voting bloc,

They represent no such thing, they only represent their constituents. Besides, that group would need to actually vote in order to be considered a "voting bloc". Right now they're just a large part of the population, but they do not vote. They make a lot of noise and they complain a lot. They want what they want, but they don't follow-through by REGISTERING or PARTICIPATING IN PRIMARIES or VOTING IN THE GENERAL ELECTION.

[George II]

58. The convention is an opportunity for the Democratic Party to be front and center nationally....

....for four nights, presenting the best of the Democratic Party, their platform, and a prime-time speech by our nominee.

[NurseJackie]

60. I'm truly surprised that people don't know (or understand) this.

But I guess I should be more disappointed than actually surprised.

[George II]

31. Sanders is going to speak. Isn't HE the spokesperson of "progressive young America"?

[Fiendish Thingy]

98. Looks like AOC is on the schedule for Tuesday night along with Obama

Guess who’s not on the schedule (at least not on the detailed list posted on Daily Kos)?

Klobuchar, Gillibrand or Stacey Abrams.

[getagrip_already]

14. they are always speaking.....

and speaking.. usually there is nothing worth hearing. They get upset when they aren't speaking or nobody is being forced to listen.

just saying.

[Laelth]

15. I wonder what the average age of our convention speakers will be.

And we wonder why young people don’t vote.

Obviously, we aren’t listening to them.

-Laelth

[getagrip_already]

21. no link really.....

There was no shortage of very young speakers during clinton's convention and campaign. They just don't show up. They never have.

Greta thornberg (sp) could headline the convention and while it would draw a huge audience, it wouldn't attract any more of a turnout than would otherwise appear. If young people don't understand this election is an existential threat to how they will live their lives, nothing will do more than entertain them briefly.

If you sit this one out, there may not be another chance. It is that important, and that isn't hyperbole.

We are listening. They aren't engaging. I don't have time to soothe hurt fee-fee's.

[Laelth]

26. I think we should feature at least one person under 40.

Personally, I don’t fall into that category, but my daughter does. She’s a Democratic Election Judge. She’s voting for Biden. That’s not the question, but she also notes how OLD the Democratic Party APPEARS. We should, at the very least, pretend to hear the voices of those in their 20s and 30s. I think we should have at least one person under 40 on our convention lineup.

Too much to ask?

-Laelth

[George II]

33. I'm pretty sure Pete Buttigieg is speaking.

[Laelth]

36. I certainly hope so. n/t

-Laelth

[NurseJackie]

23. Oh, boo-hoo!

I wonder what the average age of our convention speakers will be.

Really? You "wonder" that? Why would it matter? Are you seriously suggesting that people won't vote because the candidates and speakers are "too old"???

Ridiculous.

And we wonder why young people don’t vote.

Oh, boo-hoo! Cry me a fucking river!

Obviously, we aren’t listening to them.

That's not how it works. If they truly want to be heard... then they need to vote. If they don't vote, then they're telling the party that they don't care.

This isn't rocket-science, ya know?

[Laelth]

24. Is it too much to ask for us to feature one person under 40?

Evidently so.

-Laelth

[getagrip_already]

32. who says we aren't?

The convention is 4 days long with dozens of slots. Every convention for the past 40 years had young speakers, and rising stars are highlighted.

Who are you to say they won't be included in the final schedule? Do you have a secret schedule? I doubt it since it hasn't been nailed down yet.

Hell, a convention like this has NEVER been planned before. There literally is no roadmap and they are flying by the seat of their pants.

You just don't know. That isn't an attack, just an observation.

[Laelth]

59. Indeed. I don't know.

I only know what was leaked by Politico, and I observed that the average age of known (or expected) speakers was rather high. I expressed my hope that our “big tent” Democratic Party would feature some of its younger stars, and we do have them.

I assume that we are more in agreement than disagreement.



-Laelth

[NurseJackie]

53. Stop. This pity-party is getting ridiculous.

Is it too much to ask for us to feature one person under 40? Evidently so.

Stop. This pity-party is getting ridiculous. The far left "young voters" that are the subject of your messages need to grow up and learn to deal with their disappointment. If they feel undervalued, it's because they under-vote. If they want to be taken seriously, then they need to vote more and whine less.

If these "young Americans" are so undecided and sooooo unmotivated that they need to see speakers "under 40" in order to feel validated, then they're not likely to vote anyway. If that is their BIGGEST concern is life, then it's highly likely that they'll be viewed as a demographic that's just too unreliable to put any additional effort toward.

If they're not convinced BY NOW to vote for Democrats and to support our party's nominee... then Biden needs to cut his losses and stop focusing attention on the 5% and concentrate on the center's 30% where MANY MANY more voters exist.

All I'm trying to say is that anyone who wants to be heard needs to vote. I think everyone can agree on that, right?

[stillcool]

82. i just want to thank you..

not feeling so good today, and my ability to respond to the typical boo-hoo Democrats suck responses is non-existent. Your comments remind me sanity exists.

[NurseJackie]

83. Hi there!

I hope you feel better soon! Thanks for the compliments.

[George II]

29. Not having a young person speaking at a Convention every four years isn't why young people....

....don't vote. The problem is a lot deeper than that.

[getagrip_already]

35. young people - sometimes teens - do speak - at every convention

Go back and look. The daca kids were very prominent in the last few conventions. The castrs were highlighted during obamas conventions.

Several younger speakers were put up during clintons convention. You may not see them because it isn't during the 8-10 pm slot, but the speaches start at 4pm. Most are short, but there are a lot of them.

Cry me a river. It just isn't true that all the speakers are older.

[George II]

38. You're right, we've always had a pretty good cross-section of speakers at each convention...

...Age, gender, racial background, etc.

The actual chronological age seems to be the hangup for some here. Who cares if someone is a few years younger than 40 or a few years older than 40. They're not 60+ so they're in the "younger" generation. For example:

Harold Ford was 30 in 2000 when he delivered the keynote speech
Barack Obama was 42 in 2004 when he delivered keynote speech
Michelle Obama was 44 in 2008
Julian Castro was 37 in 2012
Stacey Abrams was 43 in 2016

Those aren't the only "young" people to speak. Quite honestly, I don't understand why a relatively unaccomplished person should speak just because of his/her actual age.

[JoeOtterbein]

44. It's harder to listen when you get older. The ears don't work as well, so often...

...the mouth takes on the extra work for the ears!

[Laelth]

61. As this thread demonstrates.

Thank you.



-Laelth

[NurseJackie]

62. Aw.

As this thread demonstrates.

Absurd. This thread certainly demonstrates something... but not at all what you think.

[Laelth]

63. Please. Enlighten me. n/t

-Laelth

[LanternWaste]

69. This then explains your posts, yes?

This then explains your posts, yes?

[NurseJackie]

76. Bazinga!

[JoeOtterbein]

77. Uhhhh, can ya speak up a little?

I nary hear a peep now ter sonny!

LOL!!!!

[GeorgiaPeanut]

52. The "squad" is not enthusiastically supporting Biden

We don't want to drag people kicking and screaming to give a scripted speech. One of the squad even refuses to endorse Biden.

[George II]

55. Two have not endorsed Biden as of now.

[NurseJackie]

64. And people want the DNC to give them a prime-time speaking slot?

Two have not endorsed Biden as of now.

And people want the DNC to give them a prime-time speaking slot? Long ago, it may have been possible to give those individuals like that a 2-minute slot at the mic (late afternoon or early evening, but not prime-time) so that they could speak for a moment then introduce the next speaker.

We don't have that luxury this year. Adjustments need to be made. Compromises need to be made. Unfortunately, there are many who have difficulty in dealing with compromise and making adjustments... and they'll have the hardest time in accepting how things are going to be.

All I'm trying to say is that I don't understand why it is that they take things so personally. The fact is this: Because of COVID19, we must have a virtual convention. In order for that to happen, difficult decisions are being made based on the reality of time constraints... there's no reason for the 5% to be so mortally offended. This is not how mature voters behave.

Mature voters also don't BOOOO at civil rights icon John Lewis either... so one positive aspect of a virtual convention is that those rude malcontents won't have the opportunity to be so disrespectful.

[George II]

71. That there is anything to ponder about endorsing Biden is mind boggling.

[NurseJackie]

72. I've been told by people who defend such things...

I've been told by people who defend such things, that people like that withhold their votes (or endorsements) because they want to be "heard" and "appreciated" or "valued" --- all very self-centered reasons, of course. It's a very Sarandonesque quality that puts one's own pride above all other considerations, and as a result, they choose to make threats about withholding their vote and/or support. Or in some cases, they'll just outright support someone else as some sort of revenge or sabotage.

What I'm trying to say is: Yes! I agree with you. It does boggle the mind that such selfish people exist when the stakes have never been so high (or so obvious). I continue to blame Youth Soccer and the "trophy for everyone" philosophy for contributing to this way of thinking.

[Fiendish Thingy]

99. Looks like AOC is speaking Tuesday night nt

[not_the_one]

17. Where is Pete?

He captures the young (the gay AND the gay$$$), and is an incredible speaker. Probably the best.

[George II]

34. I'm sure he'll be speaking. That should satisfy those clamoring for a speaker under 40.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

94. Nobody under 40 cares about Pete.

He did terribly with that demographic.

[GeorgiaPeanut]

51. Extremely divisive article

by a Sanders partisan Holly Otterbein. I think all the sobbing, whimpering and crying over Sanders' loss should stop. It is over for Bernie Sanders and his ideology. Voters rejected it.

The same voters across the country would not want extremist ideology spewed from the convention podium by any far left politicians who are only adored by a small percentage of voters and get elected in deep blue pockets where they can politically afford to embrace an ideology that would be rejected by most Americans.

There will be speeches by Beto O'Rourke, Julian Castro, Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar which should present a young face with a rational political discourse.

The so called "young people" don't show up in very large numbers to vote. Bernie Sanders can tell you that.

[brooklynite]

65. I've never been a Sanders fan in the Presidential Primaries, and I see nothing biased about this...

[George II]

66. Some of the characterizations of the actions and "reports" are less than objective. For example:

"...the Biden campaign is making some ruthless cuts.." RUTHLESS?
"...said one Biden adviser" - no name?
"There has been significant chatter in Democratic circles..." - chatter, by whom?
"...some moderate Democrats said privately..." - privately?
"The question of Ocasio-Cortez’s role has set off a debate among Democrats" - who are such Democrats?

Seems like an article rife with rumor or "unnamed sources", etc. Little is based on actual fact.

By the way, for those who are complaining about a lack of young speakers, I guess they skimmed right over this:

"A portion of the convention devoted to the climate crisis will feature young activists."

[NurseJackie]

75. HA Otterbein has a style that would fit-in well at the National Enquirer...

HA Otterbein has a style that would fit-in well at the National Enquirer... gossip, rumor, innuendo, half-truths, anonymous sources, "gal-pals say", "housekeeper reveals", "watchful neighbors report", "hairdresser tells all".

Conflict and scandal and sex... betrayal and revenge... death and tragedy... exposed lies... it all sells magazines AND it generates "clicks". Checkout-stand bait... and click-bait. It's all the same.

[Cha]

92. Mahalo for that analysis.. ".. Ruthless cuts.. "? Would

whomever like to explain why they categorized them as "Ruthless"!?

"A portion of the convention devoted to the climate crisis will feature young activists."

But it won't be a certain group who likes to tear Down Dems with their gaslighting.

[NurseJackie]

97. Or booing at civil rights icon John Lewis.

[Gothmog]

88. I was not impressed with this article either

[Greybnk48]

96. Kasich is a condescending, hard-core misogynistic, opportunistic

right-wing scum bag! WTF Bernie!

I don't like Kasich, and I don't trust him and never will no matter how much he hates Trump. Fuck Kasich!