AOC to endorse Bernie Sanders in 2020 Democratic presidential primary

[Hassin Bin Sober]

AOC to endorse Bernie Sanders in 2020 Democratic presidential primary

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/10/15/democratic-primary-aoc-endorse-bernie-sanders-president/3994047002/

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., plans to endorse Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and appear with him at an event this weekend, The USA TODAY Network has learned.

A person with knowledge of the plans confirmed the endorsement. The Washington Post had first reported the planned endorsement.

Nina Turner, a former state senator and current Sanders campaign national co-chair, said to The USA TODAY Network that Ocasio-Cortez was returning the favor for the groundwork Sanders' campaign had laid in 2016.

"So the foundation that he laid in 2016 allowed for candidates to stand up and be bold and run their race," Turner said. "This is coming full circle. One person doesn't make or break a campaign, but the level of excitement, it's going to take it to the next level for us."

[corbettkroehler]

1. @EricLevitz, "Bernie Sanders's Campaign Is Alive and Well" (Post Debate Opinion Piece)

Even excluding the endorsement of multiple members of The Squad, Bernie had a good night.

Cody Fenwick of AlterNet declared Bernie 1 of 3 winners from the DNC debate and Eric Levitz of New York Magazine offered praise:

Bernie Sanders' Campaign Is Alive and Well

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/10/bernie-sanders-aoc-ocasio-cortez-democratic-debate-ohio-winner.html



Excerpt:

At the Democratic debate in Westerville, Ohio — his first major campaign event since taking ill — Bernie wasn’t just his old, bizarrely sharp and energetic-for-a-septuagenarian self. He was better, crisper, and funnier than before. The hoarse voice that plagued Sanders on the last episode of this (wretched) TV show was gone. A new perspective on the fragility of this life — and the preciousness of every opportunity to mitigate the suffering of other human beings — had, presumably, taken its place. Or maybe Bernie just got a good night’s sleep Monday. Either way, he turned in his finest debate performance of the cycle thus far.

In the (apparently, legally mandatory) early back-and-forth on the horrors of replacing private insurance premiums with payroll taxes, Sanders benefited from the greater clarity of his position relative to Warren’s (he is comfortable copping to the necessity of tax hikes, she prefers to avoid the t-word), and his rivals’ greater interest in damaging the race’s new frontrunner.

Later, he delivered a rousing defense of his desire to expropriate Tom Steyer’s wealth; interrupted Joe Biden to crack a joke amusing enough to earn him an impromptu embrace from the former vice-president; and still managed to stick a shiv between Uncle Joe’s ribs when the time was ripe:

And then, minutes after the debate was done, the Sanders campaign won the endorsement of the most charismatic congresswoman in the United States: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez revealed that she will be lending Bernie 2020 her considerable starpower at a rally in Queens Saturday. AOC’s fellow “squad” members Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib will also reportedly be joining the political revolution.

[NurseJackie]

3. Well...

He was better, crisper, and funnier than before.

Well... in all honesty. No really. Besides, the bar had been set pretty low. From what I observed, he looked better than his last debate appearance... but he had, after all, been under a doctor's care and resting for the past two weeks. That's a luxury the POTUS does not have. He certainly did not inspire me at all into saying to myself "Hey! Here's a healthy specimen of a man who can easily survive the stress, hours and rigors of the POTUS." Even the most healthy man who becomes president is aged 25 years before the end of their term. Do the math.

All I'm saying is that his time has come and gone. He should withdraw and do Jane a favor by returning to Vermont and retiring into one of their three beautiful homes.

[corbettkroehler]

5. Alexandria, Ilhan And Rashida Beg To Differ!

Clearly, they have assessed his health and prospects and gone out on a limb with eyes wide open. More importantly, they have FAR MORE AT STAKE than you or I because they are up for reelection yet still saw fit to endorse the oldest candidate in the race. These women are nobody's fools!

While I haven't spoken with any of the 3 congresswomen, I feel confident in saying that their view of Bernie's future is diametrically opposed to yours.

[NurseJackie]

6. They know their "audience".

These women are nobody's fools!

I never said such a thing and you know it.

they are up for reelection

Yes... indeed they are. There can be little doubt that they know their audience.

Clearly, they have assessed his health and prospects and gone out on a limb with eyes wide open.

It's a statement, not an expectation that he's actually going to be nominated, nor that he's healthy enough to withstand the duties and obligations.

I feel confident in saying that their view of Bernie's future is diametrically opposed to yours.

I think they're smarter than you're giving them credit for. It has nothing at all to do with their confidence in "Bernie's future". Only their own. (Or they fear reprisals from Bernie's fans... as you know it's already happening with someone in that group who didn't endorse Bernie.)

All I'm saying is... this ain't all it's being hyped up to be. It's a big yawn and will make ZERO difference with the average voter. And the ones who know who they are (or who even care) are already BS voters anyway.

[corbettkroehler]

9. In Other Words, Their Endorsements Are Valueless And They're Just Using Bernie To Help Themselves

By this logic, then, it meant nothing when Senator Feinstein endorsed Biden for POTUS earlier this month, right?

I have A VERY HIGH opinion of all of the members of The Squad, even Ayanna Pressley who has not endorsed. Apparently, you don't.

As for the specific value of these endorsements, I encourage you to view the documentary Knock Down The House. It chronicles AOC's effective use of movement politics to go from waitressing to the halls of Congress. THAT unprecedented victory by a political novice, directed now toward Bernie's campaign, is what will move the needle for Sanders. It may not move you but it will move others, especially since Saturday's rally will be in Queens. This is not speculation but documented proof.

[NurseJackie]

10. I just have higher standards, that's all.

s for the specific value of these endorsements, I encourage you to view the documentary Knock Down The House. It chronicles AOC's effective use of movement politics to go from waitressing to the halls of Congress.

Her association with people like Cenk Uygur and the anti Democratic party "Justice Democrats" trouble me greatly.

It may not move you but it will move others, especially since Saturday's rally will be in Queens. This is not speculation but documented proof.

Wishful thinking is what it is. Unicorns and rainbows will not win him our party's nod. BS has reached his ceiling (again). He will not be our party's nominee.

[corbettkroehler]

15. Had They Endorsed Your Candidate, Would The Endorsements Have Value Then? (n/t)

[NurseJackie]

17. No... as I mentioned just a moment ago, I have higher standards.

Would The Endorsements Have Value Then

No... as I mentioned just a moment ago, I have higher standards. Perhaps it would mean something or have value to someone else, but not to me.

[corbettkroehler]

18. I GUARANTEE That Your Candidate Would Welcome The Support - I GUARANTEE IT

It would be a foolish decision for any candidate to reject such support.

[NurseJackie]

19. That wasn't the question. You asked for MY opinion, and I gave it to you.

I GUARANTEE That Your Candidate Would Welcome The Support - I GUARANTEE IT

That wasn't the question. You asked for MY opinion, and I gave it to you. That's a meaningless "guarantee" (in spite of the all-caps emphasis)

It would be a foolish decision for any candidate to reject such support.

I think experienced candidates know that some endorsements carry more weight than others. While the candidate may be polite and smile when they publicly acknowledge the endorsement... they know as well as I do which endorsements have actual value and which ones are not.

[ehrnst]

12. Didn't you say the following?

I merely point out that she will connect A to B to C and give Bernie due consideration, particularly if Faiz should reach out to her an offer a reciprocal endorsement.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=312271

That seems to be a rather dim view of what it would take to get her to "come around" and endorse Bernie, doesn't it?

[qazplm135]

29. I mean yeah it meant nothing

When Feinstein did it either just like these endorsements don't mean anything.

Feinstein was always going to endorse Biden and these folks were always going to endorse Bernie.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

57. BOOOOOOOOM!! Damn right!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[George II]

24. I don't think any of them have commented on his health or performance on Tuesday, and.....

....Tlaib has been falsely reported as endorsing him.

[corbettkroehler]

42. Their Endorsement Of Him Is Implicit Assurance Of The Stability Of His Health

If that didn't constitute stating the obvious, I didn't know what would.

[LiberalLovinLug]

8. "their three beautiful homes"

Sounds like RW smear ie...how can a SOCIALIST have any money at all?

Most of his newly found wealth was his wife selling off a house that had been in her family. Plus Bernie's book advancements. A book with great ideas for progressives that apparently was quite popular with Democratic readers, thus the income.

Meanwhile your candidate of choice:

Kamala Harris’ $1.8 million income tops Dem presidential candidates who’ve released tax returns

Mostly all from her husbands high end law firm

https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2019/04/15/kamala-harris-tax-returns-millions/

[ehrnst]

13. "from her husbands high end law firm"

Sounds like RW smear ie...how can a SOCIALIST have any money at all?

Sounds like RW smear ie...how can a WOMAN have any money of her own at all?

[mcar]

59. This

[Blistering Sun]

16. Plus the $200,000 Golden Parachute Jane Sanders took after bankrupting Burlington College...

through gross mismanagement and nearly getting herself indicted for bank fraud.

If anyone but his wife had done such things, Sen. Bernard Sanders (I-Vt) would be howling.

Bill

[LiberalLovinLug]

33. You have all the RW talking points down pat that's for sure

Here's a good article, below, in the NYT on it. The origin of every smear you used against Jane is linked to a Republican operative in this article.
Her big crime was being too aggressive with a plan to expand the colleges property, in hopes of helping to save it. And in fact, if they'd have stuck with it, she may have been exonerated, but the college got cold feet. And even if it was a risky financial decision, it was not made for personal profit, but for the betterment of the students, creating a learning center for artists and lecturers. I think that clarification is important.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/21/us/politics/jane-omeara-sanders-burlington-college.html

Jane Sanders and the Messy Demise of a Vermont College

Ms. Sanders did not make the decision alone. The 2010 purchase for $10 million was backed by the college’s board. A local bank, People’s United, approved a loan. And a state board, the Vermont Educational and Health Buildings Financing Agency, provided financial support, based on the recommendation of the consulting firm PFM.

.........

At the time of her dismissal, Ms. Sanders was in talks with Frank Cioffi, president of the Greater Burlington Industrial Corporation, who was wooing a company interested in moving to town. Selling a parcel of the new campus could have altered the college’s financial outlook.

“Hindsight is 20/20, but I think she could’ve pulled it off,” Mr. Cioffi said, adding, “I know Jane and have worked with her, and I personally have confidence in her ability to follow through and get things done.” The college, however, did not pursue the deal, he said.



Also, Sanders is, painfully to some of his supporters, NOT howling with personal attacks against his rivals enough. (Enough with her emails!) He has steadfastly stuck to the big issues as he sees them. When he howls, its about the 1%.


I just find the whole.....lets smear Sanders as a hypocrite for not donating all his book sales money, and Jane for taking a well earned severance package, rather tiring at this point. Maybe he should feel guilty that his book resonated with so many Democrat leaning readers? Republicans have a self-deluding, straw man narrative of what a Democratic Socialist (or a Social Democrat) co-existing in a capitalist economy, is or should behave. So they can then demand the straw man lives up to their own restrictive interpretation of how Bernie and Jane should live their lives. Sorry, I don't morally judge Bernie and Jane's lives through a Fox News lens, (talk about hypocrites). I totally expect Republicans to go after even children and spouses of candidates with overblown exaggerated smear jobs, but its disappointing to read it on DU.

[Blistering Sun]

36. What a disgusting personal attack.

Multiple "donors" came forward who said Jane Sanders was untruthful about the nature of what they had promised financially to support the college.

These inaccuracies were included in the school's loan request. Knowingly making false statements about future income on loan documents is criminal. Felony bank fraud. This was investigated by the FBI.

Jane also spent $500,000 of the schools money to have her daughter's company teach woodworking.

And Jane took $200,000 as a Golden Parachute was she was pushed out, just before the Sanders purchased an upgraded lake house. Most people don't call bankrupting an institution and then cashing in an example of a "well earned severance."

[LiberalLovinLug]

47. " What a disgusting personal attack."

lol. That's rich.

I provided you with a link to a good NYT article. I don't see any links on your post. Maybe its that you aren't allowed link to those types of sources that print that garbage in here?'


Here I'll list the perpetrators of those smears for you from the same article:

A local Republican grandee financed a commercial in 2014 attacking Ms. Sanders’s $200,000 severance as a “golden parachute.”

...the top Trump campaign official in Vermont filed a complaint, leading to a federal inquiry that examined whether Ms. Sanders had inflated donor commitments to secure a bank loan for the property, and whether her husband had pressured the bank to make the loan.


But ultimately:

Federal prosecutors have not spoken publicly about their investigation, though late last year, Ms. Sanders’s lead lawyer said he had been told it had been closed. And while doubts remain about the contribution pledges claimed by the college, the lawyer has said that neither Ms. Sanders nor her husband was even questioned by investigators, indicating a lack of significant evidence of a crime.

But don't let that stop you.

I just don't get why? Why even help to make a stink about one of our candidates wife's mistakes at her former job? A gamble to save a college. Is there nothing in his platform you can criticize? At least we could have an honest debate about that. Sanders blistered against reporters trying to get him to attack Hillary on 'trumped' up overblown low hanging fruit, yet his detractors see nothing wrong with following Republican smear merchants into the gutter. He'll have enough of that once he becomes our candidate!

[Blistering Sun]

49. So you are doubling down on the disgusting personal attacks?

Is this allowed here???

Those interested in the Burlington College sandal are well-advised to read the archives at the very well-respected VTdigger website on the subject.

Jane Sander took a $200,000 Golden Parachute after bankrupting the college. Those are the facts. They are not in dispute.

Donors came forward and said Jane Sanders misrepresented their bequests to the college on bank loan applications. Intentionally misrepresenting income is grounds for prosecution as felony bank fraud.

BS tells of frequently that the system is rigged in favor of the rich and powerful. He may be on to something!

[LiberalLovinLug]

54. I just can't.....

How is it a personal attack to simply point out your own personal attack on Sanders, and his wife?

And where those attacks originated from?

And how baseless they held up for law enforcement?

Again, read the article.
She was not the only one in on the decision.
It was a gamble made to strengthen the college, and it might have worked if given the chance.

But ultimately, no one is perfect, nor their family members either. And any declared winner will need at least a bit of forgiveness. Your own choice of candidate included, as you well know. Why is that so important? I'm focusing on policy and ability.

[Blistering Sun]

56. You claimed I was offering up right wing talking points. That's a disgusting personal attack.

I made no personal attacks on BS or JS.

I offered up the facts that they purchased an upgraded lake-house after JS took a $200,000 Golden Parachute from a college she drove into bankruptcy under her tenure at the helm. Does that seem right?

What would BS say if it were anyone but his wife making such a deal?

JS was investigated for bank fraud by the FBI and the Justice Department. Donors contradicted the information that JS provide on loan applications. That's in the record. VTDigger has an excellent archive of articles on the affair. They are a highly respect local news source in Vermont.

Once can take "gambles" that don't work out, but providing documents that misstate revenues and donations can make one liable to being charged with bank fraud.

[LiberalLovinLug]

61. Fine, if you think the Sanders are such high powered criminals I can't change your mind

Evidently the FBI doesn't think so. Or she'd be charged with something by now. And I'm sorry, but if you sound like you are mirroring RW smear talking points, and you continue to unapologetically throw out such obtuse terminology, that is on you. I was just showing where those attacks originated from. Usually if you dig deeper, you find there's more to the story. (or in this case less)

The idea that even Democrats help to blow out of proportion things like Warren's native heritage claim "mistake". Or Biden's son's "mistake", or Jane Sanders "mistake" is what is disgusting to me. Again...need I remind you that your own candidate lives in a huge glass house? From sexual inappropriateness, Anita Hill, opposing segregated bussing, his crime bills he has championed with unfairly and disparagingly imprisoned blacks and other minorities...and more. And these are issues that affect more than one small college going under. BUT I DON'T CARE ABOUT ANY OF THAT! If Biden is our nominee, it is all about defeating Trump. I for one will not be helping the enemy make more mountains out of mole hills.

[Blistering Sun]

63. More false accusations.

I never said JS and BS are high powered criminals. LOL.

I do think if anyone but his wife had taken $200,000 from a school that was driven into bankruptcy and dissolution under the direction of the recipient of that Golden parachute, that BS would be highly critical of that transaction. Are you fine with it?

And again with the insults. How dare you with the "RW talking points" crap!

These issues were published in the VTDigger. Hardly a right wing news source.

What's your game?

Your attacks on Biden sound like RW smears to me. You claim not to be in favor of attacking Democrats, while doing just that.

I'm onto your game.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

80. What's amazing is the same family that went after Sanders is now going after Biden.

You would think these types would have learned a lesson by now. The Toensing/DeGenova family is complete trash.

[LiberalLovinLug]

82. +1000

[George II]

26. Jane Sanders didn't sell off a house in Maine, she sold her share for a mere $150,000.

[LiberalLovinLug]

38. thanks for the clarification, I guess

a share of a house.
I still don't see how a spouses families property sale has anything to do with morals or ethics, in a bad or a good way for that matter. jeez.

Interesting how Bernie had been consistently one of the poorest Senators for decades, and then a few things come in almost the same time...a severance for Jane, a property share sale, and book sales income...boosting their income for the first time to over a million. (no where near the multi-millionaire stalwarts like Pelosi or Feinstein, but hey, that's fine, they deserve their wealth). But why is this even a "thing"? He's not a Communist, he's a Democratic Socialist advocate surviving in a Capitalist economy. I know Repubicans have a hard time differentiating the difference. I thought DUers were smarter than that.

Its perpetrating the RW adage of smears such as...you are a hypocrite if you take a car or a bus to a protest against environmentally damaging fossil fuel pipelines, as an example. The world we live in is designed the way it is, we still have to live in it, use its structures, including accumulating wealth, while we change it for the future.

[George II]

68. She was earning between $100-200K annually for years, he was earning over $150K....

for almost three decades (the last decade about $174K)

Roughly running the figures, that's about $6M since he entered Congress, not to mention paid expenses.

That's all I'll say.

[LiberalLovinLug]

72. are you an anti-Capitalist George?

Is it your position now to back whomever earned the least?

seriously, why is this even an issue? You do realize that a bunch of the top ranking Democrats make many times what either Bernie or Kamala make right?

[mcar]

52. What's with bringing Harris into this?

[LiberalLovinLug]

55. The poster that wealth-shamed Sanders is a Harris supporter

I thought it was appropriate to point out to that poster that Harris is the wealthiest income earner of all the candidates....if that is such a big deal to them.

[betsuni]

62. Has Harris called Democrats elite corporatists beholden to (wealthy donors/lobbyists/Wall St., etc)?

Regularly bring up millionaires and billionaires? I don't think she has, so there's no hypocrisy there.

[ehrnst]

64. +1000. (nt)

[sheshe2]

66. Boom!

[vsrazdem]

28. Yes, somone running as a top tier candidate should definitely withdraw. LOL.

[NurseJackie]

32. The candidate I choose will be someone who is healthy and who doesn't smear the Democratic party.

Being POTUS is a very very very stressful job, with long hours, lots of travel and not much sleep. It's a strenuous job that ages even the most FIT and HEALTHY men twenty-five years by the end of their term. Do the math.

Yes, somone running as a top tier candidate should definitely withdraw. LOL.

All things considered, yes. Being "top tier" just isn't enough. He's reached his ceiling. Plus, his inability to connect with AA and POC voters means he will never be our party's nominee.

All I'm trying to say (and I think you'll probably agree with me on this) is that it really serves no good purpose for anyone to be so divisive with the smears on the party. Things like that only create distrust and negativity. Negativity generates apathy. Apathy discourages voter turnout. Low voter turnout gives Republicans a chance to steal the elections.

[vsrazdem]

41. No, I canot agree because I do not accept your entire premise.

And as far as your preferred candidate:

From 538:

There is evidence to support the theory that Harris just isn’t a good fit for 2020. To take just one example, Obama was 47 years old in 2008. (Harris is 54.) The three leading Democratic candidates are 78 years old (Sanders), 76 (Biden) and 70 (Warren.) Moreover, Harris’s uptick in national polls was an outlier. She was in only the high single digits for most of February, March, April, May and June, and has gradually receded back to single digits after surging in early July. Also, as mentioned, the other Obama-esque candidates aren’t really doing any better.

Even on ideological grounds, Harris has had “fit” issues. In her rise through California politics, Harris positioned herself as a left-but-not-that-left, establishment-friendly figure. But that may not be a great profile in today’s Democratic Party, which has grown increasingly liberal. Indeed, Harris has struggled to defend her sometimes more conservative decisions as a district attorney and later attorney general of California and even her choice of becoming a prosecutor in the first place. Her positioning might be just fine if Biden were not in the race winning the votes of African-Americans and Democrats to the right of Warren and Sanders, but Biden is in the race.

[NurseJackie]

46. Thanks for clarifying it for us. Good to know.

All I'm trying to say (and I think you'll probably agree with me on this) is that it really serves no good purpose for anyone to be so divisive with the smears on the party. Things like that only create distrust and negativity. Negativity generates apathy. Apathy discourages voter turnout. Low voter turnout gives Republicans a chance to steal the elections.

No, I canot agree because I do not accept your entire premise.

So, you believe that negativity and divisiveness and smears of the party are a good thing? Thanks for clarifying it for us. Good to know.

[vsrazdem]

48. Please do not put words in my mouth. I said I disagree with your entire premise. The only

negativity I see is with posts that try to insult voters who support certain candidates. I think Bernie has been a positive force for the Democractic party steering it towards more progressive ideas, apparently you do not feel that way. That is your perogative, but please do not denigrate candidates that you disagree with. I agree to just disagree with your entire premise that Bernie is devisive. You can cite all the articles and facts you choose to, we can just agree to disagree.

[NurseJackie]

58. Yes... the "entire" premise. Including the summary that smearing and denigrating Democrats...

I said I disagree with your entire premise.

Yes... the "entire" premise. Including the summary that smearing and denigrating Democrats and the Democratic party only serve to create distrust and negativity. Negativity generates apathy. Apathy discourages voter turnout. Low voter turnout gives Republicans a chance to steal the elections.

I think Bernie has been a positive force for the Democractic party steering it towards more progressive ideas, apparently you do not feel that way.

Honestly, I really cannot understand why you'd consider it to be a "positive force" (your words) whenever anyone calls the Democratic party "feeble" or "ideologically bankrupt" or "the party of the one-percent" or "the party of the elite" and that there's "no difference between Democrats and Republicans". There's nothing positive about that at all. Things like that weaken the party. It discourages participation. It's divisive. It creates resentment and distrust.

That is your perogative, but please do not denigrate candidates that you disagree with.

You know perfectly well that I've done nothing of the sort. I disapprove of (and I am offended) whenever anyone smears Democrats and the Democratic party with lies. My speaking out against the lies and my defending our great party is not "denigrating candidates" ... that's something a candidate does to himself (or herself) whenever they take the low road.

All I'm saying is that attacking the party isn't something that a candidate should be proud of, nor should it be something that he (or she) pins their hopes on if they actually hope to be chosen as that party's nominee for president.

[vsrazdem]

70. Apparently you do not wish to agree to disagree. Okay.

[NurseJackie]

73. I never said that.

Why are you trying to put words in my mouth?

[vsrazdem]

74. Okay, glad that we can agree to disagree.

[NurseJackie]

76. I never said that either... And you know it.

[vsrazdem]

79. You make me laugh. Thanks.

[NurseJackie]

86. That's a point in your favor. I'm glad to hear it.

You make me laugh. Thanks.

Well, good! That's a point in your favor. I'm glad to hear it. You make me laugh too!

[vsrazdem]

87. I really needed that too. I just got out of the hospital and still wasn't feeling so hot. It was

the first laugh I had and it felt great. Thanks.

[NurseJackie]

2. Rea-a-a-aly?

[LiberalLovinLug]

4. It was either Sanders or Warren

And Sanders has just had the longer and more clearer progressive positions. Warren is still a little wishy washy on some issues.

I'm encouraged that she endorsed him so early! Good choice Alexandria!

[ehrnst]

14. Pragmatic, informed and realistic doesn't "wishy washy"

But do tell us what progressive issues she's been "wishy washy" on.

[LiberalLovinLug]

25. Elizabeth Warren's Medicare-for-All Dilemma

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/elizabeth-warrens-medicare-for-all-dilemma


....Warren started out the year by portraying her support for Medicare for All as a statement about aspirations rather than a commitment to the particulars of the Sanders plan. In an interview with Bloomberg Television, in January, she identified “affordable health care for every American” as her goal and said that there were “different ways we can get there.” At a CNN town-hall meeting in March, she said that there were “a lot of different pathways” to universal coverage, and added, “What we’re all looking for is the lowest cost way to make sure that everybody gets covered.”

But unlike in many other policy areas, Warren didn’t propose an over-all health-care-reform plan of her own, as Harris did, or back away from the commitment to eliminate private insurance, as Booker did, sort of. Warren was rolling out so many proposals that her campaign started selling T-shirts emblazoned with the slogan “WARREN HAS A PLAN FOR THAT.” .....

[ehrnst]

34. This is pragmatism, and it's what Democrats prefer to know.

The Democratic debates suffer from a nasty case of Plan-itis

This week’s Democratic debates have had a nasty case of Plan-itis, especially when it comes to health care. It’s important that candidates have plans for what to do about health-care costs and coverage. But we’re way too focused on the details of candidates’ policy plans, and it’s not serving the voters’ needs well.

Every big health reform plan has tradeoffs and winners and losers — no exceptions. It’s not really a huge contribution to voters for debate moderators to find elements of the candidate’s plans they can nail them on. Voters don’t focus on the details of plans; they use them as proxies or signals to figure out what candidates are really about and how they differ from other candidates. What voters really need to know is where candidates would take the health system, how they differ from other candidates on direction and basic choices and what that says about the kind of president they would be.

No plan proposed today will become law in any recognizable form. The details of any plan — the role of private insurance, new taxes, consumer cost sharing or how much providers are paid — will all be subject to heavy negotiation and compromise as they are written into legislation, get a score from the Congressional Budget Office and face scrutiny from the two parties and lobbyists.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/01/democratic-debates-suffer-nasty-case-plan-itis/

So, now we've cleared that up, what are those other progressive issues that you state she's "wishy-washy" on?

Women's access to reproductive health services such as abortion and contraception?

Confronting white supremacy and issues specific to POC?

Taxing the wealthy?

Please clarify.

[LiberalLovinLug]

45. Foreign policy?

Washington Post article, which you'd have to google as I can't link to it without a subscription:

Elizabeth Warren is failing the commander-in-chief test

https://jacobinmag.com/2019/05/elizabeth-warren-foreign-policy

Elizabeth Warren Can and Should Do Better on Foreign Policy

Elizabeth Warren is pushing things in a progressive direction on the domestic front. But she's far too wedded to US imperialism abroad.

....

Look, I'm a big Warren fan. And I'd be stoked with her as President. Loved her ever since I saw her as a 'gotcha' guest in the early days of the Colbert Report show on one of his sit downs. Its not a major concern, but it seems to be with a few, even more liberal, media outlets. She has a lot of time left to cement those positions though. I'm going back and forth between the two still, with the edge to Sanders at this point.

[NurseJackie]

65. Jacobin...

[LiberalLovinLug]

71. What article do you have an issue with?

Going to the About page there are a few good reviews.


The appearance of Jacobin magazine has been a bright light in dark times. Each issue brings penetrating, lively discussions and analyses of matters of real significance, from a thoughtful left perspective that is refreshing and all too rare. A really impressive contribution to sanity, and hope.

— Noam Chomsky


Jacobin, whose ninth issue just landed, has certainly been an improbable hit, buoyed by the radical stirrings of the Occupy movement and a bitingly satirical but serious-minded style.

— Jennifer Schuessler for the New York Times

What are your approved of sources? You wouldn't want to be accused of just reading a few establishment papers to form opinion would you? How old, big and wealthy does a paper have to be in order for you to give it any credit?

I think these days there are a few more choices from fresher perspectives we can take advantage of. For instance VICE did a great video piece on the Charlottesville protests from embedded with the nazis. Won a Peabody award, called Race and Terror. Check it out.

For myself, with the dominance of RW media ownership in the country, I am encouraged to see a liberal leaning papers just manage to exist. I am glad my googling research landed me on that sight for future reading.

[NurseJackie]

75. What a joke!

[LiberalLovinLug]

81. Alrighty then

brilliant response as usual NJ

Maybe the Washington Post will hire you as a writer!

[NurseJackie]

83. Or maybe Jacobin

Maybe the Washington Post will hire you as a writer!

Or maybe Jacobin That socialist rag could certainly use some help.

[LiberalLovinLug]

84. I think 40,000 magazine subcribers plus 1,500,000 monthly online subscribers

would indicate they are doing fine. They probably could hire a writer with more in their inventory than emojis. No need to apply.

[NurseJackie]

85. That doesn't mean it's any good...

... it just means that there's a lot of dumb people in the world who have very low standards and who'll believe anything as long as it's "in writing" or "on the internet".

They probably could hire a writer with more in their inventory than emojis.

I assure you, that would be an improvement over the socialist tripe that oozes from that site now.

[ritapria]

7. Bernie now has 1.4 Million Individual Donors

And 33 million dollars Cash on Hand …..

[NurseJackie]

11. One "individual donor" gave 800 times until she reached the max.

Instead of donating $3 a day every day, why not just donate what she intended to donate in the first place? Unless, of course she wanted to "water down" the size of the average donation and help to create the illusion of a massive grass-roots "movement" and "revolution"

Fact of the matter is this: BS has reached his ceiling (again) and he won't be our party's nominee.

People can donate multiple times, but they can only vote once.

[betsuni]

20. +1

[George II]

23. She made an average of 11.3 contributions PER DAY (!!) over the course of 95 days....

....until she maxxed out. On two days she made 20 individual contributions of $3.00 each. The average contribution overall was $3.42.

That makes for lots of contributions (a bragging point) and low average (a bragging point)

[NurseJackie]

31. Somehow it seems very DISHONEST to me.

[LiberalLovinLug]

50. Oh my gosh!

One person, who has the means, finding a way to max out their small contributions in a clever way to one of our candidates who resists corporate donations. Outrageous!

So much better to just accept $ from say Big Pharma, while claiming you are not. And at the same time co-sponsoring a Medicare for All bill. No conflict there right?

https://theintercept.com/2019/07/30/kamala-harris-big-pharma-donations/

Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign, while releasing a new health care proposal yesterday, balked at criticism that private industry interests would seek to influence her election effort.

Ian Sams, the national press secretary for the Harris campaign, told CNN on Monday that Harris “is not taking any money from pharmaceutical executives.”

Federal Election Commission campaign finance records, however, show that the California senator has received thousands of dollars from executives at drug companies this year, most of which has not been returned.

[George II]

21. We don't know that first point for sure. Through 2Q19 his FEC filings show only about 28,000 donors.

[NurseJackie]

22. These outrageous exaggerations remind me of the claim that BS "votes with the party 99% of the time"

These outrageous exaggerations remind me of the claim that BS "votes with the party 99% of the time". That is, until someone actually did the math, it was discovered that the ACTUAL percentage is closer to 80%.

Why would anyone lie about things like that? Do they know they're lying? If not (ie: it's something they believe to be true) I wonder if it bothers them when the find out the truth.

[helpisontheway]

27. Why are people making a big deal about an endorsement by a freshman congresswoman?

[qazplm135]

30. Because people need their politicians

To be heroes for some reason.

Particularly on our side.

The reality is Bernie isn't winning, either Warren or Biden.

And the reality there is regardless of which of them wins, we are only going to see incremental change.

[tirebiter]

35. When doesn't AOC fall into Bernie's shadow?

It would’ve been newsworthy if she had endorsed anyone else and only if.

[ChubbyStar]

37. Who is Ben?

[comradebillyboy]

39. OAC would do herself a lot of good by stepping out of Bernie's shadow.nt

[vsrazdem]

43. LOL. AOC is in Nobody's shadow.

[comradebillyboy]

40. OT: Is that George Leroy Tirebiter also know as Porgie?

[brooklynite]

44. The Democratic Socialist vote was otherwise up for grabs?

[NurseJackie]

60. ...

[Uncle Joe]

51. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread Hassin Bin Sober.

[Blistering Sun]

53. Is AOC's endorsement considered a positive?

[PDittie]

67. LOL

[NurseJackie]

69. Among those who had already made up their mind to support BS...

Among those who had already made up their mind to support BS... apparently it's a big deal. And I guess I can't blame them... after all, at this late date, it's clear that the BS campaign is doing poorly and he's reached his ceiling (again). From what I've seen already, this is probably the "biggest" endorsement he's likely to get. The honest-ta-god heavyweight political endorsements (the ones that ACTUALLY mean something) will come later on.

I always enjoy the celebrity endorsements. Those are fun.

How much ya wanna bet that BS is endorsed again by such political heavy-hitters as Susan Fucking Sarandon. She's no Meryl Streep or Barbra Streisand or Bruce Springsteen, but I guess she'll have to do, right? No doubt the BS followers will crow loudly about that as well.

Anyway, all I'm trying to say is that these types of early endorsements from little known politicians don't mean as much as folks would have us believe... and the fact that they're being hyped as much as if Obama himself had endorsed BS... well, it's just laughable and it really is a good indicator of how poorly the BS campaign is performing.

[Kurt V.]

77. kicked and recommended

[George II]

78. Kind of odd that the rally is in northern Queens but not in the 14th District.