Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Celerity
Celerity's Journal
Celerity's Journal
February 12, 2020
The New Hampshire primary may very well be remembered for the third- through fifth-place finishers and for how surprisingly close the race between Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) — the overwhelming favorite who won with 60 percent in 2016 — and former South Bend, Ind., mayor Pete Buttigieg was. Sanders was leading in the polls, but he nearly fell to the former Midwest mayor less than half his age.
Sanders was projected as the winner, but the margin of his victory was modest (less than 2 percent). As in Iowa, he did not juice the turnout with an influx of new voters as he promised. The youngest voters made up 12 percent on Tuesday compared with 19 percent in 2016. The Democratic establishment has panicked at the prospect of a Sanders win, but he now looks like a vulnerable front-runner, with well over half of his support coming from voters 18 to 29 and more than half coming from “very liberal” voters. If he was looking to expand beyond his traditional base, he did not do it. He actually got a larger share of repeat voters than first-time voters.
With the electorate heavily skewed in favor of electability (60 percent) rather than agreement on the issues, and about half the voters finding Sanders too liberal, there is reason to believe voters have become wary of Sanders as the standard bearer in a must-win election. His base of support seems not to have grown significantly from the start of the race.
Buttigieg, who won the most delegates in Iowa, finished strong in New Hampshire as well, overcoming questions about his experience. Buttigieg did almost as well with younger voters as with older ones, a sign of expanding appeal. His support was rather evenly spread among all education levels. He also won among voters who decided on Election Day and in the past few days, a sign his debate performance did nothing to slow his rise. He has yet to make inroads with African American candidates in other states, but he has grown beyond his initial base (mostly college-educated and older voters).
snip
Sanders won, but he's not the big story coming out of New Hampshire
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/02/11/sanders-won-hes-not-big-story-coming-out-new-hampshire/The New Hampshire primary may very well be remembered for the third- through fifth-place finishers and for how surprisingly close the race between Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) — the overwhelming favorite who won with 60 percent in 2016 — and former South Bend, Ind., mayor Pete Buttigieg was. Sanders was leading in the polls, but he nearly fell to the former Midwest mayor less than half his age.
Sanders was projected as the winner, but the margin of his victory was modest (less than 2 percent). As in Iowa, he did not juice the turnout with an influx of new voters as he promised. The youngest voters made up 12 percent on Tuesday compared with 19 percent in 2016. The Democratic establishment has panicked at the prospect of a Sanders win, but he now looks like a vulnerable front-runner, with well over half of his support coming from voters 18 to 29 and more than half coming from “very liberal” voters. If he was looking to expand beyond his traditional base, he did not do it. He actually got a larger share of repeat voters than first-time voters.
With the electorate heavily skewed in favor of electability (60 percent) rather than agreement on the issues, and about half the voters finding Sanders too liberal, there is reason to believe voters have become wary of Sanders as the standard bearer in a must-win election. His base of support seems not to have grown significantly from the start of the race.
Buttigieg, who won the most delegates in Iowa, finished strong in New Hampshire as well, overcoming questions about his experience. Buttigieg did almost as well with younger voters as with older ones, a sign of expanding appeal. His support was rather evenly spread among all education levels. He also won among voters who decided on Election Day and in the past few days, a sign his debate performance did nothing to slow his rise. He has yet to make inroads with African American candidates in other states, but he has grown beyond his initial base (mostly college-educated and older voters).
snip
February 12, 2020
Pete and Amy's combined totals, in a state tailor-made for Bernie, prove Sanders has zero chance
He cannot get to 1990 on the first ballot, and the Superdelegates will never commit electoral suicide on the 2nd and subsequent votes, if more ballots are needed.
He will get so so few people overall from the drop outs and/or competitors. The Biden to Sanders defection profectons spun up from early polls that came as the simple result of name recognition is a fantasy. The same for Warren to Sanders defectors.
Do you really think that enough Warren, Biden, Pete, Klobuchar, and Bloomberg supporters and/or delegates will cross over to give Bernie 50% +1?
Nope.
The big worry then becomes how his inevitable defeat is handled, and how many of his primary voters go rogue and migrate to Trump or a 3rd party or simply stay home.
February 11, 2020
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/opinion/todaysdebate/2020/02/02/bernie-sanders-campaign-dark-money-our-revolution-editorials-debates/4556051002/
snip
Sanders founded Our Revolution
This year brings a new chapter in the story. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has created, and is the beneficiary of, a new kind of dark money group called Our Revolution.
OUR REVOLUTION: Our mission is much more than electing Bernie Sanders
What makes Our Revolution different is that it is designed to advance Sanders’ cause against other Democrats in the primaries, rather than against a Republican in a general election. It’s one thing to say you have to play the dark money game because the other side surely will. It is quite another to be first off the mark in bringing its corrosive powers into a new area.
Sanders has long been a big critic of money in politics, often criticizing political action committees and the candidates who benefit from them. To then go out and found a group like Our Revolution is hypocritical.
Before and after Iowa caucuses
Our Revolution claims to voluntarily report all donors who give more than $250. But it doesn't file documents with any agency, provide identifying information about individuals or specify how much they gave.
snip
more background
Shadow group provides Sanders super PAC support he scorns
Bernie Sanders says he doesn’t want a super PAC. Instead, he has Our Revolution, a nonprofit political organization he founded that functions much the same as one.
https://apnews.com/345bbd1af529cfb1e41305fa3ab1e604
WASHINGTON (AP)
Like a super PAC, which is shorthand for super political action committee, Our Revolution can raise unlimited sums from wealthy patrons that dwarf the limits faced by candidates and conventional PACs. Unlike a super PAC, however, the group doesn’t have to disclose its donors — a stream of revenue commonly referred to as “dark money.”
Now, with less than one month to go before the Iowa caucuses, Our Revolution appears to be skirting campaign finance law, which forbids groups founded by federal candidates and officeholders from using large donations to finance federal election activity, including Sanders’ 2020 bid.
A debate over big money in politics has riven the Democratic primary with Sanders and fellow progressive, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, leading the attack on rivals including former Vice President Joe Biden and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who have relied on big-dollar donors.
But while Warren has come under fire for courting wealthy financiers in her past Senate campaigns, Sanders and Our Revolution have largely avoided scrutiny during the primary, even as he has accelerated his criticism of others, among them Biden, for relying on super PACs founded by their allies.
snip
Bernie Sanders, answer why your presidential campaign even needs a dark money group
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/opinion/todaysdebate/2020/02/02/bernie-sanders-campaign-dark-money-our-revolution-editorials-debates/4556051002/
snip
Sanders founded Our Revolution
This year brings a new chapter in the story. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has created, and is the beneficiary of, a new kind of dark money group called Our Revolution.
OUR REVOLUTION: Our mission is much more than electing Bernie Sanders
What makes Our Revolution different is that it is designed to advance Sanders’ cause against other Democrats in the primaries, rather than against a Republican in a general election. It’s one thing to say you have to play the dark money game because the other side surely will. It is quite another to be first off the mark in bringing its corrosive powers into a new area.
Sanders has long been a big critic of money in politics, often criticizing political action committees and the candidates who benefit from them. To then go out and found a group like Our Revolution is hypocritical.
Before and after Iowa caucuses
Our Revolution claims to voluntarily report all donors who give more than $250. But it doesn't file documents with any agency, provide identifying information about individuals or specify how much they gave.
snip
more background
Shadow group provides Sanders super PAC support he scorns
Bernie Sanders says he doesn’t want a super PAC. Instead, he has Our Revolution, a nonprofit political organization he founded that functions much the same as one.
https://apnews.com/345bbd1af529cfb1e41305fa3ab1e604
WASHINGTON (AP)
Like a super PAC, which is shorthand for super political action committee, Our Revolution can raise unlimited sums from wealthy patrons that dwarf the limits faced by candidates and conventional PACs. Unlike a super PAC, however, the group doesn’t have to disclose its donors — a stream of revenue commonly referred to as “dark money.”
Now, with less than one month to go before the Iowa caucuses, Our Revolution appears to be skirting campaign finance law, which forbids groups founded by federal candidates and officeholders from using large donations to finance federal election activity, including Sanders’ 2020 bid.
A debate over big money in politics has riven the Democratic primary with Sanders and fellow progressive, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, leading the attack on rivals including former Vice President Joe Biden and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who have relied on big-dollar donors.
But while Warren has come under fire for courting wealthy financiers in her past Senate campaigns, Sanders and Our Revolution have largely avoided scrutiny during the primary, even as he has accelerated his criticism of others, among them Biden, for relying on super PACs founded by their allies.
snip
February 11, 2020
https://www.socialeurope.eu/whats-at-stake-in-the-democratic-primaries
The Democratic primaries are in full swing. This year’s presidential contest will be the highest-stakes election for the Democratic party and American democracy in a long time. There has been much talk of ‘deeply divided Democrats’ and ‘fights for the soul of the Democratic party’. But from the other side of the Atlantic it may be difficult to understand what the most important differences are among the Democratic candidates and their implications for the future of the left and democracy.
Normally, intra-party differences pivot around policy disputes. There are indeed policy differences between the ‘progressives’, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, and the ‘moderates,’ Pete Buttigieg, Joe Biden and Amy Klobuchar—but on economic policy these are less than one might think. Indeed, on economic issues all the candidates favour policies further left, and closer to traditional European social-democratic policies, than any field of Democratic candidates in recent memory.
For example, with regard to health care, all the candidates support moving beyond the reforms introduced under Barack Obama’s presidency towards universal coverage. Where they differ is on how to get there: Sanders and Warren favour a rapid transition to a ‘single-payer’, public (‘Medicare for all’) system, while the moderates favour gradual change, beginning with the expansion of a public option (Medicare) to those lacking private insurance.
Similarly, all the candidates advocate higher taxes on the wealthy, fighting inequality, more business regulation, increased spending on social programmes and infrastructure, making college more affordable, and devoting greater attention to environmental issues and climate change. As with health care, on these issues the candidates differ more on how they favour achieving these goals than on the goals themselves.
snip
What's at stake in the Democratic primaries
Sheri Berman sets out the reasoning of the contending camps behind the US Democratic presidential contenders—and their European resonances.https://www.socialeurope.eu/whats-at-stake-in-the-democratic-primaries
The Democratic primaries are in full swing. This year’s presidential contest will be the highest-stakes election for the Democratic party and American democracy in a long time. There has been much talk of ‘deeply divided Democrats’ and ‘fights for the soul of the Democratic party’. But from the other side of the Atlantic it may be difficult to understand what the most important differences are among the Democratic candidates and their implications for the future of the left and democracy.
Normally, intra-party differences pivot around policy disputes. There are indeed policy differences between the ‘progressives’, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, and the ‘moderates,’ Pete Buttigieg, Joe Biden and Amy Klobuchar—but on economic policy these are less than one might think. Indeed, on economic issues all the candidates favour policies further left, and closer to traditional European social-democratic policies, than any field of Democratic candidates in recent memory.
For example, with regard to health care, all the candidates support moving beyond the reforms introduced under Barack Obama’s presidency towards universal coverage. Where they differ is on how to get there: Sanders and Warren favour a rapid transition to a ‘single-payer’, public (‘Medicare for all’) system, while the moderates favour gradual change, beginning with the expansion of a public option (Medicare) to those lacking private insurance.
Similarly, all the candidates advocate higher taxes on the wealthy, fighting inequality, more business regulation, increased spending on social programmes and infrastructure, making college more affordable, and devoting greater attention to environmental issues and climate change. As with health care, on these issues the candidates differ more on how they favour achieving these goals than on the goals themselves.
snip
February 11, 2020
Let hate sit alone.
https://twitter.com/Chas10Buttigieg/status/1158121907201298432
February 10, 2020
this Bernie-driven #PetesBillionaires slag-off is disingenuous selective opportunism
here is a list of billionaire contributors up until Q3 2019
Pete was not even the top one, and some of these I am sure have added to this list now
Bernie is singling out Pete for one reason only
the results
Iowa and now NH polls
his poutrage is as phoney as a 3 dollar bill
this list is 3 months old, the data is over 4 months old
I didn't see him having a direct, systemic go at Booker and Harris, as they were definitely still in the race then
ONE of Pete's came from healthcare, NOT dozens like the serial liar Nina Turner has said
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelatindera/2019/11/18/here-are-the-billionaires-funding-the-democratic-presidential-candidates/#45c1d77874bb
.....
February 10, 2020
https://vtdigger.org/2020/02/09/margolis-sanders-team-leads-in-pushing-idea-of-party-selection-conspiracies/
Worse, the conspiratorialists are at it, claiming not only that they wuz robbed but they are going to be robbed again because the powers that be are out to get them. Relax, everyone. The powers that be have very little power.
Both the whining and the conspiracy-mongering are coming from a few campaigns. As soon as it was clear that Joe Biden had done poorly in the Iowa precinct caucuses, someone in his campaign mumbled something about going to court to stop the state party from releasing the results. After Pete Buttigieg won (or co-won?) in Iowa, a senior official of Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s campaign said a woman with Buttigieg’s background wouldn’t have done as well.
One of those wonderfully vague political statements that can be neither confirmed nor refuted. But as usual most of the whining and most of the conspiracy delusions come from supporters of Vermont’s own Bernie Sanders, and this time from the candidate himself.
This whining is an outgrowth of a delusion now almost four years old: that Sanders didn’t win the 2016 nomination because the Democratic Party’s “establishment” (never defined) and specifically the Democratic National Committee (DNC) “rigged” the race against him.
snip
Sanders team leads in pushing idea of party selection conspiracies
Let the whining begin. Oh, too late. It’s already started. The Democratic candidates for president are complaining that they wuz robbed.https://vtdigger.org/2020/02/09/margolis-sanders-team-leads-in-pushing-idea-of-party-selection-conspiracies/
Worse, the conspiratorialists are at it, claiming not only that they wuz robbed but they are going to be robbed again because the powers that be are out to get them. Relax, everyone. The powers that be have very little power.
Both the whining and the conspiracy-mongering are coming from a few campaigns. As soon as it was clear that Joe Biden had done poorly in the Iowa precinct caucuses, someone in his campaign mumbled something about going to court to stop the state party from releasing the results. After Pete Buttigieg won (or co-won?) in Iowa, a senior official of Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s campaign said a woman with Buttigieg’s background wouldn’t have done as well.
One of those wonderfully vague political statements that can be neither confirmed nor refuted. But as usual most of the whining and most of the conspiracy delusions come from supporters of Vermont’s own Bernie Sanders, and this time from the candidate himself.
This whining is an outgrowth of a delusion now almost four years old: that Sanders didn’t win the 2016 nomination because the Democratic Party’s “establishment” (never defined) and specifically the Democratic National Committee (DNC) “rigged” the race against him.
snip
February 8, 2020
Thank you so so much for the hearts! I love hearts in general, lolol
They are kind of a wee trademark of some my fashion, along with skull and crossbones lol
Wifey just bought me these trainers via a raffle for Alla hjärtans dag ie. Valentines Day, here in Sweden, and well........ they combine the two!!!!
February 8, 2020
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/black-lawmakers-demand-biden-disavow-surrogate-s-racist-comments-n1131531
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — Black lawmakers in South Carolina are calling on former Vice President Joe Biden to disavow statements from a longtime friend and campaign surrogate that they say are racist.
About half of the 45-member Legislative Black Caucus held a news conference on Wednesday blasting Democratic state Sen. Dick Harpootlian for remarks they contend insinuated that their group’s chairman had been bought by Biden rival Tom Steyer because he was paid for his work for Steyer’s campaign. They said Biden, who is running for president and is a top contender in the upcoming South Carolina primary, should distance himself from Harpootlian following the comments.
“We ask that he do it publicly, and that he do it now,” House Minority Leader Todd Rutherford said. “His refusal to do so will not go over well in the black community, and it certainly will not go over well with members of the Black Caucus that are standing behind me.” Harpootlian denies that his comments were racially motivated. Biden spokeswoman Paige Hill said Wednesday that Harpootlian “does not speak for the Biden campaign.”
The fight broke out just over three weeks before South Carolina’s presidential primary, the first voting contest in the South. The majority of South Carolina’s Democratic voting electorate is black, a demographic that overwhelmingly supports Biden in the 2020 Democratic presidential race. Biden is working to find his footing after a struggling showing in Iowa’s first-in-the-nation caucuses on Monday.
snip
Black lawmakers call Biden surrogate's comments racist, demand former VP disavow
“I am not racially motivated in any of this,” Harpootlian said. “I will not be silenced by those who use race as a shield from criticism. ... This is an effort to shield themselves by saying this is racist.”https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/black-lawmakers-demand-biden-disavow-surrogate-s-racist-comments-n1131531
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — Black lawmakers in South Carolina are calling on former Vice President Joe Biden to disavow statements from a longtime friend and campaign surrogate that they say are racist.
About half of the 45-member Legislative Black Caucus held a news conference on Wednesday blasting Democratic state Sen. Dick Harpootlian for remarks they contend insinuated that their group’s chairman had been bought by Biden rival Tom Steyer because he was paid for his work for Steyer’s campaign. They said Biden, who is running for president and is a top contender in the upcoming South Carolina primary, should distance himself from Harpootlian following the comments.
“We ask that he do it publicly, and that he do it now,” House Minority Leader Todd Rutherford said. “His refusal to do so will not go over well in the black community, and it certainly will not go over well with members of the Black Caucus that are standing behind me.” Harpootlian denies that his comments were racially motivated. Biden spokeswoman Paige Hill said Wednesday that Harpootlian “does not speak for the Biden campaign.”
The fight broke out just over three weeks before South Carolina’s presidential primary, the first voting contest in the South. The majority of South Carolina’s Democratic voting electorate is black, a demographic that overwhelmingly supports Biden in the 2020 Democratic presidential race. Biden is working to find his footing after a struggling showing in Iowa’s first-in-the-nation caucuses on Monday.
snip
Profile Information
Gender: FemaleHometown: London
Home country: US/UK/Sweden
Current location: Stockholm, Sweden
Member since: Sun Jul 1, 2018, 07:25 PM
Number of posts: 43,283
