|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:MD Gov: Perez Maryland's republican governor is actually pretty great and has a >70% approval rating, and is no threat because of the eternally blue legislature. He's one of the very, very few examples of actual functional fiscal conservatives (and not insane corrupt ideologues). He also loathes Trump. So basically, save Perez for a different state
|
# ? Feb 12, 2017 00:40 |
|
|
# ? May 21, 2024 14:20 |
|
Convergence posted:Maryland's republican governor is actually pretty great and has a >70% approval rating, and is no threat because of the eternally blue legislature. He's one of the very, very few examples of actual functional fiscal conservatives (and not insane corrupt ideologues). He also loathes Trump. Perez is from Montgomery County, MD, and Hogan opposes Trump like McCain opposes Trump: in a manner designed to not offer meaningful substantive opposition
|
# ? Feb 12, 2017 00:43 |
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:virtually everyone who serves in a part-time legislature has another job. for years my delegate in WV worked for the rail roads. This is very true, the Colorado state legislature pages for its members list their "day jobs". As an aside, salary for CO state house is $30/yr, so if I somehow manage to get elected there (which is like to at least try sometime soon), my cheap rear end could live off of that and anpart time job!
|
# ? Feb 12, 2017 02:35 |
|
Convergence posted:Maryland's republican governor is actually pretty great and has a >70% approval rating, and is no threat because of the eternally blue legislature. He's one of the very, very few examples of actual functional fiscal conservatives (and not insane corrupt ideologues). He also loathes Trump. And how do you think that guy would govern if the MD legislature suddenly went red?
|
# ? Feb 12, 2017 05:09 |
|
Convergence posted:Maryland's republican governor is actually pretty great and has a >70% approval rating, and is no threat because of the eternally blue legislature. He's one of the very, very few examples of actual functional fiscal conservatives (and not insane corrupt ideologues). He also loathes Trump. I don't really care if the governor of Maryland is the second coming of black baby jesus, the republicans are exactly one state away from being able to call a constitutional convention and he must be deposed at all costs.
|
# ? Feb 12, 2017 07:25 |
|
Convergence posted:Maryland's republican governor is actually pretty great He's also 60 and a cancer survivor. He's going to retire at some point. Dr. Fishopolis posted:the republicans are exactly one state away from being able to call a constitutional convention and he must be deposed at all costs. Legislatures do this. (And it's close but not quite this close; several states are nominally Republican-majority but have bicameral legislatures with Dems in control of one house.) In any event, governors don't get a (direct) say in the matter. Cease to Hope fucked around with this message at 10:14 on Feb 12, 2017 |
# ? Feb 12, 2017 09:59 |
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I don't really care if the governor of Maryland is the second coming of black baby jesus, the republicans are exactly one state away from being able to call a constitutional convention and he must be deposed at all costs. Well you aren't going to get rid of someone with a 72 % approval rating so pick a different loving state i guess? Even in a wave election people like that are safe. e: that's his AR for Baltimore btw, he ain't going anywhere unless literal skeletons fall out of his closet. TROIKA CURES GREEK fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Feb 12, 2017 |
# ? Feb 12, 2017 18:50 |
|
Cease to Hope posted:He's also 60 and a cancer survivor. He's going to retire at some point. Also it takes two-thirds of states to call a convention but three-fourths have to ratify the output. Big difference. (technically it doesn't take three-fourths of legislatures, just three fourths of states' ratifying bodies, so there's some room for wacky-rear end state ratifying convention shenanigans, but they'd basically have to either be in place (FLORIDA ) or go through the legislature) Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Feb 13, 2017 |
# ? Feb 13, 2017 02:30 |
|
Convergence posted:Maryland's republican governor is actually pretty great and has a >70% approval rating, and is no threat because of the eternally blue legislature. He's one of the very, very few examples of actual functional fiscal conservatives (and not insane corrupt ideologues). He also loathes Trump. Don't play into the framing of "oh look it's a Republican who isn't a frothing at the mouth racist and is well media trained with the politics of Bob Dole, he must be great!" mcmagic fucked around with this message at 17:18 on Feb 13, 2017 |
# ? Feb 13, 2017 17:09 |
|
mcmagic posted:Don't play into the farming of "oh look it's a Republican who isn't a frothing at the mouth racist and is well media trained with the politics of Bob Dole, he must be great!" Ah, The John Kasich Effect
|
# ? Feb 13, 2017 17:11 |
|
Fiction posted:Yeah, and I'm sure there'll be a lot of "just doing his job" to help the donors if he's made chair. Well, yes, that is literally the job of the DNC chair. Perez and Ellison both know what the role entails and have signaled their full willingness to carry it out. Ellison has already demonstrated (with actions, not words) that he intends to back establishment candidates against progressive challengers, throw the public under the bus in order to please donors, and give his full and unconditional support to Pelosi and Schumer. It's just that it no longer matters what he says or does, because the narrative's already been built and no one's going to let pesky things like facts get in the way of daydreams about Keith destroying the Democratic establishment forever and singlehandedly laying the groundwork for full socialism at last. Funny how that narrative just so happens to exclude Buttigieg, Brown, and every other candidate except for the two candidates who were very obviously being fully backed by establishment factions before they even declared their candidacy. I don't understand how the supposedly anti-establishment wing don't understand that they've been downright suckered into choosing between two establishment candidates by a false narrative that essentially silences every other candidate, freezing out potential dark horses and out-of-nowhere challengers. If nothing else, the establishment has demonstrated that it's still utterly excellent at clearing the field.
|
# ? Feb 13, 2017 23:18 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:Well, yes, that is literally the job of the DNC chair. Perez and Ellison both know what the role entails and have signaled their full willingness to carry it out. Ellison has already demonstrated (with actions, not words) that he intends to back establishment candidates against progressive challengers, throw the public under the bus in order to please donors, and give his full and unconditional support to Pelosi and Schumer. It's just that it no longer matters what he says or does, because the narrative's already been built and no one's going to let pesky things like facts get in the way of daydreams about Keith destroying the Democratic establishment forever and singlehandedly laying the groundwork for full socialism at last. It's a race being decided on by party loving insiders dude.
|
# ? Feb 13, 2017 23:25 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:Well, yes, that is literally the job of the DNC chair. Perez and Ellison both know what the role entails and have signaled their full willingness to carry it out. Ellison has already demonstrated (with actions, not words) that he intends to back establishment candidates against progressive challengers, throw the public under the bus in order to please donors, and give his full and unconditional support to Pelosi and Schumer. It's just that it no longer matters what he says or does, because the narrative's already been built and no one's going to let pesky things like facts get in the way of daydreams about Keith destroying the Democratic establishment forever and singlehandedly laying the groundwork for full socialism at last. The entire congressional party has lined up behind Pelosi and Schumer. I'm not sure how you get past that.
|
# ? Feb 13, 2017 23:26 |
|
mcmagic posted:The entire congressional party has lined up behind Pelosi and Schumer. I'm not sure how you get past that. You don't. You pick better fuckin battles.
|
# ? Feb 13, 2017 23:29 |
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:It's a race being decided on by party loving insiders dude. Yeah, but because the insiders put forward two candidates rather than one, the other candidates don't even get press. If there was just one horse being backed by the establishment, the news would make a big deal about the outsiders in hopes of striking a more interesting narrative than "single candidate with no credible opposition sails to totally predictable victory", and outsider candidates would also likely attract the attention of the anti-establishment voters. Because there's two candidates, though, both the media and the anti-establishment voters instead focus on the one-on-one horse race and utterly sidelines the actual outsiders. And since both establishment candidates are acceptable to and loyal to the establishment and have essentially identical policies, it hardly matters to them who wins. People keep asking "but what about the perception and the symbolism" without realizing that the party insiders put Ellison in the race for the explicit purpose of creating that perception and symbolism. mcmagic posted:The entire congressional party has lined up behind Pelosi and Schumer. I'm not sure how you get past that. Start replacing Congressmen until they get the idea. If no acceptable candidate can win the race, then you're running the wrong race.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 00:49 |
|
You can't even vote on the DNC chair unless you are a part of the literal party establishment. Plus, further fringe candidates from Buttigieg to Buckley were around before Perez was, and failed to draw any interest.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 00:56 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:Yeah, but because the insiders put forward two candidates rather than one, the other candidates don't even get press. If there was just one horse being backed by the establishment, the news would make a big deal about the outsiders in hopes of striking a more interesting narrative than "single candidate with no credible opposition sails to totally predictable victory", and outsider candidates would also likely attract the attention of the anti-establishment voters. Because there's two candidates, though, both the media and the anti-establishment voters instead focus on the one-on-one horse race and utterly sidelines the actual outsiders. And since both establishment candidates are acceptable to and loyal to the establishment and have essentially identical policies, it hardly matters to them who wins. People keep asking "but what about the perception and the symbolism" without realizing that the party insiders put Ellison in the race for the explicit purpose of creating that perception and symbolism. You're way over thinking this.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 01:56 |
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:You're way over thinking this. I think he has a fair point, it just also doesn't really matter and there's nothing we could do about it either way.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 02:02 |
|
Lightning Knight posted:I think he has a fair point, it just also doesn't really matter and there's nothing we could do about it either way. Even if Perez hadn't ran, no one would give a poo poo about the others.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 02:08 |
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Even if Perez hadn't ran, no one would give a poo poo about the others. Agreed.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 02:14 |
|
Brown has said Democrats need to be more like Republicans, and another attacked Ellisson as unfit for the position because he is a Muslim, and therefore Homophobic. Why in the gently caress would you want these asshat to have more of a chance?
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 02:17 |
Still holding onto the hope that my Mayor will win...
|
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 02:56 |
|
What ideas does he have that Ellisson and Perez don't?
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 03:00 |
|
Butigeg is A Cool Dude, and it kinda bums me out how he has no chance whatsoever.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 05:25 |
|
If Buttigieg is smart, he knows he probably has a future in the Democratic Party that lies outside of the Democratic National Chair.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 05:46 |
|
Chelb posted:If Ellison is smart, he knows he probably has a future in the Democratic Party that lies outside of the Democratic National Chair.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 05:46 |
|
Yes after he leads the dnc to trample the GOP. It's awesome we see eye to eye.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 06:06 |
|
If Buttigieg was serious and not just trying to raise his profile nationally by running to the left of Ellisson and Perez, he would have thrown in when Dean did and failed to get any endorsements. He wouldn't have waited til mid January to announce. He is doing this because he wants national attention, not because he wants the job. He's trying to kick off a 2018 house or senate run, or a 2020 presidential run.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 06:42 |
|
Fulchrum posted:If Buttigieg was serious and not just trying to raise his profile nationally by running to the left of Ellisson and Perez, he would have thrown in when Dean did and failed to get any endorsements. He wouldn't have waited til mid January to announce. Definitely Congress or a governorship, not president. He's only ever held office as the mayor of a small city.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 10:25 |
|
There seems to be some sort of general opinion that Buttigieg is to the left of Ellison/Perez. Why is this? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with it, but I can't find anything specific that seems to point towards that conclusion.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 10:35 |
|
Ytlaya posted:There seems to be some sort of general opinion that Buttigieg is to the left of Ellison/Perez. Why is this? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with it, but I can't find anything specific that seems to point towards that conclusion. You know how there's a significant number of people in this thread saying that the Dems are kind of hosed and the people who led the party into this blind corner need to be replaced immediately? That's Buttigieg's actual position. It has not won him many endorsements. (He got Martin O'Malley!)
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 10:44 |
|
Cease to Hope posted:Definitely Congress or a governorship, not president. He's only ever held office as the mayor of a small city. Yeah, can't think of any presidents to have had so little public service.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 11:54 |
|
Ytlaya posted:There seems to be some sort of general opinion that Buttigieg is to the left of Ellison/Perez. Why is this? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with it, but I can't find anything specific that seems to point towards that conclusion. Marched with Women's March instead of going to donor meeting with David Brock Actual pledge to ban lobbyist donations
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 14:39 |
|
Actually not. He has 2 young'ish popular senators in his state that are going to be there a while.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 15:27 |
|
Ytlaya posted:There seems to be some sort of general opinion that Buttigieg is to the left of Ellison/Perez. Why is this? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with it, but I can't find anything specific that seems to point towards that conclusion. He's definitely left-leaning, has a good reputation for working with the grassroots, and has been very vocal that the Democratic Party needs to start treating people as people rather than numbers and demographics. Everything I've seen him say and write has been spot-on, and I've heard that he's said good stuff in the debates as well, although I didn't watch them. And while he's only a mayor, he's the mayor of a poor ex-manufacturing town in red Indiana. The big thing that's really catapulted his leftist cred, though, is the fact that Buttigieg was the only DNC chair candidate to participate in the Women's March. All the others, including Ellison and Perez, were at a luxury resort in Florida attending a private retreat for big donors and top party officials. Obviously, blowing off the activists and protesters to go schmooze with party leadership and influential donors is the way to get elected as DNC chair...but on the other hand, the optics of it are absolutely awful and it puts a big damper on their efforts to portray themselves as advocates for the voters who'll prioritize the grassroots over big money. Buttigieg was the only one willing to live up to his rhetoric and prioritize the base over the donors, even if it hurt his standing among the establishment - and people noticed. That's how Mayor Pete won my heart, at least. His "Letter from Flyover Country", authored about three weeks before he joined the DNC chair race, shows that he's got his priorities in the right place, which is something quite rare in the debate over reforming the Democratic party: https://medium.com/@buttigieg/a-letter-from-flyover-country-5d4e9c32d2ac#.xs23gzv6t (I'm just posting a couple of excerpts, but go read the whole thing, it's good!) quote:None of this is theoretical for me. I didn’t see Afghanistan on the news, I saw it through the armored windshields of the vehicles I drove or guarded on dozens of missions outside the wire, and as a Reservist I could be sent back to war if a reckless president leads us into peril. I don’t think about gun violence as an abstraction, not when I’ve had to attend funerals and console the mothers of victims in my city — and swear in police officers alongside family members who pray they will come home safe every day. Marriage equality isn’t a political rallying cry for me, it is a legal fact without which my future family cannot even exist. Obamacare isn’t a political football for me, it’s a matter of household finance: it’s how my partner pays for his health care and how his mother pays for the chemotherapy on which her life depends. Climate change isn’t about polar bears for me. It’s about the South Bend families whose homes I stood in last summer, their basements flooded with muck and excrement while children wandered around the porch the night before school started, because our city had just experienced one of those unprecedented rainfalls that science kept warning us about.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 17:31 |
|
mcmagic posted:Actually not. He has 2 young'ish popular senators in his state that are going to be there a while. He's CoChair of the CPC and if the left's assumption holds true that 2018's gains will come from progressive enthusiasm... that'll put him in line for House Leadership, tenure be damned. Klobuchar has been a trendy pick for a ticket or the bench for years, Franken is a "youngish" 65, and Ellison would immediately be among the favorites to replace Governor Dayton at the end of his term. Given your track record of thorough incompetence, maybe you should find something other than politics to spend your time discussing?
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 18:10 |
|
Mmm:quote:When it comes to my part of the country, we will recover our ability to reach people only when we take them seriously, connecting our plans to their actual, personal lived experience rather than focusing on The Show. We need to invite individual people to assess how their individual lives changed — how their safety, their income, their access to health care, their gun rights, their marriages — have actually been affected, if at all, by what goes on in Washington. he can gently caress right on off
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 18:10 |
|
i think you missed the part where he's one of The Gays and he's married to another one of The Gays
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 18:15 |
|
Sapozhnik posted:i think you missed the part where he's one of The Gays and he's married to another one of The Gays Their Gun Rights.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 18:19 |
|
|
# ? May 21, 2024 14:20 |
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Mmm: Careful, if you kneejerk any harder you might kick yourself in your own face. What's so offensive about "we should talk to actual people to find out what they think about gun rights and how their individual lives are affected by them, rather than having party leadership dictate a Washington consensus down onto people"?
|
# ? Feb 14, 2017 18:24 |