Nothing But Bernie: Why Other Candidates Eat His Farts Link Super Station

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > Nothing But Bernie: Why Other Candidates Eat His Farts Link Super Station

«‹›4 »

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Classon Ave. Robot posted:

Does anyone have like a quick list of all the horrible things about Pete Buttigieg put together that they can link to or copy-paste or something?

redleader posted:

yeah, are there places to get summaries and/or hot takes from? this thread moves way too fast to keep up with

Pete Buttigieg

Nathan Robinson's early take on him (Current Affairs writer whose done a good job working on this thread title for awhile, so I'll be leaning on him alot)

quote:

Talking about politics on campus, Buttigieg says:

In April 2001, a student group called the Progressive Student Labor Movement took over the offices of the university�s president, demanding a living wage for Harvard janitors and food workers. That spring, a daily diversion on the way to class was to see which national figure�Cornel West or Ted Kennedy one day, John Kerry or Robert Reich another�had turned up in the Yard to encourage the protesters.

Striding past the protesters and the politicians addressing them, on my way to a �Pizza and Politics� session with a journalist like Matt Bai or a governor like Howard Dean, I did not guess that the students poised to have the greatest near-term impact were not the social justice warriors at the protests [�] but a few mostly apolitical geeks who were quietly at work in Kirkland House [Zuckerberg et al.]

I find this short passage very weird. See the way Buttigieg thinks here. He dismisses student labor activists with the right-wing pejorative �social justice warriors.� But more importantly, to this day it hasn�t even entered his mind that he could have joined the PSLM in the fight for a living wage. Activists are an alien species, one he �strides past� to go to �Pizza & Politics� sessions with governors and New York Times journalists. He didn�t consider, and still hasn�t considered, the moral quandary that should come with being a student at an elite school that doesn�t pay its janitors a living wage. (In fact, years later Harvard was still refusing to pay its workers decently.)

quote:

Pete Buttigieg does not recall his time at McKinsey with a sense of moral ambivalence. Today he says it might have been his most �intellectually informing experience,� and by that he doesn�t mean that he saw the dark underbelly of American business. No, he was �learning about the nature of data.� It was a thoroughly neutral experience, �a place to learn.� The most critical thing he will say is that he was �sympathetic� to those who think consulting careers less worthy than �public service.� But ultimately, Buttigieg only left McKinsey because it �could not furnish that deep level of purpose that I craved.� His sense of purpose. Have a look at the book: See if you can find a single qualm, even a moment�s interrogation of the nature of the company he worked for.

In fact, Buttigieg was asked in an interview what he thought of the company�s misdeeds. On the work pushing OxyContin, he replied that he �hadn�t followed the story.� On collaborating with the murderous Saudi government:

I think you have a lot of smart, well-intentioned people who sometimes view the world in a very innocent way. I wrote my thesis on Graham Greene, who said that innocence is like a dumb leper that has lost his bell, wandering the world, meaning no harm.

quote:

In fact, as I started reading about South Bend after getting through Shortest Way Home, there was a lot Buttigieg had left out. The eviction rate has been nearly three times the national average, a �crisis� among the worst in the country. If the word �eviction� appears in Buttigieg�s book, I did not notice it. The opiate crisis, homelessness, and gentrification are all serious issues in South Bend, but Buttigieg mentions them offhandedly if at all.

All of this made me go back and rethink one of Buttigieg�s proudest stories. Every time the media talks about Buttigieg, if they mention anything other than his r�sum�, it�s his signature initiative to deal with �blight.� Buttigieg says that when he took office, there were �too many houses,� that the main complaint he received from residents was about the proliferation of vacant homes. His major policy goal, then, was to �repair or demolish� 1,000 homes in 1,000 days, a number his staff thought impossible. The council president called this an initiative to �right-size the city� (�right-size� is a euphemism from the business world used to make layoffs sound like the simple reasonableness of a corporate Goldilocks). Thanks to his diligent, McKinsey-esque management, Buttigieg blew past the goal.

But news coverage of the plan makes it sound a little less savory:

By leveling fees and fines, the city leaned on homeowners to make repairs or have their houses demolished. In many cases, Buttigieg said, the homeowners proved impossible to find amid a string of active and inactive investment companies. In other cases, he said, they were unwilling or unable to make repairs.

[quote]
I�ll try to shut up about Bernie, but seriously: Look at page 3 of Our Revolution, in which he lists what his Democratic Party stands for, from a $15 an hour federal minimum wage to breaking up the banks. Then read Buttigieg talking about how his aim was to �generate economic growth and maintain confidence in the business community,� and he thought he�d be a good mayor because he had a �professional background in economic development and was fluent in the language of business.� He�ll tell you what his goals were: �to grow jobs by simplifying business process, to set up a 311 line for customer service, and to deal with the hundreds of boarded-up vacant homes in our neighborhood.� I am sorry, but that�s not enough.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/03/all-about-pete

Pete's Racism Problem

quote:

Since Buttigieg became mayor in January 2012, taking charge of the South Bend Police Department, the city�s black residents have been far more likely to be arrested for marijuana offenses than its white residents. That disparity in South Bend under Buttigieg, in fact, is worse than in the rest of the country, or even the rest of Indiana.

A black South Bend resident, under the Buttigieg administration, was 4.3 times more likely to be arrested for possessing marijuana between 2012 and 2018 than a white resident, according to data collected by the federal government. Meanwhile, in Indiana statewide during that time, according to data from reporting law enforcement agencies, black people were 3.5 times more at risk of a pot arrest; nationally, the disparity between the rates of black arrests and white arrests was 3 to 1. In the study Buttigieg cited to back up his claim in Iowa, the ACLU in 2013 found a 3.7 to 1 disparity nationally. The study is also referenced in Buttigieg�s Douglass Plan for Black America, which calls for marijuana to be legalized and arrest records to be expunged.

South Bend has a black population of roughly 27,000 and a white population of around 64,000, and local police have made 1,256 arrests for pot possession since 2012. Of those, 805 were black, while just 449 were white. Nationally, the rate of marijuana use is roughly equal for blacks and whites. The disparity in South Bend policing extends into other crimes: In 2018, 22 black people were arrested for selling weed in South Bend, while just 4 white people were taken in.

quote:

Henry Davis Jr., who was recently elected to a third term to the city council, told The Intercept he was unsurprised to hear the significant disparity in arrests. �It�s bad as hell here,� said Davis. �The numbers for African American police officers have dropped to historic lows.� He also said that Buttigieg has yet to make a human connection with the South Bend black community. �He feels like it�s an open book test: If I do these things, then I win,� he said. �He�s discounting the fact that he�s dealing with human beings.�

Davis lost to Buttigieg in a 2015 primary for mayor, and has often butted heads with the city over policing. In October 2012, after leaving a council meeting in which he voted against a police union contract, Davis was pulled over and detained at gun point. Davis, according to the dash cam video, protested that officers knew who he was. �I know exactly who you are,� one told him, explaining he had been pulled over for a �sudden lane change,� though there�s no evidence of such a lane change in the video. In the wake of the Boykins fiasco, Davis had reported the South Bend Police Department to the Department of Justice for an investigation into the racist remarks caught on police recordings, and the officers sued him for defamation, which was tossed out of court.

Jorden Giger, a 28-year-old South Bend activist with Black Lives Matter, agrees with the prominent criticism that Buttigieg ignores the concerns of black people in South Bend. �Mayor Pete is like, you know, he�s very calculating,� Giger said.

The mayor�s focus on police accountability in his presidential campaign is puzzling, he continued, �because we don�t see that here in South Bend.�

https://theintercept.com/2019/11/26/pete-buttigieg-south-bend-marijuana-arrests/

quote:

In January 2012, Pete Buttigieg stepped into the South Bend, Ind., mayor�s office after winning the city�s first open mayoral election in 24 years. South Bend had three African Americans in visible high level and public leadership positions: Mayor�s Assistant Lynn Coleman; Fire Chief Howard Buchanon and Police Chief Darryl Boykins.

Within three months, all three would be gone.

quote:

Boykins had served as a police officer in South Bend for 27 years before he was appointed as the city�s first (and to date, only) black police chief in 2007. In 2011, after the city�s police telephone recording system crashed, SBPD Communications Director Karen DePaepe discovered recordings of white officers allegedly using racist rhetoric and concocting a way to get rid of Boykins with the help of top donors to Buttigieg�s then-ongoing mayoral campaign. DePaepe made five cassette tapes of the most egregious remarks and described them in legal documents the city has had for years. One officer allegedly said: �It will be a fun time when all white people are in charge.�

Soon after Buttigieg took office, word got out about the tapes and the officers complained that the recordings violated the Federal Wiretap Act. Even though the recording system had been in place for more than a decade, its existence somehow became the black guy�s fault.

According to Boykins� eventual racial-discrimination lawsuit, Buttigieg�s chief of staff, Mike Schmuhl, �with Buttigieg�s full and conspiratorial agreement,� told Boykins the feds were investigating him and the only way for Boykins to avoid prosecution was to resign as South Bend police chief.

That was not true.

Two months after Buttigieg demoted Boykins, the U.S. attorney wrote to the city, explaining that before Boykins was demoted, �We advised [the city] that our primary concern was that the SBPD practices comply with federal law.� The phone calls, the top prosecutor wrote, were �mistakenly recorded.�

In testimony that did not become public until this past September, Schmuhl later admitted the feds never directly threatened to indict Boykins. Rather, he testified that �the strong impression the [U.S. Attorney] left with me was that our policies as it relates to telephone recording in the South Bend Police Department were out of compliance with federal law and their guidelines and that there were two people who were responsible for that, and that the impression was to end the investigation, that these policies needed to be adjusted and put in compliance and that personnel actions needed to be taken.�

At the time, according to Boykins� suit, he believed his three decades of service could possibly end with a conviction on federal wiretapping charges. Boykins would later say in a sworn deposition that he felt �threatened and intimidated� by Buttigieg. After contemplating his decision, Boykins rescinded his resignation and was subsequently demoted by Buttigieg. Buttigieg fired DePaepe for her role in the scandal.

So what happened to the white officers who were heard on the recordings?

Captain Brian Young went on to lead the county�s Special Victims Unit.

Dave Wells became the commander of the County�s drug unit.

Tim Corbett, the county�s homicide commander, ran for Sheriff.

Steve Richmond retired and moved to Michigan.

�South Bend is like an onion�the more layers you peel away, the more you want to cry.� �Davin Hackett, Former SBPD Police Officer

Buttigieg claims he has never listened to the tapes because that would be illegal. More recently, in response to a question at an April 2019 CNN Town Hall, Buttigieg not only insisted that he has never listened to the tapes, but he claimed that he doesn�t know what�s on the tapes.

In his book, Shortest Way Home: One Mayor�s Challenge and a Model for America�s Future, Buttigieg wrote:

�Infuriatingly, I had no way of finding out if [the allegations of racist language on the tapes] was actually true. The entire crisis was the result of the fact that the recordings were allegedly made in violation of the law. Under the Federal Wiretap Act, this meant that it could be a felony not just to make the recordings, but to reproduce and disclose them. Like everyone else in the community, I wanted to know what was on these recordings. But it was potentially illegal for me to find out, and it was not clear I could even ask, without fear of legal repercussions. As of this writing, I have not heard the recordings, and I still don�t know if I, and the public, ever will.

Responding to an email from The Root and The Young Turks (TYT) asking if he had ever been informed that there was racist language on the recordings, Buttigieg�s campaign said: �When Pete first learned of the tapes� existence as a result of the federal investigation, he was not interested in figuring out what the tapes said,� adding that it was �irrelevant to him.�

�[A]ll he knew was what federal investigators had told his office,� explained a spokesperson for Pete for America. �[T]hat the Chief was improperly recording officers� phone conversations of his employees to determine who was loyal and disloyal to him.�

That was not �all he knew.�

In media interviews following her firing and in her wrongful-termination suit, DePaepe hinted at what was on the secret police tapes. She publicly stated that she�d tried to meet with Buttigieg to tell him what the tapes contained. No one knew for years, but DePaepe detailed the contents of the recordings in a 2012 officer�s report, and in 2013, answered written questions from Buttigieg�s attorneys, both obtained by The Young Turks� Jonathan Larsen. In his July 2013 deposition, Schmuhl admitted that he �briefly� told Buttigieg that the phone calls contained derogatory and disrespectful comments about Boykins and Buttigieg.

Buttigieg eventually settled Boykins� discrimination suit against him, Schmuhl, and the city for $50,000. The city paid DePaepe $235,000. The officers who were allegedly captured on the recordings also filed claims alleging that they were recorded without their knowledge. The city settled with the white officers for $500,000 and agreed that they were not �aware of any evidence of illegal activity by the Plaintiffs or any evidence that reveals that the Plaintiffs used any racist word against former Chief of Police, Darryl Boykins.�

Buttigieg repeatedly says he demoted Boykins because Boykins was the �subject� or �target� of an FBI investigation�but the U.S. attorney has never confirmed that Boykins was the �subject� or �target� of their investigation. Pete�s chief of staff confirmed that the U.S. attorney never said it in a deposition.

He also insists that Boykins� demotion had nothing to do with race and he has yet to comment publicly on the fact that DePaepe�s secret legal documents quote police as saying he agreed to get rid of Boykins before he even became mayor.

No one knows why Buttigieg pressured Boykins to resign and subsequently demoted him. The only thing we know is Buttigieg�s explanation that Boykins was the target of a federal investigation is not true. It was never true. Still, Buttigieg�or proxies from his campaign�continue to repeat it.

This would not be the last time Buttigieg and the city of South Bend would be accused of discriminating against a black police officer.

Over the course of the last month, The Root and The Young Turks have received internal documents, examined formal complaints, and interviewed former officers who outlined a pattern of racial discrimination against black police officers in South Bend. The alleged discrimination spanned the course of multiple police chiefs, captains, and supervisors. The only common denominator is that every black complainant mentions one name:

Pete Buttigieg.

When Buttigieg became mayor in 2012, the SBPD was 11 percent black (29 of 244 officers). There were 28 black officers in 2013; 26 in 2014, and by the time Buttigieg announced his run for president, the South Bend police force was six percent black, with 15 black officers.

Officially, Pete Buttigieg can�t hire black police officers or fire racist cops.

The mayor invoked this legalistic defense during an interview with The Root when he was asked about Aaron Knepper, a white police officer accused of police brutality in at least four incidents since Buttigieg took office. Buttigieg repeated this claim at a contentious June 23 town hall in response to the fatal shooting of a black man by a South Bend police officer.

It�s true that the five-person Board of Public Safety (BOPS) has disciplinary oversight of the SBPD and the fire department�not the mayor. But, as Buttigieg pointed out in his conversation with The Root, the mayor appoints the BOPS members. The mayor appoints the chief of police. The mayor controls the board that controls the chief who controls the police. The ultimate leverage is in the mayor�s hands.

So, why were black police officers leaving the South Bend Police Department en masse?

Racism.

That is not an opinion. It�s what black officers specifically, repeatedly, told the South Bend Common Council, the BOPS and Mayor Pete in memos, emails and complaints obtained by The Root and TYT. The claim is reflected in at least five discrimination lawsuits filed in federal courts. The accusations were leveled in our conversations with current and former SBPD officers. Included in the documents were letters signed by 10 black SBPD officers�a significant cohort of the force�s black members�in which they describe several problems within the department. The letters were sent in 2014 to the BOPS, the mayor�s office and the city�s legislature.

Two other black officers who had not signed the letter filed Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaints around the same time (both cases were subsequently dismissed)�meaning half of all black SBPD officers were raising their voices and risking retaliation to call attention to the problems.

Since that time, all but five of those dozen have left. And most of the ones who left didn�t leave law enforcement�they just left South Bend law enforcement.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theroot.com/mayor-pete-s-invisible-black-police-1840727624/amp

Buttigieg helped fix bread prices in Canada

DACK FAYDEN posted:

don't forget mayo pete's connection to the Canadian bread price fixing scandal:
https://nationalpost.com/news/how-m...ocratic-primary

etc

quote:

It was before Iraq, before Afghanistan, before becoming mayor of South Bend, Ind., � and long before his surge up the ranks of the U.S. Democratic primaries.

For six months in 2008, Pete Buttigieg says he spent 14-hour days hunkered down in a suburban Toronto office park, crunching data for Loblaws as a McKinsey and Company management consultant.

He says his task was figuring out how the Canadian supermarket chain could strategically lower prices as a way to increase profits and �subtly change� shoppers� perceptions of Loblaws. The analysis became so complex, he needed an upgraded computer that colleagues nicknamed Bertha.

It was part of the Indiana mayor�s three-year stint with McKinsey and in his memoir, Buttigieg says the work initially seemed �against all my expectations � fascinating.�

https://twitter.com/wideofthepost/s...r%3D1203%23pti1

https://mobile.twitter.com/SleepyDj...genumber%3D1229

lol

https://mobile.twitter.com/coolturt...genumber%3D1158

SpiderHyphenMan posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_sbHIssJwI

Shageletic has issued a correction as of 17:50 on Jan 29, 2020

# ? Jan 17, 2020 15:10

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 9, 2024 04:51

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Elizabeth Warren

Elizabeth Warren started this presidential cycle as a reformist populist candidate only to see that reputation melt in recent months. Let's examine why.

Nathan Robinson:

quote:

It�s not clear to me that Warren has a theory of how to build power. While her website says she wants to put power �back in the hands of workers and unions,� there is no plan for union-building, suggesting she considers it secondary. If you have released a plan for �promoting competitive markets� before a plan for making unionizing easier, your priorities are woefully skewed. At every turn, I see worrying signs that Warren isn�t thinking about how to build a �mass movement.� Bernie�s slogan �not me, us,� and his constant use of �we� language means he understands that political power isn�t about electing a single person president. It comforts me that Bernie�s website says: �This is your movement. No one candidate, not even the greatest candidate you could imagine, is capable of taking on Donald Trump and the billionaire class alone. There is only one way we win � and that is together.� It troubles me that Warren�s does not. These seem subtle differences, and are often just slight changes in emphasis�both candidates talk about mobilization, organizing, etc.�but my feeling is that we would eventually find out they are huge differences in approach. As Matt Huber of Jacobin concluded: � Sanders has spent his lifetime embedded in civil rights, labor, and other mass struggles, Warren is a lawyer-academic and a policy wonk. She would be more likely to seek compromises than side with mass popular demands in the streets.�

This is not trivial. It is not quibbling or nitpicking. It is everything. A central lesson of Obama�s presidency is: You cannot succeed without a movement behind you. The approach of getting the �best and brightest� in a room together and having them make good plans will inevitably fail. We cannot elect the best policy wonk. We have to elect the best organizer. And once we accept this as a crucial criterion for selecting a candidate, Sanders and Warren start to look very different in ways that could well mean the difference between political success and political failure, even if their policies were identical.

quote:

The New York Times reported that Warren �wooed wealthy donors for years� but stopped for her presidential campaign. She�s only forgoing big money donations for the primary, but not the general election, which suggests that it�s just a temporary ploy to appease the left. Questioned by Chris Hayes about her decision, Warren said she doesn�t believe in �unilateral disarmament� when the Republicans take so much corporate money. But Bernie Sanders understands that there is no alternative: It�s a matter of principle, non-negotiable. You need to win the election by mobilizing people, and working as hard as you can to collect small donations. It�s actually good to �tie your hands� this way, because it means that there is no alternative but to build huge popular support�money from rich people is cheating, and if you cheat this way, it will bite you in the rear end when you get into office and have failed to build a giant network of supporters.

I don�t like to say that I can�t trust Elizabeth Warren, but I can�t. I can even see her appointing Pete Buttigieg or Kamala Harris as her VP instead of Bernie Sanders. She has done so many things that make me suspect she won�t follow through on her radical rhetoric, or will shift to the center in a general election, or won�t be willing to fight as hard as necessary. Look at that moment in the State of the Union where Donald Trump promised that America would �never be a socialist country.� Warren stood up and applauded, as Bernie sat and fumed. This was a very clear �Which side are you on?� moment. She was asked whether she was with Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump, and she said Trump.

quote:

In order to assess candidates, it�s better to look at their records than their rhetoric. This is one reason I trust Bernie Sanders so much: He�s been saying the same thing since he was 18 years old, when he was getting dragged away by police for participating in civil rights protests. For decade after decade, he has championed his vision of democratic socialism, condemning cuts to the welfare state, sticking up for LGBT people, and loudly demanding justice. It�s because he�s spent a lifetime doing this that I feel I can be somewhat confident in him.

Elizabeth Warren does not have this kind of record of activism. She spent decades at Harvard Law School, which should be viewed with the same skepticism that we should view someone who spent decades working for Chevron. Harvard Law is the training ground of the American ruling class. Warren could have chosen any place to work, she chose to train corporate lawyers. She was also a Republican until her mid-40s (a �diehard conservative� in her early years, according to a friend). I think this matters quite a bit, because it means that during the Reagan years, she was a member of a racist organization. Certainly, people evolve, and I believe strongly in forgiveness. But we would be dubious of the newfound progressivism of a longtime corporate lawyer who had spent many years in a Confederate sympathy society, and we should be equally dubious of a former Republican from Harvard Law School. It shows a lack of commitment to justice for many, many years. That negative presumption can be overcome, of course. But the burden of proof is heavy. I would want to make sure the candidate didn�t give any signs of wavering, any suggestion that they would fail to fight hard for a left agenda.

Unfortunately, there are warning signs. Conventional wisdom is that Elizabeth Warren�s plans and Bernie Sanders� plans are pretty similar, but the seemingly small differences matter in very big ways. So, for example: The first five sections on Bernie�s �issues� page are Medicare For All, the Green New Deal, College For All, Workplace Democracy, and Housing For All. I�ve already mentioned that there�s a huge difference between Bernie�s union-building Workplace Democracy plan and Warren�s plan. But the differences don�t stop there. On Medicare For All, Warren has been evasive about what it would actually mean, and details are noticeably lacking on her plan-packed website. As Abdul El-Sayed has written for this magazine, we should be wary of any Democrat who won�t be specific about Medicare For All, because the insurance industry is going to want to water it down and not implement a full single-payer system. Dylan Matthews of Vox, who has examined Warren�s healthcare plans, has suggested that Warren is �not serious about single-payer.� This is a giant difference. (Also: I realize this might not persuade many people, but to me it�s an important piece of evidence. Warren�s daughter, with whom she collaborated on The Two-Income Trap and an unfinished novel about Harvard Law School, is a former health industry executive and McKinsey management consultant. There is a hesitation to hold people accountable for the deeds of their family members�any child can turn out to be an Alex P. Keaton�but I think Warren moves in a world where it is not considered shameful to be an insurance executive or McKinsey consultant, and I worry that nobody from such a world will ever have the guts necessary to fight the insurance industry to the death. I would bet a considerable amount of money that Warren will never make a real effort to abolish the industry that her daughter and co-author is so closely tied to.)

There are serious differences, too, with the college plans. Bernie Sanders has promised to cancel all outstanding student debt. Elizabeth Warren says that �my plan would provide at least some debt cancellation for 95% of people with student loan debt (and complete and total student debt cancellation for more than 75%).� She explains further:

It cancels $50,000 in student loan debt for every person with household income under $100,000. It provides substantial debt cancellation for every person with household income between $100,000 and $250,000. The $50,000 cancellation amount phases out by $1 for every $3 in income above $100,000, so, for example, a person with household income of $130,000 gets $40,000 in cancellation, while a person with household income of $160,000 gets $30,000 in cancellation.

Now, reading this, it becomes clear that at least for me, there is a giant difference between Warren and Sanders. I have $140,000 in student debt. Sanders promises to wipe all of it away. Warren promises to get rid of $50,000. So the difference between the two candidates is about $90,000!

But we can also see here why leftists think Warren is excessively �wonkish.� Here�s how Meagan Day explained it in Jacobin:

� A socialist pursues decommodification through universal social programs that enshrine new social rights for all, which is why Sanders has proposed to eliminate every last penny of existing student debt. A capitalist of the liberal or progressive variety is seduced by means-testing, which is why Warren needlessly introduced eligibility requirements and caps into her student-debt forgiveness program.�

�Means-testing� is a critical part of the difference between the two, because in it we see the serious differences between what Sanders and Warren each think the world ought to be like. Sanders believes in a �de-commodified� provision of public goods, where they�re free and you get to use them because you�re a person. Warren believes much more strongly in giving them only to people who satisfy a set of eligibility criteria. Now, defenders of means-testing will argue that it is �progressive��this is why they say things like �you don�t want to give free college to Donald Trump�s kids.� But you should give free college to them, for the same reason that we give Donald Trump�s kids the same access to free public high schools and free roads and free fire services and free libraries and free parks. They are people, so they get given the basics the same as anyone else. Means-testing introduces a dark new quality to public benefits: You have to qualify, meaning that there will be paperwork, and there will be scrutiny of your finances, and you can�t just have the thing, you have to go through a bureaucratic process. We on the left are fighting for a world in which people do not have to prove that they are poor enough to get to go to the public high school or the public college. They just get to go.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/09/the-prospect-of-an-elizabeth-warren-nomination-should-be-very-worrying

quote:

What will the right�s main line of attack against Warren be? I think you can see it already, actually: They will attempt to portray her as inauthentic and untrustworthy. She will be painted as a Harvard egghead who has suddenly discovered populism for self-serving reasons, a slippery elite who isn�t telling you the truth about her agenda.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/10/why-criticize-warren/

Elizabeth Warren will not pass M4All

quote:

But less than a month after releasing a half-baked plan to finance single-payer, the Massachusetts Democrat released yet another plan�an implementation timeline that calls for passing full-fledged Medicare for All in year three of her presidency.

That is not a plan to pass Medicare for All; it is an acknowledgment that it will never happen.

Modern presidents tend to have precious little time to pass big-ticket legislation�typically just a year or two after coming into office. After that, they face midterm elections, which tend to reduce the number of congressional seats a new president's party controls, and then the long, slow slog of a re-election campaign, during which point the legislative process slows to a halt. Major bills, like Obamacare or the GOP's 2017 tax law, tend to happen at the beginning of the timeline, or not at all.

Medicare for All, as envisioned by Elizabeth Warren and her rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I�Vt.), is the biggest of big-ticket legislation. It's a $20 trillion plan under Warren's laughably generous assumptions and, more realistically, a $30 or $40 trillion overhaul of both American health care and government, which under Medicare for All would become essentially the same thing. The political challenges alone would make it exceptionally difficult to pass in year one of a presidency, even with both chambers of Congress controlled by a Democrat. It is all but impossible to imagine it passing in year three of a Warren presidency.

Tellingly, Warren would use her first year to pass a public option that offers tax-funded health care to children and lower-income households, while allowing others to buy into the system. She argues that under Senate rules, it could be passed with a simple majority, avoiding the complications of the filibuster.

This is much closer to the comparatively moderate plans offered by Warren's centrist-lane rivals, former Vice President Joe Biden and South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg�plans Warren has derided as being compromised, the sort of ideas that could only be proposed by a weak politician afraid of big structural change. Now Warren is proposing her very own compromise.

In theory, this is a form of savvy political hair-splitting that allows her to solve a problem that has bedeviled Democratic candidates all year long: Progressives, especially Sanders supporters Warren believes she needs to win the nomination, demand a candidate who backs Medicare for All, but many moderate Democrats are wary, and single-payer could prove disastrous in the general election. Warren is trying to split the difference by supporting a starter plan that could pass without 60 votes in the Senate while still nominally paving the way for Medicare for All to follow.

In practice, however, it signals to committed progressives that she's not serious about single-payer, and that she won't make it a priority. Sanders has already taken note, warning that "some people say we should delay that fight [for Medicare for All] for a few more years," and pledging to introduce a Medicare for All bill during week one of his presidency.

https://reason.com/2019/11/19/elizabeth-warren-gives-up-on-medicare-for-all/

quote:

Now, Warren is trying a different tack: admitting that she isn�t really going to pass single payer after all. Not any time early in her presidency, at least. And maybe not ever.

That isn�t quite how Warren is framing things, of course. But I think it�s the fairest reading of the first-term plan for �transitioning� to Medicare for All that her campaign released on Friday. The candidate promises that within her first 100 days as president, she�ll use the executive branch�s regulatory powers to start bringing down health costs, push for fast-track legislation to build on the Affordable Care Act, make traditional Medicare available to everyone over the age of 50, and create a very generous public insurance option with modest premiums that Americans will be able to purchase on Obamacare�s exchanges, which she is branding as the �Medicare for All option.�

https://slate.com/business/2019/11/elizabeth-warren-health-care-transition-medicare-for-all.html

Elizabeth is not a progressive on foreign policy

quote:

But by the time she spoke on the podcast Pod Save America on February 21, she had changed her tune on sanctions. �I support economic sanctions but now we�re gonna start, we�ve got to turn the dial some here we have to offer humanitarian help at the same time.�

According to a study by economists Mark Weisbrot and Jeffrey Sachs for the Center for Economic and Policy Research, sanctions are estimated to have killed forty thousand people from 2017 to 2018. These sanctions, they write, would �fit the definition of collective punishment of the civilian population as described in both the Geneva and Hague international conventions.�

Perhaps more importantly, Warren has so far declined to co-sponsor SJ Res. 11, known as the �Prohibiting Unauthorized Military Action in Venezuela Resolution of 2019.� [Update: Following publication of this article, Warren signed on as a cosponsor of S.J.Res.11.] This bill would ban �department or agency funding from being used to introduce armed forces into hostilities with Venezuela, except pursuant to a specific statutory authorization by Congress enacted after this joint resolution.� In contrast to Warren, fellow presidential contender Sen. Bernie Sanders (I�VT) is cosponsoring the resolution. And like Warren, Sens Cory Booker (D�NJ), Kirsten Gillibrand (D�NY) and Kamala Harris (D�CA) are not cosponsoring.

quote:

In a June 2018 statement about the United States-North Korea summit, Warren said, �Yesterday�s photo op doesn�t change the fact that a nuclear-armed North Korea is a threat to the security of the United States, our allies, and the world. Generations of North Korean leaders have made and broken promises before � this Administration�s success will be judged on whether it can eliminate Kim�s nuclear weapons and verify they are gone.�

And in March 2018, Warren indicated that Trump � a president who has casually threatened �to totally destroy North Korea,� should be more aggressive: �I�m very worried that Donald Trump will go into these negotiations and Kim Jong-un will simply take advantage of him.�

Comments like these were a blow to Korean peace movements, which have long argued that, to make the world safer, it is necessary to embrace peace talks to end the Korean war. Christine Ahn, a South Korea-born, Hawai�i-based peace activist has been organizing to end the Korean war under the administrations of Trump, Barack Obama and George W. Bush, told me in June 2018 that liberal fear-mongering about the North was incredibly unhelpful.

quote:

In the midst of Israel�s brutal 2014 �Operation Protective Edge� war on Gaza, that killed more than 2,100 Palestinians and horrified the world with the slaughter of four Palestinian children playing on the beach, Warren repeated Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu�s talking points to defend Israel�s bombing of schools.

�When Hamas puts its rocket launchers next to hospitals, next to schools, they�re using their civilian population to protect their military assets,� she said at a town hall meeting on August 20, 2014. �And I believe Israel has a right, at that point, to defend itself.�

She went on to defend $225 million in emergency funds granted by the US for Israel�s �Iron Dome� project.

�I think the vote was right, and I�ll tell you why I think the vote was right,� she said. �America has a very special relationship with Israel. Israel lives in a very dangerous part of the world, and a part of the world where there aren�t many liberal democracies and democracies that are controlled by the rule of law. And we very much need an ally in that part of the world.�

She has also been close to AIPAC, a powerful right-wing pro-Israel lobbying outfit. As Nathan Guttman pointed out in his 2016 Forward piece about how Warren is a �surprising Israel hawk,� Warren �has attended the annual dinners hosted by the AIPAC Boston chapter and counts among her supporters some mainstream pro-Israel backers, including Steve Grossman, a former Massachusetts treasurer who was also president of AIPAC.�

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

Elizabeth Warren's Racism Problem

https://twitter.com/AmyEGardner/sta...ican-indian-dna

quote:

Among the many unfortunate results of Warren�s recent DNA test suggesting she�s somewhere between 1/64th and 1/1,024th Native American by ethnicity: It inevitably draws attention to her contribution to the �80s cookbook, �Pow Wow Chow: A Collection of Recipes from Families of the Five Civilized Tribes.� Under �Elizabeth Warren, Cherokee,� it lists five recipes, three of which were apparently cribbed from the New York Times and Better Homes and Gardens.

Worse, one of the recipes she submitted: �Crab with Tomato Mayonnaise Dressing.� A traditional Cherokee dish with mayonnaise, a 19th-century condiment imported by settlers? A crab dish from landlocked Oklahoma? This can mean only one thing: canned crab.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/join-my-tribe-elizabeth-warren/2018/10/16/3fb0867e-d181-11e8-b2d2-f397227b43f0_story.html

quote:

I do not fault Warren for believing what she was told as a child. But in 2019, Warren isn�t a kid anymore. She is a United States senator running for president. If she is not in a position that demands accountability and truth, who is?

The center of this controversy is not Warren�s political career, it is Cherokee sovereignty and self-determination. The monster I am trying to wrestle to the ground is not one white woman who claimed to be Cherokee. It is the hundreds of thousands of white people claiming to be Cherokee and the broad social acceptance that emboldens them. It threatens the future of my tribe. Warren is just the most public example.

When white people took over our land, they outnumbered us. Today, Cherokees are once again outnumbered by outsiders, claiming not our land, but our identity. In the last U.S. census, there were more white people claiming to be Cherokee than there are Cherokee citizens enrolled in our tribes. These fakes are writing our history, selling our art, representing us to the United Nations, fighting for the same legal status as our tribe, and stealing millions of dollars from federal programs set aside for people of color. And they all have stories that sound just like Warren�s.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/eliz...A6bmDxhkZDapQ1_

quote:

She was not a hero to me when she failed to foster a haven of support for Native students within Harvard University�s alienating Ivy League culture. She is not a hero for spending years awkwardly avoiding Native leaders. She is not a hero because, despite claiming to be the only Native woman in the U.S. Senate, she has done nothing to advance our rights.

She is not from us. She does not represent us. She is not Cherokee.

quote:

In defending her supposed Native identity, Warren has drawn from both racist stereotypes and easily refutable stories about her family. At a 2012 press conference Warren stated that her family knew her grandfather was �part� Cherokee because �he had high cheekbones like all of the Indians.� Cherokee genealogists have pored through her family history to find that �None of her direct line ancestors are ever shown to be anything other than white, dating back to long before the Trail of Tears.� To add insult to injury, despite Warren�s public claims of Native American heritage, she has decidedly avoided talking with Native leaders and, in 2012, refused to meet with a group of Cherokee women at the Democratic National Convention.

quote:

As Cherokee Nation citizen and community activist David Cornsilk told me, �We don�t get to celebrate her, because we don�t know her. She is not related to us, she does not live in our community. She is not our conduit to the Senate. We are not celebrating her in the Tribal newspaper. Elizabeth Warren is nothing to us, so we have no inroad to that powerful operation that affects our daily lives.�

Warren�s misrepresentation of her heritage has major consequences for Native Americans, who have little visibility not only in politics, but in American culture at large. Warren�s claims of Cherokee identity make her the only representation of Cherokees that the average American will likely ever see. I challenge non-Native readers to name another Cherokee leader in elected office. Or any Native American holding elected office in the United States. Or a contemporary Native American author. A Native American movie star. A Native American athlete. Or any famous Native people who are alive today. What is beyond maddening is that, as Native people, we are relegated to being invisible, while Warren is not.

As a mixed Native woman, I have to relive the racist stereotypes Warren spits out to defend her alleged Native identity everyday. People constantly ask me, what part Cherokee are you? Who in your family was Cherokee? That�s so nice that you embrace your Native heritage.

I am not part Cherokee. There is not one member of my family who was Cherokee. I am Cherokee. I am an enrolled citizen of Cherokee Nation and a member of my home and urban Indian communities. We are living, real, and whole people; not fractions of Indians who used to be real.

https://thinkprogress.org/elizabeth-warren-is-not-cherokee-c1ec6c91b696/

https://mobile.twitter.com/pollysgd...genumber%3D1212

Warren will get demolished by Trump

https://mobile.twitter.com/thedaily...60%2Fframe.html

https://mobile.twitter.com/tomselli...-a-terrorist%2F

Shageletic has issued a correction as of 14:04 on Jan 27, 2020

# ? Jan 17, 2020 15:11

Seriously 2.0: May 14, 2009; by Cyrano4747

Good thread OP, Pete is a rich bitch succ republican, and laying out clearly why he's bad is a public good.

Your second post got lots of potential candidates, should have saved at least 7 posts for the other dingdongs (hint: if they ain't named Bernie Sanders then they are scum).

# ? Jan 17, 2020 15:16

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Seriously 2.0 posted:

Good thread OP, Pete is a rich bitch succ republican, and laying out clearly why he's bad is a public good.

Your second post got lots of potential candidates, should have saved at least 7 posts for the other dingdongs (hint: if they ain't named Bernie Sanders then they are scum).

Thx. Actually dont know how long posts could be was planning to jam all of the other succ candidates in the OP but saved a second post if I hit a word length limit or something

# ? Jan 17, 2020 15:41

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Joe Biden

Joe Biden's Racism Problem

https://mobile.twitter.com/mayavada/status/1217017556805898240

https://mobile.twitter.com/ZaidJilani/status/1113835842215337989

https://mobile.twitter.com/ZaidJilani/status/1113464366081413120

https://mobile.twitter.com/aidachav...genumber%3D1539

HOLY gently caress

https://twitter.com/KindAndUnblind/...genumber%3D1256

Joe Biden will cut your Social Security and Medicare

https://twitter.com/WalkerBragman/s...ial-security%2F

https://twitter.com/_ericblanc/status/1218681841667805185

https://twitter.com/DanRiffle/status/1217534162929881089

https://mobile.twitter.com/davidsir...r%3D1265%23pti1

https://mobile.twitter.com/ibrahimp...r%3D1254%23pti1

quote:

More recently, there is Biden�s appearance in 2018 at the Brookings Institution, when the former vice president made a muddled statement that seemed to embrace means-testing Social Security. �I don�t know a whole lot of people in the top one-tenth of one percent, or the top one percent who are relying on Social Security when they retire,� he said, before going on to discuss his own tax plans, adding that it (and Medicare) �still needs adjustments.�

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/01/14/sanders-is-right-biden-is-vulnerable-trump-social-security/

quote:

Placed in context, however, Biden�s record on Social Security is far worse than one offhand remark. Indeed, Biden has been advocating for cuts to Social Security for roughly 40 years.

And after a Republican wave swept Congress in 1994, Biden�s support for cutting Social Security, and his general advocacy for budget austerity, made him a leading combatant in the centrist-wing battle against the party�s retreating liberals in the 1980s and �90s.

�When I argued that we should freeze federal spending, I meant Social Security as well,� he told the Senate in 1995. �I meant Medicare and Medicaid. I meant veterans� benefits. I meant every single solitary thing in the government. And I not only tried it once, I tried it twice, I tried it a third time, and I tried it a fourth time.� (A freeze would have reduced the amount that would be paid out, cutting the program�s benefit.)

�The truth is the last election did one thing,� Biden continued. �I do not know whether it really made you guys a majority party for long. I do not know. We will find out. I know one thing it did. What it did was it made sure that there was nobody left on the left in my party who, in fact, said we do not care about moving the budget toward balance.�

quote:

BIDEN�S FIXATION on cutting Social Security dates back to the Reagan era. One of Ronald Reagan�s first major moves as president was to implement a mammoth tax cut, tilted toward the wealthy, and to increase defense spending. Biden, a Delaware senator at the time, supported both moves. The heightened spending and reduced revenue focused public attention on the debt and deficit, giving fuel to a push for a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.

In the midst of that debate, Biden teamed up with Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley to call for a freeze on federal spending, and insisted on including Social Security in that freeze, even as the Reagan administration fought to protect the program from cuts. It was part of the Democratic approach at the time not just to match Republicans, but to get to their right at times as well, as Biden also did on criminal justice policy.

Biden teamed up with Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley to call for a freeze on federal spending, and insisted on including Social Security in that freeze.

�So, when those of my friends in the Democratic and Republican Party say to me, �How do you expect me to vote for your proposal? Does it not freeze Social Security COLAs for one year? Are we not saying there will be no cost-of-living increases for one year?� The answer to that is �Yes, that is what I am saying,�� Biden said in a Senate floor speech in April 1984, referring to the adjustment that millions of seniors look for every year.

quote:

Biden voted for the balanced budget amendment anyway, even after his multiple warnings that it would undercut Social Security.

It was, in fact, the argument over Social Security that torpedoed the balanced budget amendment by a single vote on the Senate floor, after it had already passed the House. �After days of persuasion, the Republicans supporting the amendment were unable to attract the one last vote they needed for a two-thirds majority, resulting in a victory for Democrats, who raised doubts in the final hours about whether the Social Security trust fund would be safe if the measure became law,� the New York Times reported in March 1995. Biden�s inability to bring along one additional Democratic colleague had saved the program, and saved the Constitution from being amended with a draconian fiscal constraint mechanism.

quote:

As vice president, Biden was involved in multiple administration attempts to cut Social Security as part of a �grand bargain� with Republicans, all of them blocked by tea party Republicans, who couldn�t agree to any tax increases. In 2014, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said at a conservative event that Biden had privately told him he was supporting of raising the retirement age and means-testing Social Security benefits. �I asked the vice president, don�t we have to raise the age? Wouldn�t means-testing and raising the age solve the problem?� Paul recounted, with Sens. Ted Cruz and Mike Lee on stage, adding that Biden said, �Yes in private, but will not say it in public.� Paul hadn�t been paying close enough attention.

A few years later, at a Brookings Institution event in April 2018, Biden addressed Social Security again. �Paul Ryan was correct when he did the tax code. What�s the first thing he decided we had to go after? Social Security and Medicare. Now, we need to do something about Social Security and Medicare,� Biden said, then added in a whisper: �That�s the only way you can find room to pay for it.�

Joe Biden in 2018

https://twitter.com/organizingpower/status/1210789801709862912

looooooool

https://mobile.twitter.com/Organizi...genumber%3D1284

https://mobile.twitter.com/OrganizingPower/status/1219127247619153921

Joe Biden is Really loving Weird, Mack

https://mobile.twitter.com/VicBerge...genumber%3D1430

https://mobile.twitter.com/WinkleBerns/status/1222700460340940801

Shageletic has issued a correction as of 22:47 on Feb 1, 2020

# ? Jan 17, 2020 17:50

DACK FAYDEN: Feb 25, 2013; Bear Witness

don't forget mayo pete's connection to the Canadian bread price fixing scandal:
https://nationalpost.com/news/how-m...ocratic-primary

etc

# ? Jan 17, 2020 17:54

Koishi Komeiji: Mar 30, 2003

Not sure if this is the right place to post this but biden just gave an interview with the new york times and it was really cool and good:

https://twitter.com/ashleyfeinberg/status/1218183029874667521

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/01/17/opinion/joe-biden-nytimes-interview.html

# ? Jan 17, 2020 18:06

got any sevens: Feb 9, 2013; by Cyrano4747

why doesnt pete just join repubs already and take off his mask

# ? Jan 17, 2020 18:25

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Amy Kloubacher

Amy Kloubacher's Racism Problem

quote:

Politics
As a prosecutor in heavily white Minnesota, Amy Klobuchar declined to go after police involved in fatal encounters with black men

https://mobile.twitter.com/AP/statu...genumber%3D2004

https://mobile.twitter.com/thehill/...genumber%3D1622

Shageletic has issued a correction as of 16:09 on Jan 30, 2020

# ? Jan 17, 2020 18:55

Koishi Komeiji: Mar 30, 2003

This article from buzzfeed about pete's 0% support from black people is really good

https://twitter.com/jakebackpack/status/1218554043288768515

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/mollyhensleyclancy/pete-buttigieg-black-voters-iowa-democratic-primary

There's some really good stuff in there:

quote:

No matter what, the subject of Buttigieg and black voters almost always made Iowans uneasy. They said they thought race shouldn�t matter � then corrected themselves to add that they knew it often did.

quote:

Eventually, the police escorted several protesters out of the hall, their shouts of �Black Lives Matter� mingling with supporters� chants of �Boot Edge Edge� � the phonetic rallying cry for Buttigieg�s campaign.

# ? Jan 18, 2020 19:44

Fleetwood: Mar 26, 2010; biggest hochul head in china

a copypaste something I posted earlier in the Succ Zone:

Fleetwood posted:

I don't think this has been posted in the succ, but here's a recent article from Max Blumenthal about the dude Pete went to Somaliland with in 2008:

https://consortiumnews.com/2019/12/19/the-insider-national-security-mandarins-groomed-pete-buttigieg-managed-his-future/

quote:
Imperial Social Network

Nathaniel Myers� relationship with the presidential hopeful began at Harvard University. There, they formed two parts of �The Order of Kong,� a close-knit group of political junkies named jokingly for the Chinese restaurant they frequented after intensive discussion sessions at the school�s Institute of Politics.

Like most members of the college-era �order,� Myers and Buttigieg have remained close. When the mayor married his longtime partner in 2018, Buttigieg chose him as his best man.

Myers currently works as a senior advisor for the United States Agency for International Development�s Office of Transition Initiatives (USAID-OTI) in Washington, D.C. The OTI is a specialized division of USAID that routinely works through contractors and local proxies to orchestrate destabilization operations inside countries considered insufficiently compliant to the dictates of Washington.

Wherever the U.S. seeks regime change, it seems that USAID�s OTI is involved.

In a 2015 op-ed arguing for a loosening of bureaucratic restraints on USAID�s participation in counter-terror operations, Myers revealed that he had �specialized in programming in places like Yemen and Libya� � two conflict zones destabilized by U.S.-led regime-change wars. (Myers was working as a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations at the time, but would return to USAID�s OTI the following year.)

USAID�s OTI has also fueled Syria�s brutal proxy war, coordinating U.S. government assistance to supposed civil society groups like the White Helmets that were attached to the armed extremists who ruled over portions of the country for several years.

In Venezuela, the OTI has spent tens of millions of dollars cultivating and training opponents of the late President Hugo Chavez and his successor, Nicolas Maduro. It has done the same in Nicaragua, serving as the linchpin of a U.S. effort to �lay the groundwork for insurrection.�

In Cuba, meanwhile, the OTI attempted to stir up civil unrest through a fake, Twitter-style social media site called ZunZuneo, hoping to turn the public against the country�s leftist government through coordinated flash mobs. To populate the phony social media platform, the OTI contracted a D.C.-based firm called Creative Associates that had illicitly obtained half a million Cuban cellphone numbers.

USAID and Creative Associates attempted to place ZunZuneo into private hands through a Miami foundation called Roots of Hope, which was founded by students at Harvard University. Twitter founder Jack Dorsey was even solicited by the State Department to operate the platform. (Roots of Hope board member Raul Moas, who personally trained ZunZuneo employees, is today the director of the Knight Foundation.)

The devious operation and its eventual exposure revealed the extent to which covert operations historically associated with the CIA had been outsourced to private contractors and NGOs.

And the role of the Harvard-founded �Roots of Hope� in the scheme demonstrated how much USAID and its contractors depended on the same Ivy League talent pool that produced Buttigieg and Myers.

A lengthy paper Myers authored for the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in 2015 indicated that he had special knowledge of the ZunZuneo scheme and had been invested in its success.

Myers took the journalists who exposed the USAID-OTI program to task, claiming that �individual grants were pulled out of context and described as failures without heed to their actual goals,� provoking an unfair �Capitol Hill pillorying.�

article goes on to lament the grad school-to-NGO-to-consultant-and beyond neoliberal pipeline leveraged by the State Dept and CIA

Pete's solution to our endless wars is to destabilize foreign countries that US corporations want to invest in through the NGO/State Dept/CIA pipeline by getting them to fight amongst themselves

edit: my gut reaction is that this guy would probly be a Chief of Staff in a Butt admin

# ? Jan 18, 2020 20:36

But Rocks Hurt Head: Jun 30, 2003; by Hand Knit; Pillbug

good and useful thread imo

# ? Jan 18, 2020 20:40

Succbot Circlejerk: Jan 8, 2020; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

Biden advocates for SS cuts... while being outrageously racist

https://twitter.com/KindAndUnblind/status/1218759684020219904

# ? Jan 19, 2020 17:07

138: Oct 28, 2003

Koishi Komeiji posted:

This article from buzzfeed about pete's 0% support from black people is really good

https://twitter.com/jakebackpack/status/1218554043288768515

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/mollyhensleyclancy/pete-buttigieg-black-voters-iowa-democratic-primary

There's some really good stuff in there:

hahaha, holy poo poo

# ? Jan 19, 2020 17:58

pospysyl: Nov 10, 2012

Here's an effort post about why the Klobuchar electability argument is bunk. If you somehow come across a Klobuchar truther in the wild, I think this would be a good argument against them.

The most important and under-reported argument against Klobuchar�s electability is the lack of a null hypothesis. �Wonks� like Nate Silver and Chris Hayes should be familiar with this empirical concept. Their entire electability argument rests on the fact that Klobuchar won in red counties in Minnesota, but a proper test would first assume that any well known Democratic candidate could have won those counties just as well. Klobuchar winning in those counties is not sufficient to prove that she is a superior candidate to any other candidate in the primaries.

To illustrate this, we can consider a thought experiment. Imagine if Bernie, Biden, or any of the other primary candidates were to move to Minnesota and run in the same exact race that Klobuchar did. That would be a satisfactory way to determine whether Klobuchar�s electioneering skills were superior to any other candidate�s. As it happens, the only major candidate we can conceivably compare Klobuchar to is Buttigieg. As Klobuchar pointed out in the debate, Buttigieg ran for statewide office in red Indiana and lost to the [url=�https://fox59.com/2014/08/29/state-treasurer-richard-mourdock-submits-resignation-to-gov-pence/%94]lunatic Richard Mourdock.[/url] We can therefore conclude that Klobuchar is a more viable candidate than Buttigieg, but the evidence simply isn�t there to compare her to any other candidate. To argue that Klobuchar is uniquely electable would be the same as rolling a die twice, seeing a 6 both times, and concluding that it was a loaded die.

To return to our thought experiment, there is good reason to think that Sanders could not win a Senate election in Minnesota. Sanders is popular in Vermont for being a mayor of one of the state�s largest towns and a respected representative in the House for years. Those qualities wouldn�t serve him as well in a different state. Likewise, Klobuchar was a known progressive advocate in Minnesota for years before her first Senate campaign, and Bernie wouldn�t be able to capitalize off of a similar history. This goes to my next point: winning an election in Minnesota doesn�t necessarily translate to winning similar victories elsewhere. Klobuchar won in Minnesota in large part because of her known political history within the state, and those qualities won�t necessarily earn her support anywhere else. When primary polls suggest that she won�t win in the swing state of New Hampshire, that evidence is just as indicative of her inability to win in swing states as winning in Minnesota.

My larger point here is that it�s hard to definitively say that prior performance in smaller elections will guarantee results in one of national scale. We rightfully scoff at Buttigieg running for president when he has only ever won an election with 10,000 votes, but the scale of winning an election in Minnesota against winning an election in all fifty states is only slightly less daunting. I have no doubt that presidential candidate Klobuchar would win the state of Minnesota with ease, but the idea that she would be uniquely qualified to win every other swing state is a gross exaggeration.

# ? Jan 19, 2020 20:26

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Thx for the Klobucher breakdown! Its hella useful.

# ? Jan 20, 2020 05:09

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

If you want to have enough people to beat Trump, you have to vote for Bernie Sanders

https://mobile.twitter.com/MattBrue...genumber%3D1427

https://process.filestackapi.com/AG...DMvQYS8CmWNQIDQ

https://mobile.twitter.com/Christia...genumber%3D1433

https://twitter.com/BernForBernie20...genumber%3D1494

https://mobile.twitter.com/BernieSa...60%2Fframe.html

https://mobile.twitter.com/JoshGacita/status/1222365474215931904

https://twitter.com/_brohan_/status/1225153979434328064

Shageletic has issued a correction as of 22:43 on Feb 5, 2020

# ? Jan 24, 2020 14:33

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Shageletic has issued a correction as of 16:05 on Jan 30, 2020

# ? Jan 26, 2020 19:39

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Bernie Sanders will demolish Trump in the debates

https://mobile.twitter.com/majorityfm/status/1151423568770752512?lang=en

# ? Jan 27, 2020 14:21

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Bernie Sanders is the only politician leading a multi racial, working class movement that can change this country

https://mobile.twitter.com/Twinklin...genumber%3D1656

https://mobile.twitter.com/JordanUh...genumber%3D1158

https://mobile.twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/1220519083143241729

https://mobile.twitter.com/abibabibubu/status/1151772726110982144

https://i.imgur.com/gBhjRlF.mp4

Shageletic has issued a correction as of 22:32 on Feb 1, 2020

# ? Jan 27, 2020 14:26

Anne Frank Funk: Nov 4, 2008

Shageletic posted:

Bernie Sanders will demolish Trump in the debates

https://mobile.twitter.com/majorityfm/status/1151423568770752512?lang=en

this is an extremely pro click

# ? Jan 27, 2020 15:14

Koishi Komeiji: Mar 30, 2003

I don't think klobuchar is much of a threat at this point but she hasn't dropped out yet (I had to go check) and this horrible story about her is making the rounds:

https://twitter.com/VoiceofCal/status/1222702600073682946
I guess she's the candidate for people that liked all of kamela harris's evil cop poo poo but found her to be too "ethnic"

# ? Jan 30, 2020 17:09

The Archaic: Jul 6, 2003; Are you a consultant archaeologist in North America?

Unionize today!

PM me and ask me how your future can be history!

Koishi Komeiji posted:

I don't think klobuchar is much of a threat at this point but she hasn't dropped out yet (I had to go check) and this horrible story about her is making the rounds:

https://twitter.com/VoiceofCal/status/1222702600073682946
I guess she's the candidate for people that liked all of kamela harris's evil cop poo poo but found her to be too "ethnic"

Did Trump call her snowoman because she's loving ice cold hearted or what?

".....YOUR hair in a blizzard!" :smug:

# ? Jan 30, 2020 17:22

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Koishi Komeiji posted:

I don't think klobuchar is much of a threat at this point but she hasn't dropped out yet (I had to go check) and this horrible story about her is making the rounds:

https://twitter.com/VoiceofCal/status/1222702600073682946
I guess she's the candidate for people that liked all of kamela harris's evil cop poo poo but found her to be too "ethnic"

jeSUS

# ? Jan 30, 2020 18:31

got any sevens: Feb 9, 2013; by Cyrano4747

*sees a black kid*

KLOBBERIN TIME

# ? Jan 30, 2020 18:40

got any sevens: Feb 9, 2013; by Cyrano4747

https://twitter.com/TheOnion/status/1222561456866103297?s=19

# ? Jan 31, 2020 16:57

Koishi Komeiji: Mar 30, 2003

https://twitter.com/TheOnion/status/1222989139739660288

# ? Jan 31, 2020 17:30

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Sander's is leading a multiracial, working class movement, part 2

https://mobile.twitter.com/Harbpeac...agenumber%3D237

https://mobile.twitter.com/arieljru...agenumber%3D237

https://mobile.twitter.com/JaymalGreen/status/1224513533922226182

# ? Feb 5, 2020 02:15

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Part 3

quote:

The Iowa Democratic Party tried to make the caucuses more inclusive and accessible this year, opening 87 satellite caucus precincts, 11 of which were specifically set up to meet cultural and language needs.

In Des Moines, the obvious place to hold a Latino caucus was the Southside YMCA, where a vast majority of Latinos live. This precinct was an experiment and a special event I wanted to cover. I made it a point to arrive two hours before everything started. Once there, I saw a room full of reporters, ranging from Spanish TV channels like Univision and CNN Espa�ol, to organizations like America�s Voice.

It was amazing to see so many Spanish media together!

About an hour before 7 p.m., caucus participants started to show up. They got in line to check in, and you could feel the excitement Latinos brought with them. Listening to so many people speak Spanish, talking to each other and chanting for their favorite candidate gave me a sense of pride. When campaigns are intentional in pursuing the Latino vote, the community responds with big numbers and enthusiasm.

There were 187 caucus-goers at the satellite caucus, with what appeared to be 171 people supporting Sen. Bernie Sanders. Smaller groups of people supporting former Vice President Joe Biden, former mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Elizabeth Warren also were visible.

I first approached Sara Lunas who has lived in Iowa for the last 25 years. Lunas is not eligible to vote because she is a permanent resident on her way to becoming a U.S. citizen. She was there to take her disabled husband to caucus for Sanders, who has made a considerable push this election cycle to engage Latinos across the country in politics.

They supported the Vermont senator because he talks about helping undocumented immigrants become citizens and his belief in universal health care. She doesn�t like what�s happening at the U.S.-Mexico border � people seeking asylum because of the violence in their home country, only to be rejected and separated from their family members.

This year Lunas saw her friends, neighbors and family getting involved in the caucuses and believed it was in great part to the growing discrimination against Latinos.

Not far from Lunas I chatted with 39-year-old Yesenia Leon, one of three people supporting Biden. She has participated in the caucuses before, but this time her motivation was a growing concern about the way taxes for small businesses have increased.

Her family owns a few restaurants in town, and she shared that under the current administration they are paying higher taxes, which she didn�t think was fair given that some large corporations pay no taxes. Lunas also wanted to vote for a president who would help the Latino community because they live in fear of deportation and harassment. She believed that the former vice president was the only one who could beat President Donald Trump because Biden has government experience, and that made Lunas feel that she could trust him.

�He already knows what to do, and that�s important to me,� she said, noting her second choice was Sen. Sanders.

Karen Yerena, 31, was there as an observer and a Sanders� fan. Yerena�s not a citizen but she feels it�s extremely important to participate in any way possible. She decided that being an observer would give her the chance to see how the process works. She wanted to be there on behalf of all those who live in fear and remain in the shadows as an immigrant in America.

Christian Ucles originally is from Honduras and has lived in America since he was 7 years old.

He has participated in six caucuses, and this time was there in support of Sen. Warren.

�We need a president like her fighting for refugees and against what�s happening at the border,� said Ucles, 37.

One of only four supporters for Warren, Ucles joined the Sanders group because Warren was not viable in the precinct. Although he favored Warren, he recognized that Sanders� campaign had done an excellent job organizing the Latino vote and recruiting volunteers that have worked with Latinos for a long time.

He added that Sanders and Warren were very similar, but he would like to see a woman president. Still, he thinks Sanders will do a good job if elected president.

At the end of the junta de vecinos (caucus) it was obvious that Sanders� hard work paid off; he was the clear winner of the Latino vote at this satellite precinct.

Whether we all support him or not, we must recognize he has motivated and encouraged Latinos to get involved and participate in a process that, not long ago, was totally unknown for many in the community. He has earned the trust and given hope to many constituencies that have been marginalized and discriminated for a long time.

It is also undeniable that Trump�s rhetoric and attacks are a huge motivator behind the rise of Latino participation. We are ready to elevate our voices, mobilize, vote and let candidates and the country know that the Latino vote can no longer be ignored.

https://iowastartingline.com/2020/02/04/how-sanders-outreach-paid-off-in-iowas-first-latino-caucus/

# ? Feb 5, 2020 14:32

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Buttigieg is some racist poo poo (worth reading the entire thread)

https://twitter.com/IBJIYONGI/status/1224851530186014722

https://twitter.com/IBJIYONGI/status/1224852728880386048

# ? Feb 5, 2020 22:28

baw: Nov 5, 2008; RESIDENT: LAISSEZ FAIR-SNEZHNEVSKY INSTITUTE FOR FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY

can someone tell bernie to include nuclear in the gnd, it's annoying when people point out that he's anti nuclear

like tell him that chernobyl was just a movie, unlike idiocracy, which is a documentary

# ? Feb 5, 2020 22:30

Animal-Mother: Feb 14, 2012; RABBIT RABBIT
RABBIT RABBIT

What's that psychological term for when somebody doubles down on an incorrect belief when you prove to them, beyond a shadow of a doubt, with a mountain of facts, that they are wrong? Because it keeps happening with my 2016 Bernie supporting dad who became a Buttigieg guy because he retired and watches cable news all loving day.

# ? Feb 6, 2020 22:18

Koishi Komeiji: Mar 30, 2003

Animal-Mother posted:

What's that psychological term for when somebody doubles down on an incorrect belief when you prove to them, beyond a shadow of a doubt, with a mountain of facts, that they are wrong? Because it keeps happening with my 2016 Bernie supporting dad who became a Buttigieg guy because he retired and watches cable news all loving day.

Cognitive dissonance, every baby boomers most beloved mental fault.

# ? Feb 6, 2020 22:31

Koishi Komeiji: Mar 30, 2003

Here is an article that does a good job of explaining why younger voters don't just dislike pete but absolutely loathe him:

https://twitter.com/WeAreMel/status/1225440763380551682
Good for when his little grinning psycho rat face makes you so angry you can't find your words.

# ? Feb 6, 2020 23:08

Ytlaya: Nov 13, 2005

Shageletic posted:

Buttigieg is some racist poo poo (worth reading the entire thread)

https://twitter.com/IBJIYONGI/status/1224852728880386048

Ah, this reflects the similar article about Warren PoC staffers feeling tokenized - https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/06/elizabeth-warren-campaign-nevada-111595

It's unsurprising that people can pick up on that sort of attitude, and unlike wealthy media figures these folks probably aren't being compensated nearly well enough to deal with that poo poo.

# ? Feb 6, 2020 23:55