I’m not sure you understand the “scandal” here.. Her getting fired because she was pregnant isn’t what ”looks bad”... Rather, what “looks bad” is that Republicans are saying she is lying about getting fired because she was pregnant. They are pointing at the contract she was offered while she was 5-months pregnant and are saying it is proof that her pregnancy wasn’t an issue. Warren has an explanation for this (she was hiding her pregnancy and they didn’t know she was pregnant), but it fits into a larger narrative the Republicans have built around Warren about her lying about key things in her biography
Right. That line of attack is particularly effective because the Republican candidate has never lied about key things in his biography...or about anything else.
It is effective if the media focuses on it much more than it does on the catalogue of demonstrable lies put forth by the other side. That, plus the willful ignorance of the public at large works wonders for Republicans.
Trump's brand doesn't include telling the truth. In one sense, that gives him an advantage over any Democrat, who will be expected to be (largely) truthful. In another it does not, as evidenced by Trump's poll numbers. Those who care about the truth won't vote for him.
So they don't care. I mean sort of, it's a nice-to-have, but push come to shove the truth just doesn't rate that high on their priority list. As with democracy, the Founding Fathers, and the Constitution. They all fall below winning/getting what they want.
Collins is caught between the proverbial rock and hard place.....Won't miss you lady. A new Public Policy Polling survey in Maine shows Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) has a dismal 35% to 50% approval rating. Collins trails a generic Democrat for reelection 41% to 44%. That represents a big drop for Collins compared to a September poll when she led a generic Democrat by 6 points at 44% to 38%. Also interesting is that 53% of Mainers support impeaching President Trump with 44% opposed. When asked who they would choose if Collins opposed impeachment, she goes from a 3-point deficit against a generic Democratic opponent for reelection to a 7-point deficit at 40% to 47%.
Interesting. I sort of saw them staying out of this. It's a big win for Bernie, who needs a boost badly.
One of them is from Massachusetts, right? The cynical thing would be to endorse Warren and open up her Senate seat.
Glad to see my boy Yang finally mustering the courage to challenge Warren's economic theories, and the fact checkers ruled in his favor. Trade deals are not the primary causes of job displacement : #APFactCheck: Sen. Elizabeth Warren said that the "principal reason" for losing jobs has been bad trade policy. Economists mostly blame those job losses on automation and robots, not trade deals. https://t.co/hd3mdxqLLh— AP Fact Check (@APFactCheck) October 16, 2019 Wealth taxes similar to her plan have been tried in Europe and consistently failed to meet revenue expectations and have been repealed : https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ang-on-whether-wealth-taxes-work/?arc404=true Also, the whole anti trust topic was very enlightening. Yang was able to interject the policy of making data a property right, which would be much more transformative for the average American than what size Facebook is. What I wouldn't give for a long form round table to flush these issues out in more detail. Fantastic performance from Buttigieg too on economics. As a Yang supporter, the more time goes by the more I view Buttigieg as an ally. Also loved Castro coming out in favor of exploring UBI. Overall last night left me feeling a little more proud about being a Democrat. I think this was the best collective performance from these candidates in the 4 debates. Even grandpa Joe got me pumped up a little at the end. And this is the 2nd time I've been impressed with CNN's moderation. Get rid of NBC and ABC and let's just use CNN from here out.
So, word is that the squad will be at the November debate to endorse Bernie. This will be fascinating to see. A lot of progressive women have been coalescing around Warren. But the squad is the de facto face of progressive women in the House. Is there enough oxygen for both these things to coexist peacefully, or is this race about to heat up?
Bernie needs a boost and that will be helpful. Warren was trying to get their endorsement and it is a bit of a blow for her.
Really? I thought the questions weren't great. The one at the end in particular was trash. Climate change, who needs to discuss that? Let's spend 20 minutes talking about Ellen DeGeneres and using John McCain as a predetermined "sane Republican friend" shield.
lol ... yeah that was cringe. I watched with a larger group of people, mostly Warren and Pete supporters, and that question got groans and rolled eyes. When I say they were good, admittedly it's a low bar. NBC was atrocious IMO.
I don't know man. With NBC we were at least talking issues the whole time. A question like that, alongside a major chunk of time spent so everyone can give their soliloquy on why Trump is impeachable, and I feel like meat was left on the bone. That being said, the objections to Warren's wealth tax are interesting. There's enough of Warren's ideas I find suspect that maybe I should give someone like Buttgieg another shot. My thing with Buttgieg is that he's clearly a foreign policy interventionist when I'm so tired of that. American foreign intervention needs exit strategies not entrance strategies.
Better unlearn that Trump talking point ASAP because that's exactly what he's going to campaign on. The more important stat to look at is labor participation rates which are at multi decade lows of around 63%. Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts 59% by the end of next decade. One of the driving forces is the number of retired people increasing, but another driving force is sharp declines in male labor participation which is directly linked to the decline in good manufacturing jobs, which like those fact checkers confirm is primarily linked with automation. This can be seen anecdotally too just by driving through Youngstown, Flint or Gary and much of the Midwest. Without those manufacturing jobs entire regions became decimated. The next best jobs in these communities are working at your local Walmart or Amazon fulfillment center and that's the next sector that is going to get hit the hardest by automation. https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2018/b...falling-us-labor-force-participation-rate.htm The other big issue being hidden by the unemployment rate is underemployment. Today almost 50% of college grads can't get jobs in their fields. A college grad who ends up as a Starbucks barista shows up as employed. Which sucks because we have a record $1.5 trillion in student debt so you can see how this is creating a massive design flaw in our economy. 90% of the new jobs being created today are temporary, contract, part time or gig jobs with no benefits or long term income stability. Anyone who is not addressing this decay in our economics is going to have a hard time relating to the voters out there. Democrats need to get out of the headspace where we allow unemployment, GDP and stock prices to dictate how we feel about the economy.
Well ask Clinton how those endorsements by House and Senate black leadership helped her against Obama. I am sure it will help Sanders, but progressive women will most likely continue to give their support to Warren.
OK fine, those are different issues. We can talk about those. As a side note, none of this is about Trump. He doesn't have any effect on this topic. His contributions, such as they are, are rounding errors.
Buttigieg is problematic. On an intellectual level he's pretty much on point, but on a human empath level sometimes he makes me cringe. Earlier this week he called campaigns that rely on small donors as "pocket change" candidates who can't win. So out of touch. Bernie is fueled by the money of hard working people. It's not enough that Buttigieg undercuts that with his corporate money, but to just casually shit on all those small donors shows a lack of empathy with people who want change.