1. Given the rules of the Senate, 1 senator has a ton of power. 2. There's a good chance at some point in his term he'll be the 51st or 52nd vote. 3. Cabinet secretaries implement policy, they don't make it. Now, being good at implementing policy is a kind of power, but still....
"This is not your father's Republican party. This is a different outfit” — Joe Biden in 2008“Folks, this is not your father's Republican Party” — Joe Biden in 2012“This is not your father’s Republican Party, by the way. This is a different outfit” — Joe Biden today— Matt Viser (@mviser) May 13, 2019 becoming less enamored by the day....
I'm not saying that a senator does not have power, just that running an entire department, figuring how to enact the policy, that is power. Look at how De Vos is ********ing up education. Look at how Pruitt ********ed up the enviorment (as much as he could). Look at Neilsen and immigration. That is a hell of a lot of power. And what can a single senator do against that?
Nielsen lost her job because she didn’t want to pull a 1934-style raid. Pruitt’s successor is doing exactly what Pruitt did.
https://www.gq.com/story/biden-no-health-care-plan I'll be interested to see if you can remain consistent with that position.
Bennet isn't up until 2022. Cory Gardner is the Colorado Senator who's up in 2020. And frankly, I'm not terribly worried here. Hick is a bit of a no-hoper for President, so I expect that he'll be out early enough to be in the Democratic primary to run against Gardner. Meanwhile, Bennet does his vanity run, sells a few books, and returns to his day job in the Senate once he drops out.
I have been reading this in a lot of places and I agree with Bullock. I think Hager may be the right mix of steak and sizzle to go afternoon Cronnyn better than Beto. I would love to see Sally Yates go for GA Senate (lord please let this happen). You can't make some do what they don't want to do but this race to big up their profile is madness to me. I do hope Dems can recruit that Kentucky shock jock to at least rattle Mitch's cage and take some attention away.
You're confusing me with someone else, because if those were the only two choices I'd probably pick Bernie.
I'm under this misapprehension b/c I recall you were defending Hillary v Bernie back when. And I don't really see much of a difference between the 2 candidates.
This is moronic. I watched the Fox News town halls with a couple of the Dem candidates who accepted. There were no "gotcha" moments designed to make the candidates turn on each other. The questions were pretty much the same questions you'd expect on CNN or MSNBC. The crowd was not stacked with booing Republicans. In fact the candidates were able to bring a lot of their supporters into the live crowd. When will these dimwit politicians understand that making an appearance on a media platform has nothing to do with endorsing that media platform. It's about talking to the viewers directly. You can take your opportunity to criticize Fox News while you're on their station if that's your strategy. Bernie attacked Fox and Bret Baier took it in stride like any professional would. This is just an example of Warren virtue signaling to parts of the ideological base who would actually care if she went on Fox. Any rational person wouldn't care. It's these antics that make it hard for me to take some of these candidates seriously. We need leaders not candidates who pander to the craziest people on the far left.
You are little off bro. The way I understand it, grassroots campaigns have been working to dissuade advertisers from advertising on Fox. It is easy when you consider the hate narrative. By going on them, Dem candidates legitimize Fox and undo the work. So now they can say we don't just hate darkies and think it is OK to pepper spray Browns, we had Buttigieg on too. It makes it hard to get fox to Punish a Pero, if there will be now financial loss to accommodate it.
Based on my experience with Fox News watching in-laws, they don't watch the town halls, but they do watch Cucker Tarlson and Interchangeable Racist Blond Lady's shows so they know who to hate. (Spoiler alert: it's AOC, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib.) Giving their network a veneer of respectability allows them to continue spewing this hate.
I get the gist of it, I just think it's moronic. I watched Dem town halls on Fox and there was no requirement to legitimize the network. If you want to use your 60 minutes bashing the station, you were free to do so. Fox wasn't asking for any legitimacy. This was an opportunity for the candidates to talk directly to the viewers/voters with no Fox editorial filter. What exactly would you want from Fox to make these town halls more fair? In my opinion Fox is conducting themselves as the good faith adults in this situation. Nobody is forcing them to invite Democrats on their network. They could very easily just block all Democrats from appearing on their network, thus insulating their viewers from Democratic ideas. Just another example in how the left cares more about ideological virtue signaling than actually winning the debate.
And now they are running with the Tlaib lie. What next? I think you are being naive about who and what Fox is. However it is in your nature as you pull towards the middle so seeing Dems reaching out to GOP Voters makes you happy. Let's see what happens during the next major FOX infraction
My views have continued to evolve over that time. Trump and the threat he represents have cast my views on a variety of subjects in a much starker light, and that has caused me to re-evaluate the incrementalism vs counter-revolutionary dynamic at the present moment. If Trump is going to take the nation so far in a certain direction, it's going to take a lot of backtracking just to get back to where we were, nevermind where I think we should be aiming for. Thus, Democrats should go for the throat with a much bolder and more aggressive program than incrementalism. I don't know that Bernie is the man for the job, but I sure as heck know Biden isn't. Biden preaches a return to "normalcy", but the Republican Party declared war on normalcy when they nominated Trump. I don't think anyone who's willing to accept normalcy as an end in and of itself at this stage understands the gravity of the situation.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Did Fox lie about Tlaib? She's a big girl, she can handle whatever it is. Fox is a right wing station so their editorial programs are going to attack Democrats ruthlessly. So what? Are we grownups or are we toddlers in need of safe spaces? Grow a pair and go on their network and tell them to their face. Stop pretending that these grandstanding boycotts make Dems look virtuous. It just makes them look weak and scared.
It's not about the town halls being "fair". It's about Fox News intentionally misinforming viewers on their non-town hall shows, which leads to a voting public that is more likely to elect an unqualified con man like Donald Trump. Really, go back and look at how Fox News viewers rate on basic facts, like whether Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, and ask yourself if America is better off with those people voting, or if rational people should not legitimize the organization that wants Americans to be dumb and scared.
I think the risk of legitimization, such as it is, is lesser than the reward of having a platform to speak to the viewers and offer an alternative viewpoint. Democrats aren't going to stop the spread of Fox News by ignoring it and not reaching out.
I have this wacky theory that there's no reaching their viewers - they're not going to vote Democratic under any circumstances, because as soon as the town hall is over, one of their entertainers is going to come on and remind you about how awful Democrats are, and oh my god look over there it's brown people in a caravan. The other part of my wacky theory is that there are a whole bunch of people who don't vote (or can't vote due to voter suppression), but if you can get them to come out and vote, your reward is much greater than going on your opponents' network to get the word out to people who already vote but would never vote for you.