Cite? As of three hours ago, he had not: https://vtdigger.org/2019/03/12/sanders-team-feeling-good-early-days-still-no-timeline-tax-returns/
(BTW, what were the kudos for?)
That’s weird:
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/bernie-sanders-tax-return-222041
Oh, I see, he only released one, more to come. Well, that’s a start.
You know that’s from 2016, right? And part of the problem, back then when he did that, was that he only released the short form.
WaPo: Bernie Sanders’s false claim that he has released his full federal tax returns
Nor did Geraldine Ferraro. Remember her?
Let me clarify my remark. Of course I would prefer any Democrat over any Republican. Elizabeth Warren is a genuine heroine: my choice of the word “joke” was ill-adivsed. What I meant is that it is a joke to think Warren might win the November 2020 election.
Unfortunately, the voters who will decide the Democratic primaries are very different from the voters who will decide the November election. We may assume that most Democrats motivated enough to participate in a caucus or vote in a primary will turn out to vote against Trump no matter who is nominated. But the election will be decided by a vast swarm of low-information voters who, if the economy is still good, are likely to vote for Trump despite his faults. They will be scared by all the talk about socialism, offended by all the talk about racism, annoyed by “pies-in-the-sky” and talk about matters (incl. climate change) they deem to be unimportant; and, just as they did in 2016, they may find reasons to vote against a Democrat that outweigh the reasons to vote against Trump.
We are embarking on a test where Democratic primary voters will pick from among a host of candidates. But this is the wrong test. In November will the Deplorables and near-Deplorables of the Rust Belt vote for Bernie? Vote for Warren? Vote for Booker? I don’t think so. I pray that I’m proven wrong, but I see a probability that Trump will be a two-term President. Trump will win in large part because of the failure of progressives to keep their eyes clearly focused on the relevant goalposts.
We’ve got several announced big time candidates who have received extensive press coverage. And yet Biden still leads, despite not announcing yet. I say it’s his unless someone takes it from him. And so far, no one seems up to the task. The debates will tell us a lot. That’s where someone like Warren, who knows her stuff, will have a big chance to improve her standing. She’s polling really weak right now though given her name recognition. As a Biden fan, the guy I most worry about is actually Beto.
I am with you somewhat, as Klobuchar is the only one right now I am optimistic about. If you’re writing off all but two this early, taking a step back for awhile may be in order at least to see if someone rises up out of nowhere.
I’ll make a bit of a case here for Kamala Harris in the general election. A few months ago I heard Newt Gingrich opine that Harris will be the nominee. I don’t know how good his tea leaves are, but he was on the Trump express before nearly anyone of note in his party and he is an architech of our polarization who knows how buttons are pushed. Since then, I’ve seen a lot of negative written about Harris, and not much of it seems all that consequential. I’ve come to see her as sort of a reliable floor, mediocre candidate with a war chest to be reckoned with. I’m not at all inspired yet; she does seem more likable than HRC and it remains to be seen if she could do better in some swing states than her.
A lot of progressives are low on Harris because of all the males of color she prosecuted. You can guess I feel those complaints are mostly overplayed. Some scrutiny is fine and maybe Harris could help herself demonstrably doing an about face on marijuana if relevant. This won’t be a popular sentiment around here, that I think much of the left has lost the plot when it comes to law enforcement officers. It isn’t necessarily most Democrats, it’s an activist mindset that has become widespread. I commonly hear things said about cops from mainline liberals that I would expect from anarchists and some libertarians.
It’s like this: 1) Accountability in the form of wearing body cameras along with other oversight and striving to continually improve these are very good things. 2) Violations of civil rights are wrong – most should be able to agree on. 3) It isn’t cool to disrespect the jobs of police officers, the varying degrees of difficulty in policing different regions, and the toll in mental health it can take. In a world of less scarcity we could give officers paid time off rather than push them when things are rough for them. It isn’t cool to lack empathy and have unrealistic expectations of them. It isn’t cool to rush to judgment each time a story makes the news. It isn’t cool to thought police motives and call out individual racism when black officers respond to situations much the same way all the time in precincts where the majority of officers are black; the fallback to that is magical thinking that would be a turn-off to almost any moderate. Now, I don’t understand anarchists. I do understand where the far left activists are coming from in that I’ve seen firsthand how relations and trust between police and community were never mended after decades of abuse swept under the rug. So, if we’re going to escalate, what is the end game but to riot? People did riot in Milwaukee after a black officer shot a black man in August 2016. They destroyed businesses mostly owned by blacks, mostly patronized by blacks, in struggling neighborhoods mostly populated by blacks.
We’re talking about a presidential election, so law enforcement shouldn’t be an issue that gets all that much discussion. I’m saying it might be nice to have a Democratic candidate who can build some common sense bridges and speak as one who is well acquainted with how it is on both sides of the blue line. I don’t know how well regarded in the black community Harris is. It’s just something I like to think could happen and it beats Trump’s simplistic pro-law enforcement grandeur with a side of thuggery. A lot of people seem to conflate the left-leaning electorate and the Democratic Party/politicians; IF Harris can win over broad appeal within the base, maybe she can get some of them to sound less insane on the issue of law enforcement to those whose votes we need.
Good points, Covfefe. I don’t know if any candidates are actually disrespectful of police officers, but recently a “Centrist” posted a long OP in which he implied liberal disrepect for police is one reason he might vote for Trump. :smack: Harris has various controversial positions but maybe if she plays her hand right she can use these controversies to “thread two needles” and appeal to both the liberal base and to undecided “centrists.”
I feel better about Harris’ chances than I feel about Sanders, Warren or Booker. My big problem with her is that I don’t find her oratory style Presidential or charismatic, but maybe that’s just me. (I was also unimpressed with her performance in the Kavanaugh hearing where she seemed overly focused on a silly Gotcha.)
What is your problem with Booker? He seems strong to me.
What makes you think that Sanders has any sort of “leash” on the Bernie Bros? Or any sort of leverage, influence, or any other sort of connection to them? If them going “off-leash” will guarantee Trump victory, then of course they’re going to do that, because that’s what they’re getting paid the big rubles to do.
Some are, no doubt, but some are solid bernie-or-bust followers, and Bernie can either drop out once it is clear he has lost, with a nice concession, or at least give a speech and on his website asking his followers not to use negative attacks. How much that will work, i dont know, but he shoudl at least try.
Look for an announcement from Beto tomorrow morning.
I’m actually relieved. I was worried was waiting until St. Patrick’s Day to announce and would come out dressed like a leprechaun.
Immigration Control and Enforcement is a federal law enforcement agency. I’d expect they continue to get a lot of discussion as the cycle wears on.
Lol, Beto is in. Julian Castro must be pissed off right about now.
Castro should have run for statewide office. His cowardice in that respect is why he’s nobody.
Has the DNC set the rules for how the nominee will be determined at the convention next year? I think it’s a safe assumption that with this many candidates that it’s unlikely someone will have over 50% of the delegates when the last primary is over. How would things go from there? Is the candidate with the fewest delegates who hasn’t dropped out yet eliminated after each round of voting? Do the individual delegates who are pledged to candidates that are out of the running decide for themselves who they change their vote to, or does the nominee they are pledged to direct them to change their vote to that candidates favorite among those who still remain?
The second sentence is just ridiculous personal silliness.
Before he got in, I didn’t think he had a chance. But in that one clip, along with his other viral clips, he always shows what a great speaker he is and how much charisma he has. He didn’t even say anything in his announcement, and I have a feeling I won’t like his policies, yet I’m drawn to it.
Yeah, right now I’m leaning towards Booker or Mayor Pete, but it’s early days yet.
This time it’s not personal. I actually like Castro and was impressed by his recent interviews. But he chose an easier path to the Presidency(get a nothing job in DC and have the party heavily promote how awesome you are), than Beto, who did the work of trying to beat Ted Cruz. There’s just no way that Beto doesn’t deserve more credit from voters for how he got here.