I hear that a lot here and don’t get it.
Why do you think they know better who is a bigger threat than you do?
They have unlimited ammo, they can smear all the Democrats all the time. They’re like the Germans in the bunkers at Normandy, as soon as the Democrats near the beach and the doors open up, they go full blazes on them all. Every single Democrat that makes it as far as Iowa will bear the brunt of the Republican smear machine.
They know who they see as a threat. They aren’t necessarily right.
I think they are in a campaign, when it comes to saying what you want, what you think is the way things ought to be.
Once you’re elected, you find out how much of it you can get through Congress, and get the best deal you can. Sometimes half a loaf is the best you can get, and that’s fine.
What’s a mistake is to run on half a loaf.
a) That’s not going to get those marginal voters to come out of the woodwork and show up at the polls.
b) Half a loaf then becomes the starting point for Congressional negotiations, and in negotiations, you’re going to necessarily give some ground; if you can get everything you ask for, you hardly needed to negotiate. So let Mitch or Manchin or whoever talk you down from the entire loaf, not from half a loaf. We saw too much of the latter during the Obama years, and we know how that story goes.
Yeah, I don’t quite get that last bit. I mean, Trump isn’t really black either.
Also, they may define threat more broadly than in just the electoral sense. Strong, assertive black people and strong, assertive women are threats to them whether or not they’re running for President, for the reasons we all know so well.
It means either “Come on, people, don’t be fooled” if they’re actually addressing Democrats, or “The DemonicRats are so dumb they think she really *is *black” if they’re only reassuring each other.
Yeah, actually, IIRC something similar was tried with Obama, cf. Limbaugh and such calling him a “halfrican American”. Didn’t really work that time, probably wouldn’t this time.
Well, orange is the new black.
On Biden v Harris: I like them both. Harris took her shots respectfully. I hope in the next debate she gets asked “why is busing an issue to discuss in 2019?” and Biden gets asked: “Given the behavior of Mitch McConnell in the past 10 years, what makes you think Republicans are going to behave any differently with you as president?”
That being said, I’m starting to have doubts about Biden’s viability. Maybe it is time for a younger candidate.
Indeed.
True, but the value is in seeing in which direction the majority of the fire is directed at any given time. That’s why I keep an eye on prevailing messages in trolldom (the coherent messages, not the “hur hur Obummer Killary libtards” shit) . Some of it will be direct trolling and some of it will be useful idiots parroting current right-wing talking points, but there are definitely trends to be found.
As for the “Kamala Harris isn’t really black” thing, it serves multiple purposes:
-
The primary purpose is to signal to black voters that she’s not “one of them” and therefore they owe her no allegiance or support. They’re worried that a black candidate will see an Obamaesque surge in black turnout.
-
Secondary message: She’s a fraud, deluded or both. The messages also tend to mention Elizabeth Warren’s Native American thing and/or Rachel Dolezal, for extra mocking of liberals (and bonus smearing of another candidate).
That conservatives are attempting to act as “race police” on this matter is ludicrous for multiple reasons, but then it’s not remotely about rational consideration of the facts; it’s about smearing Harris.
Me, too, but because of the busing thing rather than age-related slowness. Regardless of the validity of his stance, the paid concern trolls now have ammunition to selectively target African Americans with anti-Biden ads, which will have enough of a grain of truth to them that it might lower their turnout.
I think they are in a campaign, when it comes to saying what you want, what you think is the way things ought to be.
Once you’re elected, you find out how much of it you can get through Congress, and get the best deal you can. Sometimes half a loaf is the best you can get, and that’s fine.
What’s a mistake is to run on half a loaf.
a) That’s not going to get those marginal voters to come out of the woodwork and show up at the polls.
b) Half a loaf then becomes the starting point for Congressional negotiations, and in negotiations, you’re going to necessarily give some ground; if you can get everything you ask for, you hardly needed to negotiate. So let Mitch or Manchin or whoever talk you down from the entire loaf, not from half a loaf. We saw too much of the latter during the Obama years, and we know how that story goes.
It’s been asked, and she’s answered:
Thanks for that, glad to know she’s addressed it.
Regarding the half a loaf negotiating, I agree to a point. Obama was a terrible negotiator, he’d start with what he thought was a reasonable compromise which I think is a huge mistake that the Republicans took full advantage of. But you can go too far with that. Case in point- reparations. I think the matter should be studied and I think this is something we’ll have to do at some point. But to bring it up during the campaign is a sure way to lose an election. Ditto with talking about giving health care to undocumented immigrants. I’m 100% for it, but I’d much rather have that conversation after the election.
Didn’t watch the whole debate; but have gotten as far as watching that clip.
What got me was Biden’s reaction when she hit that line. His head came right around with a look of total astonishment on his face.
Why was he so surprised?
This isn’t just a matter of whether he’d done his homework – if he’d checked the bios of the other candidates, he should have known that she was a little girl in California, and as soon as she came out with that half he should have seen the second half coming. But even if he hadn’t read their bios – why should it be so astonishing that one of the children who did get bussed is up there on that stage with him? I believe that Biden means well and wants to help a wide assortment of people, including little black kids – but does he think of children who need such assistance as being in some sort of different category from the category of people who can plausibly grow up to run for POTUS?
It shouldn’t have been a ‘gotcha’, even if he didn’t know her particular bio. It should have always been a possibility, somewhere in his mind, that being bussed or having been stuck in a terrible school for lack of bussing could easily have been part of the experience of any black person in the right age range, unless he specifically knows otherwise.
It isn’t that he didn’t expect *this *attack; he didn’t expect *any *attack. Everybody loves ol’ Joe, right?
Too late to edit: of any black person who was a child in the USA and who is in the right age range.
As to Harris and identity … my understanding is that in general she has in the past been careful to refer to herself as “a woman of color” … and has not dismissed or downplayed the Indian part of her heritage.
As impressed as I was by the skill of her “that girl was me” play, it is also a calculated attempt to have Black voters more strongly identify with her, and to imply some story that may not really apply. When people think of Black kids who benefitted from bussing a certain stereotyped image of comes up. Not the daughter of a mother who was a breast cancer scientist and a father who was a Stanford professor. And who spent her teen years living in Quebec with her mother who did research at Jewish General Hospital and taught at McGill.
She lived a life of privilege to no small degree. And that is fine. Pretty much every candidate wants tell their story as one of having come up from poverty and working class and to discount their privileges. Self-made bootstraps pulled. But if she makes her personal life story as a Black American who only got educated because she was bussed an ongoing centerpiece it will bite her as much as Warren’s DNA test bit her. She needs to pivot quickly.
I’m a little worried too, but not in a panic mode. I’m also a moderate Democrat and I’m a bit unique in that my social group as well as social media bubble is considerably younger than me.
It’s June and I understand only the political junkies are paying attention right now and they tend to come from the more activist wing of the party. I know there were some pretty crazy things said by candidates not named Trump in the early Republican debates in 2015 as well.
Biden does have a foot in mouth problem and he’s got to realize he has a huge target on his back as the front runner and Buttigieg, Harris, and Warren all want to break through.
I don’t know who’s on Biden’s staff, but he’s got to get someone who’s very savvy on social media immediately. He’s being destroyed on Twitter. First it was his awkward explaining of the touching issue, then the racial issue awkwardness, and now the gay waiter awkwardness. These candidates are going to need a lot of the young activists to knock on doors, phone bank, and text bank as the primaries get nearer.
According to a new HuffPost/YouGov poll, Biden’s ‘electability’ advantage is all but gone.