The Democratic Safe House

[Arcangl86]

Also, the White House spokesman did not deny it happened - rather, they spun it as "The intention of preventing hurricane damage is a good one". It seems very likely to be true.

I think it's likely but impossible to confirm.

 

[Scholastica]

It's possible, we just need to get our hands on an NSC memo from 2017 where Trump talked about bombing hurricanes even then.

Granted, it's not likely we'll be seeing that any time soon. So improbable, but not totally impossible.

 

[Arcangl86]

It's possible, we just need to get our hands on an NSC memo from 2017 where Trump talked about bombing hurricanes even then.

Granted, it's not likely we'll be seeing that any time soon. So improbable, but not totally impossible.

I'm sure any NSC documents are not going to be subject to FOIA, so I'll probably be dead by the time it's released

 

[FreeinChrist]

The 2020 Democratic Primaries thread

 

[GACfan]

I want to thank everyone who answered my question. I appreciate it. I was curious because he did say in a speech that the Continental Army took over airports in 1781. So, I thought it could be true.

 

[Arcangl86]

Ugh. I really wish there was some kind of rule that somebody was required to read The Rules for Radicals before mentioning them in a post. It's obvious they have no idea what Alinsky's tactics and ideology actually was, but like using him as a boogyman.

 

[DaisyDay]

Ugh. I really wish there was some kind of rule that somebody was required to read The Rules for Radicals before mentioning them in a post. It's obvious they have no idea what Alinsky's tactics and ideology actually was, but like using him as a boogyman.

Interestingly, GOP operatives have adopted the tactics along with an opposite ideology.

 

[Scholastica]

Interesting. I've never heard of The Rules for Radicals before. Is it worth picking up, or are the rules listed on its Wikipedia page the gist of it?

 

[Arcangl86]

Interesting. I've never heard of The Rules for Radicals before. Is it worth picking up, or are the rules listed on its Wikipedia page the gist of it?

The rules on the wikipedia page are the gist of it. He expands them of course. They are actually starting to fall into disfavor because they are really organizer centric.

 

[DaisyDay]

 

[Scholastica]

Organizer centric? Why is that a bad thing?

 

[Arcangl86]

Organizer centric? Why is that a bad thing?

It focuses on paid professionals to organize people around certain issues instead of how to best utilize true grassroots movements to effect systematic change.

 

[mark46]

In order to secure a victory, we need to win in the Midwest. When I do a map, Republicans have 248 votes without AZ, NH, MN, MI, WI and PA.

2020 Presidential Election Interactive Map

Yesterday's results showed that we will continue to win in the suburbs, and the VA is solidly blue (as it has been).

This is essentially the 2016 map. Trump needs to hold FL and NC, and then win a couple of the real swing states.
======
I will state the obvious. Democrats have a better chance to win the MidWest with Biden, Buddigieg or Klobuchar.

For those who want foundational changes with Warren (the former Republican and Harvard professor from MA), I would point out that we will likely lose many of the suburban voters. Many folks don't want to have the government take away their health insurance and run healthcare. Many don't want a fight against the "rich". Many of the suburban voters are NOT poor or Middle Class. If they are not well to do, they want to be well to do. Attacking the rich just won't win electoral votes.

 

[Halbhh]

In order to secure a victory, we need to win in the Midwest. When I do a map, Republicans have 248 votes without AZ, NH, MN, MI, WI and PA.

2020 Presidential Election Interactive Map

Yesterday's results showed that we will continue to win in the suburbs, and the VA is solidly blue (as it has been).

This is essentially the 2016 map. Trump needs to hold FL and NC, and then win a couple of the real swing states.
======
I will state the obvious. Democrats have a better chance to win the MidWest with Biden, Buddigieg or Klubuchar.

For those who want foundational changes with Warren (the former Republican and Harvard professor from MA), I would point out that we will likely lose many of the suburban voters. Many folks don't want to have the government take away their health insurance and run healthcare. Many don't want a fight against the "rich". Many of the suburban voters are NOT poor or Middle Class. If they are not well to do, they want to be well to do. Attacking the rich just won't win electoral votes.

Good points. Though I've been a fan of former republican Elizabeth Warren since 2003 when I chanced onto one of her books (the excellent "The Two Income Trap") in the Austin library, and began to recommend the book to everyone I knew...

After I listened to Amy Klobuchar a couple of minutes I realized there is an excellent moderate in the race that isn't so old. As you know, it's sorta hard for a lot of Democrats to get excited over a down to earth moderate that is just a good person with a good personality and would lead in the center. But she would make a great candidate in the general election in my view, and win, especially with a few well written speeches that would help bring out a side of her that is less prosaic. But she seems solid, and of good temperament.

 

[mark46]

Warren was probably a fine professor, and probably writes fine books. She would be fine as an advisor, one that can present plans and analysis for candidates.

Good points. Though I've been a fan of former republican Elizabeth Warren since 2003 when I chanced onto one of her books (the excellent "The Two Income Trap") in the Austin library, and began to recommend the book to everyone I knew...

After I listened to Amy Klobuchar a couple of minutes I realized there is an excellent moderate in the race that isn't so old. As you know, it's sorta hard for a lot of Democrats to get excited over a down to earth moderate that is just a good person with a good personality and would lead in the center. But she would make a great candidate in the general election in my view, and win, especially with a few well written speeches that would help bring out a side of her that is less prosaic. But she seems solid, and of good temperament.

 

[mark46]

This view has little to do with winning elections. Without winning, the possibility for meaningful change is extremely limited.

I have had these discussions for least 55 years. The most important goal in 2020 is to win elections: at the federal level, at the stat level and at the local level. But, by FAR the most important goal is defeat Trump. Presenting lofty plans to the American people is just NOT that important to me.

We passed all the legislation over the years by electing politicians. Goldwater was the only one to win through introducing a movement. The win didn't happen until 16 years after he won the nomination.

It focuses on paid professionals to organize people around certain issues instead of how to best utilize true grassroots movements to effect systematic change.

 

[Kentonio]

This view has little to do with winning elections. Without winning, the possibility for meaningful change is extremely limited.

I have had these discussions for least 55 years. The most important goal in 2020 is to win elections: at the federal level, at the stat level and at the local level. But, by FAR the most important goal is defeat Trump. Presenting lofty plans to the American people is just NOT that important to me.

We passed all the legislation over the years by electing politicians. Goldwater was the only one to win through introducing a movement. The win didn't happen until 16 years after he won the nomination.

Trump won because people were tired of establishment politics. Nominating a centrist now just means you’re gambling that they will have changed their minds because of Trump and forgotten the reasons they turned against centrist Dems in the first place. You may be right, but it’s certainly a risk and that should be recognized.

There’s also a very strong risk that even if the Dems regain power in 2020, that continuing along the same path as before will just invite the same backlash in a few years time when the memory of Trump is fading.

The current extremist Republican Party is ripe for destruction. They are deep in the pockets of corporations and the super rich and offering little or nothing to ordinary working Americans. They’re clinging onto power with propaganda, gerrymandering and deceit and need to be swept away to allow for a new much more moderate GOP to take their place. That is only going to happen though if the Dems offer ordinary people real change and not just more neo-liberalism.

 

[Scholastica]

Reminder to my fellow Californians that the Democratic state party convention will be this weekend in Long Beach. I'll be there Saturday with the Warren supporters most of the afternoon.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Have you already decided Warren is your favorte candidate Scholastica?

 

[Scholastica]

If I hadn't then the Warren bumper sticker on the back of my car would be rather awkward.

Which is to say yes, I have decided to support Warren.

Now to convince the rest of my ruby red county to do the same.