AuthorTopic: Election Errata  (Read 128994 times)

Online azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 9489
    • View Profile
Re: ⚾ Demodope Debate Lineup: BATTER UP!
« Reply #1050 on: June 14, 2019, 02:36:47 PM »
Can't wait to see the Bernie vs. Biden Slugfest!  ;D


Democratic Debate
NBC announces lineup of Democrats for each night of first 2020 debate
To decide the matchups, candidates' names were drawn manually at NBC News' headquarters in New York.

Adrian Lam / NBC News; AP; Getty Images
June 14, 2019, 8:36 AM AKDT / Updated June 14, 2019, 9:03 AM AKDT

By Dartunorro Clark

NBC News on Friday announced the lineups of Democratic presidential candidates who are appearing on stage this month on each night of the first debate of the 2020 race.

The first group of 10 appearing on Wednesday, June 26:

    Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey
    Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts
    Former Rep. Beto O'Rourke of Texas
    Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota
    Former Rep. John Delaney of Maryland
    Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii
    Former Housing Secretary Julián Castro
    Rep. Tim Ryan of Ohio
    New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio
    Washington Gov. Jay Inslee

The second group of 10 appearing on Thursday, June 27:

    Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont
    Sen. Kamala Harris of California
    Former Vice President Joe Biden
    Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana
    Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado
    Author Marianne Williamson
    Rep. Eric Swalwell of California
    Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York
    Entrepreneur Andrew Yang
    Gov. John Hickenlooper of Colorado.

Where the candidates will stand on stage each night has not yet been determined.
Lineup of Democrats for first 2020 debates announced
June 14, 201904:55

To decide the matchups, candidates' names were drawn manually at NBC News’ headquarters at 30 Rockefeller Plaza in New York. One representative from each of the qualifying campaigns was invited to attend the draw along with officials from the Democratic National Committee. Campaign representatives saw the paper slip with their respective candidate's name on it before it was folded and placed inside the box.

A representative from NBC News Standards & Practices conducted the draw.

Candidates were divided into two groups: those who polled on average at or above 2 percent through midnight on Wednesday, June 12, and those who polled on average below 2 percent through midnight on Wednesday.

A random draw then took place, to create two separate groupings of 10.

NBC News then designated each grouping to a specific debate night.

DNC chairman Tom Perez told MSNBC’s Hallie Jackson on Friday before the draw that he wanted the committee to avoid grouping lesser-known candidates together on one night and high-profile candidates on the other.

"The purpose of that is to be consistent with our principle of trying to be fair to everybody but also, it gets to the point of your question, so that we have maximum eyeballs both nights,” Perez said.

The determination of the lineups came a day after the DNC announced the 20 candidates who met the threshold to appear on stage for the two-night event. The debate, hosted by NBC News, MSNBC and Telemundo, will take place on June 26 and 27 at the Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts in downtown Miami.

The historically large field of candidates includes a slew of U.S. senators, a handful of mayors, a former vice president, longtime legislators and some political novices.

The DNC set two ways for candidates to qualify for the debate — fundraising and polling. To make the stage, candidates needed to have either at least 1 percent support in three qualifying polls, or provide evidence of at least 65,000 unique donors, with a minimum of 200 different donors in at least 20 states.

The debate will air live across NBC, MSNBC and Telemundo from 9 p.m. to 11 p.m ET both nights. The debate will also stream online free on NBC News' digital platforms, including,, the NBC News Mobile App and OTT apps, in addition to Telemundo's digital platforms.

NBC News’ Lester Holt, Savannah Guthrie and Chuck Todd, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and Telemundo’s José Diaz-Balart will moderate the debate.

Dartunorro Clark is a political reporter for NBC News.

WHAT ! No Killary  :icon_mrgreen:

I'll just watch reruns of southpark, more entertaining.....
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world.
You don’t know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39377
    • View Profile
🗳️ Elizabeth Warren isn’t Hillary Clinton
« Reply #1051 on: June 15, 2019, 12:40:15 AM »

Elizabeth Warren isn’t Hillary Clinton

How Warren is using many policies to reinforce one message, and a few other notes from our conversation.
By Ezra Klein@ezraklein Updated Jun 14, 2019, 11:31am EDT

Alex Wong/Getty Images

My old American Prospect editor Mark Schmitt had a maxim I always liked: “It’s not what you say about the issues; it’s what the issues say about you.”

Mark’s line came to mind while I was interviewing Elizabeth Warren (you can listen to our conversation on my podcast, or read it here). I’ve seen a lot of nervous Democrats compare Warren to Hillary Clinton. After all, Clinton had plans too. Clinton was the most prepared candidate on the stage, too. And look how that ended.

I think the analogy is flawed. Clinton had a lot of plans but no clear message. Warren’s genius has been to turn a lot of plans into a clear message. Clinton’s plans couldn’t dispel the sense that she was complicit in the status quo. Warren’s plans underscore her longstanding loathing of what American capitalism has curdled into.

It’s common for Democrats to talk about income inequality. Warren fixates on wealth inequality. During our conversation, she used the word “wealth” 23 times but mentioned “income” only four times. There’s a reason for that. Wealth is where income pools into power and privilege. When your money comes from income, it is, at least in theory, being earned through work. When it’s just wealth creating more wealth, it’s a hoarding of resources divorced from the labor and innovation that drives economies forward.

“Think of it this way,” she told me. “The bottom 99 percent last year paid all-in on their taxes 7.2 percent of their total wealth. Top 1 percent? They paid 3.2 percent of their total wealth.” Those huge fortunes, she continued, “are growing on their own. They are now capital. You don’t have to work if you’ve got one of those big fortunes. Those things are managed by professional managers.” Listen to how Warren talks about this. It offends her.

Over and over again, Warren turned the conversation back to her wealth tax, and everything it could buy. Like here:

    Two cents on the one-tenth of 1 percent, the greatest fortunes in this country, $50 million and above, and for 2 cents we can provide universal child care, universal pre-K, raise the wages of all our child care workers and pre-K workers, universal technical school, two-year college, four-year college, and cancel student loan debt for 95 percent of the people who’ve got it. We cancel student loan debt for 43 million Americans across this country. The vision of what government can do and whose side government is on changes just like that.

And here:

    I was talking a minute ago about the 2-cent wealth tax. My proposal is a tax on the 75,000 biggest fortunes in this country. If you’ve got more than $50 million, the 50 millionth and first dollar gets taxed at 2 cents. And then 2 cents on every dollar after that. Two cents. What could we do with 2 cents? Look at the opportunity it builds in child care and early childhood education and technical school and college and freeing up people from huge debt burdens.

And here:

    But notice how much you get from the wealth tax. The 2-cent wealth tax is enough to do all those things I talked about, plus have $100 billion to put into opioids and still have nearly half a trillion dollars left over. It’s a staggering amount of money that it produces because there is such extraordinary concentrated wealth in this country. Getting that 2 cents opens up real opportunity for everybody else.

Warren’s tagline is “I have a plan for that.” And on one level, it’s true: She has a lot of plans. But a clearer way of understanding her pitch is she’s got one plan that she applies over and over again.

As Warren sees it, there’s been a massive hoarding of wealth — and thus of power and opportunity — in this country. She wants to tax the wealth and redistribute both the money and the opportunity. She wants to break up concentrations of economic power by putting workers on corporate boards and unleashing antitrust regulators on Amazon and Facebook and ending Washington’s revolving door. These are different policies, yes, but they all say the same thing: The wealthy have too much money and power, and Warren wants to change that.

That’s the difference between her and Clinton. Clinton had a lot of plans and just as many messages. Warren has a lot of plans, but they reinforce one message. Warren has her weaknesses, but the way she talks through policy is a defining strength.

A few other notes from our conversation:

• I asked Warren where she disagreed with the democratic socialists, and didn’t get much. “I believe in markets,” she told me. “But markets without rules are theft.” I asked her about health care and education, which are the only places where Bernie Sanders suggests nationalizing even part of an industry, but Warren agreed with him. “Markets mostly don’t work in those areas,” she said. “It’s not to say there aren’t pieces that you could make work, but no. Health care is something that is a basic human right, and we fight for basic human rights. Public education is public education because it’s not market-driven.”

Sanders calls himself a democratic socialist and Warren calls herself a capitalist, but the difference between them is subtler than that suggests. If you ask Warren about capitalism, she’ll wax rhapsodic about what properly regulated markets can create. Ask Sanders about capitalism and he’ll focus on its failures and fundamental immorality. It’s a sharp difference in affect, but it doesn’t lead to all that much difference in policy.

• A more serious split in the primary is between Warren and Joe Biden’s theories of change. Biden is emphatic that the problem is the politicians, not the political structure. “The system’s worked pretty damn well,” he says. “It’s called the Constitution. It says you have to get a consensus to get anything done.”

Biden pitches himself as likelier than his competitors to get that consensus. Warren, by contrast, holds no illusion that she’ll receive Republican support, and is all about systemic change. She told me her first bill would be a massive anti-corruption package. She wants to persuade her fellow Democrats to abolish the filibuster. “This business that Democrats play by one set of rules and Republicans play by a different set of rules — those days are over when I’m president,” she says. “We’re not doing that anymore.”

• When I asked Warren what she’d do first as president, she answered quickly. “I’ll do the things that I can do as president on my own.” For all her enthusiasm for executive action, I found her a little vague on the authorities she’d use. But while most presidents delegate regulation to staff, having watched Warren’s career, I think she’s unusually likely to act as regulator-in-chief.

Warren designed and helped construct an aggressive regulatory agency — the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — and she did it well. As a senator, she’s put a particular focus on fighting over regulatory decisions and appointments. She has expertise here that most presidential candidates don’t. “You know, most of those agencies were built at a time when we believed in government,” she told me. “That was true whether you were talking about the Food and Drug Administration or the Department of Commerce or the Environmental Protection Agency. Those agencies still have a huge number of tools.”

Presidential campaigns tend to focus on legislative dreams rather than regulatory strategies, but it’s very likely that even if a Democrat wins in 2020, they will face a Republican Senate. In that world, the ability to creatively wield the powers of the executive branch will matter enormously. I’d like to see Warren, and all the Democrats, get more specific on how they’d approach this part of the job.

• This one is more impressionistic, but there’s enough of a narrative out there that I want to say it: I’ve interviewed most of the Democrats running for president and I find Warren warmer and more natural than almost any of them. That’s true in person, but it’s also true on the stump.

This bit got cut from the transcript, but if you listen to our full podcast, you’ll hear her discussing her insistence that the lights are always turned up in the auditoriums so she can see the faces of her audience and actually interact with them. “It’s actually a very close and intimate interaction, even with a thousand people or a couple of thousand,” she says. “It’s the eye to eye, face to face.” This isn’t just talk: Warren engages much more naturally with the crowd than most politicians do. The idea that she comes off as cold or uncharismatic on the stump — she was going viral with speeches when that was barely a thing — crumbles upon watching or meeting her.

That said, Warren has never performed that well in Massachusetts. She ran behind Barack Obama in 2012 and, adjusting for the swing toward Democrats from 2016 to 2018, behind Hillary Clinton too. She’s less popular than Charlie Baker, the Republican governor. She’s trailing Biden in her own state. This is the “electability” question that I wonder about with Warren — why isn’t she stronger among the voters who know her best?
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39377
    • View Profile
🗳️ How Elizabeth Warren's debate draw could help her or hurt her
« Reply #1052 on: June 15, 2019, 01:06:46 AM »
She's better off the 1st night IMHO.  Night 2 will be all about Uncle Joe and Grandpa Bernie ripping each other to shreds.


How Elizabeth Warren's debate draw could help her or hurt her
CNN Digital Expansion 2018 Harry Enten

Analysis by Harry Enten, CNN

Updated 3:59 PM ET, Fri June 14, 2019
how to qualify for a presidential debate mh orig_00000810

What it takes to qualify for the 2020 Democratic debates 02:20

(CNN)Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren is the odd woman out when it comes to the first Democratic debates at the end of June.
There is, of course, two debates on consecutive nights with ten candidates on each stage. And because of a random draw, all the other top polling candidates (former Vice President Joe Biden, South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, California Sen. Kamala Harris and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders) are debating against each other on the second night.
That leaves Warren facing off against nine other contenders the night before, including New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker and former Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke.
The question is whether Warren lucked out or struck out by being separated from the other high polling candidates? The answer to me is not immediately clear and strong cases can be made for both.

The argument that this is good for Warren starts with big fish in a little pond. By appearing on stage with, at this point, lower performing candidates, Warren could appear like a frontrunner. She will likely get a center podium and be flanked on her left and right by two candidates who are polling poorly. Put another way, the debate will look like it is revolving around her.
Here are the matchups for the first 2020 Democratic debates
Here are the matchups for the first 2020 Democratic debates
Warren gets the additional benefit of not being on the stage with Biden. Any moderator worth her or his weight would want Biden and Warren to contrast themselves with each other: Biden and his more moderate voting record vs. Warren and her very progressive record. By not being on the same stage as Biden, Warren will get to talk about her record on its own.
Meanwhile, Warren can allow other candidates to do her dirty work. Other high polling candidates and maybe even a few low polling ones will have the chance to take down Biden. In doing so, they may end up damaging each other, which would in essence kill two birds with one stone for Warren.
Yet, I have to step back and recognize that most people are not political junkies. Even among those who deeply interested in the primary, who is really going to tune into two nights of debates? And if you only tune into one debate, are you going to watch the one with most of the polling leaders or the one with Warren?
There is a clear possibility that viewership for the Warren debate could be lower than the one featuring most of the other polling leaders. This means that fewer people will be able to hear Warren's message.
There is also the possibility that Warren not being on the stage with the other frontrunners will limit her ability to make a viral moment. She won't be able to punch upward. Instead, Warren might find herself on the defensive from Democrats on her stage looking to go after the most high profile Democrat around.
Worse, Warren could end up looking like the head of the junior varsity squad. Instead of rising above the fray, the optics of being on the stage with low polling candidates may make Warren look like she doesn't belong on the same stage as folks like Biden and Harris.

Interestingly, a far easier case could made that Booker and O'Rourke are in a better position. They are by far the most well known candidates next to Warren on their debate night. This means they'll be elevated in a way they wouldn't have been if they were on the stage with Biden, Buttigieg, Harris and Sanders.
The fact that I'm arguing back and forth with myself here points to something rather obvious: we don't know if Warren is helped or hurt by the debate draw. The only way to know is to see what happens on the debate stage later this month.
Save As Many As You Can

Online azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 9489
    • View Profile
Re: Election Errata
« Reply #1053 on: June 15, 2019, 01:56:13 PM »
The only demodope with world stage experience is Joe 6p Biden....

The rest of em' will be eaten & left for dead.
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world.
You don’t know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39377
    • View Profile
Re: Election Errata
« Reply #1054 on: June 15, 2019, 02:18:10 PM »
The only demodope with world stage experience is Joe 6p Biden....

The rest of em' will be eaten & left for dead.

I'll take that bet.  What odds?

Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39377
    • View Profile
🗳️ Trump campaign zeroes in on a new threat: Elizabeth Warren
« Reply #1055 on: June 16, 2019, 01:18:34 AM »

Trump campaign zeroes in on a new threat: Elizabeth Warren

The president's team is about to go after a candidate he had left for dead.


06/15/2019 06:35 AM EDT

President Donald Trump’s reelection machine is setting its sights on a new target, one it had left for dead just a few months ago: Elizabeth Warren.

With the Massachusetts senator rising in polls and driving a populist message that threatens to cut into the president’s blue-collar base, the Trump campaign is training its firepower on Warren with an eye toward blunting her momentum.

Trump aides and their allies at the Republican National Committee, who initially believed their money and manpower were better focused elsewhere, are digging up opposition research, deploying camera-wielding trackers, and preparing to brand Warren as a liberal extremist. The reassessment of Warren, confirmed in conversations with more than a half-dozen Trump advisers, reflects the volatility of the massive Democratic primary and how the reelection campaign is reacting to it.

The Trump team — including the president himself — had been focused almost exclusively on Joe Biden to this point. But Warren’s rise now has them thinking she could pose a serious threat in a general election. Warren’s disciplined style, populist-infused speeches, and perceived ability to win over suburban female voters, Trump advisers concede, has raised concerns.

Campaign pollster John McLaughlin has sounded the alarm internally, stressing that Warren’s attacks on Trump threaten to undercut his support from the working-class voters who propelled him to the presidency.

“Although our own early published polls and internal polls discounted Elizabeth Warren, her recent momentum in May and June in national and early caucus and primary states into a strong second place to a flat Joe Biden is a cause for our campaign’s attention,” McLaughlin wrote in a text message to POLITICO.
Elizabeth Warren

2020 Elections
California poll: Warren surges to second, Harris falls to fourth


“Sen. Warren’s attacks on President Trump’s policies need to be rebutted,” McLaughlin added. “We can’t just allow her to continue to attack the President in key states like Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and elsewhere.”

Biden will still receive a significant share of the campaign's attention. But Trump aides say they're less certain that he'll be their eventual opponent.

The reelection campaign first began taking note of Warren’s momentum several weeks ago, when polling showed her gaining substantially on Biden and Sanders. They were startled earlier this month when Tucker Carlson, a host on Trump-friendly Fox News, used the opening monologue of his show to heap praise on the liberal senator.

Warren’s populist economic agenda, Carlson said, “sounds like Donald Trump at his best.”

Other pro-Trump Republican groups are paying closer attention to Warren, too. The GOP oppo research shop America Rising has placed Warren in its top tier of Democratic candidates and will prioritize putting trackers on her campaign events. The RNC, meanwhile, recently sent out a news release drawing attention to a radio interview in which Warren was pressed on her past claims of Native American ancestry.

But Trump aides are planning a barrage that extends well beyond the heritage issue, which has been the focus of Trump's mockery and broadsides. They’re preparing to dig into her past as a professor and try to pick apart her laundry list of policy proposals.

“There’s no question that Elizabeth Warren is on the move, has momentum and could well end up as our opponent,” said Tim Murtaugh, a Trump 2020 spokesman. “We have to make sure voters know about her proposals for government takeover of health care, free health care for illegal immigrants, radical environmental restrictions, and increased taxes — all proposals that will devastate this country.”

A Warren spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.
Elizabeth Warren

2020 elections
The winners — and losers — of the Democratic debate draw


Warren is enjoying a renaissance after a painful campaign rollout. Trump attacked her mercilessly after she released a DNA test that attempted to put the controversy over her blood lines to rest only to reveal she’s between 1/64th and 1/1,024th Native American.

During an appearance at his Mar-a-Lago resort in March, the president lamented to donors that he knocked Warren out of the race too early and that he should have saved his jabs for later. During a late April rally in Wisconsin, the president said Warren was “finished.”

In the weeks that followed, though, the anti-Wall Street crusader engineered a turnaround with a litany of policy plans, a nonstop campaign schedule and a hard-charging populist message.

In the most recent national poll, from Quinnipiac University, Warren was at 15 percent, only slightly behind Sanders for second place. And in polls released this week of California and Nevada — two key states that vote in late February and early March, respectively — Warren leapfrogged Sanders, running behind only Biden.

The latest view inside the Trump campaign is that Warren has a more coherent message and a more passionate liberal following than Biden, whose support they see as soft. “Her politics are where the Democratic party has moved,” said Trump campaign adviser Raj Shah. “She’s primed to pick up more support as Bernie fades and Biden erodes.”

Biden and his supporters, however, are confident the Democratic electorate is more centrist than prognosticators think.

Not everyone agrees that going after Warren is the right move. Some Trump aides contend that her liberal positions would make her an easier general election opponent and that they should hold off on attacking her. Others, however, argue that guessing a particular candidate's level of electability is impossible and that the Democratic nominee — no matter who it is — needs to be defined well before next year’s convention.

Trump himself appears to recognize Warren’s newfound strength.

“Now I see that Pocahontas is doing better,” the president said during a Friday morning appearance on Fox News, using his favorite nickname for the Massachusetts senator. “I would love to run against her frankly.”
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39377
    • View Profile
🗳️ The many 2020 polls are telling a pretty clear story
« Reply #1056 on: June 18, 2019, 01:48:54 AM »
Not looking good for Trumpovetsky.  :icon_sunny:


The many 2020 polls are telling a pretty clear story

The state of the 2020 presidential election polling, explained.
By Dylan Jun 17, 2019, 1:40pm EDT

Joe Biden is still leading the 2020 Democratic presidential primary polls. But there is more to the story. Scott Eisen/Getty Images

Former Vice President Joe Biden is still leading the Democratic primary, but is potentially seeing some soft spots in his foundation, according to a group of polls released in recent days. Meanwhile, Sen. Bernie Sanders has plateaued, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren is surging, with Sen. Kamala Harris and South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg holding steady right behind the top three.

At the same time, President Donald Trump sure looks to be in some trouble as he prepares to formally launch his reelection campaign.

Several new 2020 national polls told the same story on the Democratic candidates. Both Fox News and Economist/YouGov polls found Biden in front with about 30 percent, Sanders in second, and Warren in third. Here are the longer-term trendlines, from Real Clear Politics: Biden’s and Sanders’s support have flagged, Warren is on the rise, with Buttigieg and Harris a cut above the rest of the field.

Real Clear Politics

National surveys are of limited value, but the story seems to be the same in early primary states. Some more nuanced polling, asking Democratic primary voters about their comfort with a given candidate, also suggests some erosion for Biden and Sanders, while others like Warren and Buttigieg are growing in voters’ estimation.

Meanwhile, the polling for Trump continues to look bad. It’s too early to draw any conclusions about Trump’s reelection bid just yet, but he’s underwater in the key battleground states that were key to his victory last time. His approval rating is still low. His internal polling keeps leaking and keeps looking terrible. And while head-to-head polling is of limited value this early in the game, he appears to be losing to every Democratic candidate in a potential 2020 matchup.
The current 2020 Democratic primary polling, briefly explained

The national polling, to borrow from FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver, suggests at least four, maybe five tiers of 2020 Democratic candidates. Here they are, with their national polling averages from Real Clear Politics:

    Joe Biden (31.5 percent). He’s all by himself, still holding a substantial lead in both national surveys and most of the early primary state polls.
    Bernie Sanders (15.8 percent) and Elizabeth Warren (12.8 percent). Right now, Sanders is still Biden’s top rival, but Warren has regularly come in second or third in both national and state surveys for a little while now.
    Pete Buttigieg (7.8 percent) and Kamala Harris (7.3 percent). They have been holding steady, after Harris’s solid start and Buttigieg’s surprising surge.
    Former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (3.5 percent) and Sen. Cory Booker (2.3 percent). We’re splitting hairs now, but this pair tends to score at least a few percentage points of support in any given poll, which puts them a notch above the dozen or so other candidates.
    Everybody else. No other candidates are topping 2 percent in national polls, though Sen. Amy Klobuchar (1.3 percent) and entrepreneur Andrew Yang (1.3 percent) are currently at the front of the also-ran pack.

Democrats don’t have a national primary, so national polls are useful only as a general gauge of support. But the polling of early primary states tells mostly the same tale. CBS and YouGov put out a survey of voters in the first 18 states on the primary calendar and found these results:

    Biden: 31 percent
    Warren: 17 percent
    Sanders: 16 percent
    Harris: 10 percent
    Buttigieg: 8 percent
    O’Rourke: 5 percent
    Booker: 2 percent
    Klobuchar: 2 percent

The tiers hold up. The same could be said of new polling from South Carolina (Biden, 37 percent; Warren, 17 percent; Buttigieg, 11 percent; Sanders and Harris at 9 percent) and in California (Biden, 22 percent; Warren, 18 percent; Sanders, 17 percent; Harris, 13 percent; Buttigieg, 10 percent). The latest Iowa poll from CBS/YouGov showed Biden in the lead at 30 percent, Sanders in second with 22 percent, Warren a little farther back in third with 12 percent, then Buttigieg registering 11 percent and Harris 5 percent.

You get the point.

To look at the primary a different way, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll asked Democratic primary voters whether they would be enthusiastic about a given candidate, comfortable with them, have some reservations about them, or whether they’d be very uncomfortable with the candidate. Biden and Sanders had lost some ground, while Warren has grown in the estimation of Democratic voters.

We have such a long way to go; the first big moment in the 2020 election is finally coming next week when the candidates step on stage for the opening Democratic primary debate. But that is the state of things heading into that watershed moment: Biden and Sanders at the top but hardly running away from the field, with Elizabeth Warren nipping at their heels.
Donald Trump keeps polling really badly in hypothetical 2020 matchups

Now to the president. As Vox’s Matt Yglesias covered last week, Trump’s reelection odds certainly appear bleak based on hypothetical head-to-head matchups with the top 2020 Democratic candidates:

    If you look at Donald Trump’s polling lately, it sure looks like he’s in trouble for reelection.

    A June 11 Quinnipiac poll showed Trump losing 40-53 to Joe Biden. He’s also down 51-42 to Bernie Sanders, 41-49 to Kamala Harris, 42-49 to Elizabeth Warren, 42-47 to Pete Buttigieg, and 42-47 to Cory Booker.

    All plausible contenders at this moment can take heart in the fact that just 40 to 42 percent of the population feels like voting for Trump’s reelection. The public is mostly saying they want to vote for any Democrat, and the strongest pattern so far indicates better-known Democrats do better than the more obscure ones.

    None of this means that Trump is a sure bet to lose the election in 2020 — public opinion can change fast and there’s nothing particularly predictive about polling this far out — but it’s a pretty clear snapshot of public opinion right now.

The Trump 2020 campaign’s own internal polling also keeps leaking to political reporters and it also doesn’t look good:

(The Trump campaign has said those numbers are out of date, and Trump has disavowed them on Twitter, with news emerging that he has fired several of his pollsters over the leaks.)

Now you, as a wise and seasoned monitor of campaign polls, might think it is ridiculous to be polling November 2020 general election matchups in June 2019 before the first Democratic primary debates and you, dear reader, would be right to think that. But some of the other indicators for Trump’s reelection are equally dismal.

Trump is still really unpopular. He’s generally quite unpopular in the most important electoral battleground states too. Here are the raw numbers for Trump in the states that are expected to be competitive in the 2020 election, according to the latest Morning Consult data:

    New Hampshire: 39 percent approval, 58 percent disapproval
    Wisconsin: 42 percent approval, 55 percent disapproval
    Michigan: 42 percent approval, 54 percent disapproval
    Iowa: 42 percent approval, 54 percent disapproval
    Arizona: 45 percent approval, 51 percent disapproval
    Pennsylvania 45 percent approval, 52 percent disapproval
    Ohio: 46 percent approval, 50 percent disapproval
    North Carolina: 46 percent approval, 50 percent disapproval
    Florida: 48 percent approval, 48 percent disapproval
    Indiana: 49 percent approval, 46 percent disapproval

It’s a grim picture. Wisconsin and Michigan were critical Midwestern pieces of Trump’s Electoral College puzzle, and he is now deeply unpopular in both states. Pennsylvania was maybe his most surprising win in 2016, and now he is 7 points underwater there. Perhaps Trump can take solace in his even job approval rating in Florida, but that is the only swing state where the president looks as strong as he did on Election Day 2016. Everywhere else, his support has deteriorated.

Maybe the most striking finding is in Iowa, where Trump beat Hillary Clinton by nearly 10 points. Iowans disapprove of his job performance by a 12-point margin now, in a farming state that’s been hit hard by Trump’s trade war. That would suggest the president’s cult of personality will not totally inoculate him from the unpopular parts of his policy agenda.

We still have a year and a half to go before the 2020 election. These approval numbers aren’t the same as a head-to-head matchup with a specific Democratic candidate (though those have not been very encouraging for Trump either). But they do indicate the unusual weakness of the president heading into his reelection campaign.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39377
    • View Profile

Biden spars with Warren and Sanders at first event facing rival Democrats

Event organized by The Poor People’s Campaign tackled issues ranging from bipartisanship to inequality and systemic racism

David Smith in Washington

Mon 17 Jun 2019 23.53 EDT
Last modified on Tue 18 Jun 2019 00.15 EDT

Joe Biden speaks at the Poor People’s Moral Action Congress presidential forum in Washington on Monday.
Joe Biden speaks at the Poor People’s Moral Action Congress presidential forum in Washington on Monday. Photograph: Susan Walsh/AP

Joe Biden, the Democratic frontrunner, clashed with his primary rivals on Monday over whether it is “naive” to try and work with and win over Republicans in a post-Donald Trump era.

Appearing at an event with other Democratic candidates for the first time in the 2020 race, Biden spoke at a forum in Washington organised by The Poor People’s Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival.

The Reverend William Barber, the co-chair of the campaign, urged the audience to refrain from cheering or clapping any of the nine candidates but rather focus on listening. “If you don’t do that, the media will misinterpret it, and our issues won’t get out,” he said. “The movement is bigger than any one person.”
Can lightning strike twice? Trump set to launch 2020 campaign
Read more

Even so, some of those present could not resist generating some noise for Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, whereas the reaction to Biden was somewhat cooler.

Joy Reid, an MSNBC host who moderated the question and answer sessions, asked Biden how he would get his plans through a resistant Congress, noting that, when he was vice-president, the Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell considered anything that came from the White House “dead on arrival”.

Biden fixed his gaze on the sitting Reid, walked closer and leaned towards her as he replied: “Joy, I know you’re one of the ones who thinks it’s naive to think we have to work together. The fact of the matter is, if we can’t get a consensus, nothing happens except the abuse of power by the executive. Zero.”

He acknowledged “there are certain things where it takes a brass knuckle fight” but said a president has to use the power of persuasion. “You’ve got to make it clear to Republicans that you understand on some things there’s a rationale for compromise.”

Biden, who made several references to Barack Obama during some meandering answers, added: “You can shame people to do things the right way.”

During the campaign so far, the former vice-president has implied that Trump is an aberration, and that his defeat could herald a return to the kind of bipartisan cooperation he enjoyed in the Senate with the likes of John McCain. Other candidates, however, have suggested that Trump is a symptom of a far deeper malaise.

Warren, who is gaining on Biden in opinion polls, told the forum: “Let’s be clear, if we’re in the majority and Mitch McConnell wants to block us on the kinds of things our country needs and the kinds of things they elected me and other people to enact, then I’m all for getting rid of the filibuster.

“We cannot let him block things the way he did during the Obama administration. I’ve been there when it was one set of rules when President Obama was president and now it’s a different set of rules now that they’ve got Trump in the White House. We can’t do that as Democrats. We have to be willing to get in this fight.”

The Senate filibuster is a gift to obstructionists, enabling a minority of senators to use procedure to prevent a bill from being voted on by the full Senate by extending debate.

In an energetic performance, Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado also suggested a combative approach. “I wouldn’t want any of us to be as malevolent or as cynical as Mitch McConnell, but could we please just be as strategic as he is?”

Raising his left hand, Bennet almost shouted: “We have a climate denier in the White House! The majority of the American people believe that climate change is real, that humans are contributing to it and we should deal with it urgently. But we have a climate denier in there who ran proudly on that and the Senate is full of climate deniers as well.”

Rather than trying to persuade them, the senator argued in favour of out-organising them and building a coalition, including farmers, that could overcome McConnell. “I do not believe we can change all this in one election,” he added. “I think this is going to take the rest of my lifetime, election after election after election, starting with the defeat of Donald Trump.”
Elizabeth Warren speaking at the event.
Elizabeth Warren speaking at the event. Photograph: Alex Wong/Getty Images

The Poor People’s Campaign released what it called a “Moral Budget”, highlighting that 140 million people in the US are considered poor or low income, laying out a plan for change, and challenging “the lie of scarcity”. It identifies $350bn in annual military spending cuts that would make the nation and the world more secure, and $886bn in estimated annual revenue from fair taxes on the wealthy, corporations, and Wall Street.

Barber declared at the event’s opening: “We are here because in 2016 we went through the most expensive presidential campaign in US history without a single serious discussion or debate about systemic racism or poverty. Twenty-six debates and not one hour.”

Barber criticised Democrats in past cycles for focusing on the middle class rather than the poor and embracing neoliberalism and “Republican-lite”. He argued that although poverty is most concentrated among black people, it is highest in raw numbers among white people.

He quizzed candidate after candidate over how they would deal with the “interlocking injustices” of systemic racism (for example, voter suppression), poverty, ecological devastation, militarism and “distorted morality” (for example, by the religious right), and whether Democrats should hold a televised debate on the issue.

Sanders and Warren, who both answered yes, seemed most at ease in outlining visions to combat multi-pronged injustices simultaneously. Sanders described Republican governors who suppress votes as “political cowards” and earned applause by stating: “If you are a citizen of America, you have the right to vote even if you are in jail.”

Attendees held up signs including ‘“Starving a child is violence”, “A poverty wage is violence” and “Polluted drinking water is violence”.

Bobby Fields, 33, an African American man who earns $9.30 an hour working at McDonald’s in Tampa, Florida, said he has yet not decided which candidate to support. “Trump has never acted in our best interests. He makes things worse. I’m feeling much better about all the Democratic candidates than I am about the president.

Patricia Chadwick, 66, who works in communications for an international not-for-profit organisation, voted for Sanders in the 2016 primary but said: “I like him but he’s a little too old. I’m leaning towards Elizabeth Warren. She’s produced ideas and plans and there’s the benefit she’s a woman. I wouldn’t [vote] for someone just because they’re a woman but I would like to see a woman as president.”

As for Biden, Chadwick was unimpressed. “I don’t like him. He’s very mainstream corporate. He’s sexist. I didn’t like the thing he did at the hearing with Anita Hill.”
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39377
    • View Profile
🗳️ Warren emerges as potential compromise nominee
« Reply #1058 on: June 20, 2019, 04:27:16 AM »

Warren emerges as potential compromise nominee

Centrists who once said the senator would lead the party to ruin are coming around to her as an alternative to Bernie Sanders.


06/19/2019 05:02 AM EDT

Sen. Elizabeth Warren has drawn notice for her wide-ranging “I have a plan for that” policy playbook, which has just enough center-left measures to earn her a serious look from former detractors. | Alex Wong/Getty Images

CHARLESTON, S.C. — There was a time not so long ago when leading Democrats warned that Elizabeth Warren’s “fantasy-based blue-state populism” risked leading the party to ruin.

But in a revealing tell of how far her campaign has come since its early February launch, some unlikely voices in the center of the party are growing more comfortable with the idea of Warren as the nominee.

It’s a sign of how the ideological lanes of the 2020 primary have blurred and overlapped and of the steady progress Warren is making as a candidate. But it’s also a statement on Bernie Sanders, Warren’s top rival for progressive votes. Sanders continues to face significant resistance from within the party — and nowhere more so than among the moderates and establishment players who blanch at his talk of democratic socialism.

Warren, on the other hand, is gaining traction among those who once rejected her muscular vision of liberalism. She’s drawn notice for her wide-ranging “I have a plan for that” policy playbook, which has just enough growth-and-opportunity, center-left measures to earn her a serious look from former detractors. The Massachusetts senator may be out of sync with party centrists, but she’s drawn at least one sharp line with Sanders that is resonating with prominent moderate voices as she surges into the top tier in national and early state polls.

“One is a Democratic capitalist narrative,” said Matt Bennett, a co-founder of Third Way, a centrist think tank that convened a conference of party insiders in South Carolina this week designed to warn about the risks of a nominee whose views are out of the political mainstream. “The other is a socialist narrative.”

The race for 2020 starts now. Stay in the know. Follow our presidential election coverage.

By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Third Way, which isn’t backing a candidate, famously torpedoed Warren in a widely read 2013 op-ed that exposed the party’s ideological fissures on entitlements. “Nothing would be more disastrous for Democrats” than to adhere to Warren’s brand of economic populism, wrote two of the think tank’s leaders in a piece that drew condemnation from progressives.

Today, however, Third Way is learning to live with Warren even as it embarks on a mission to ensure the Democratic nominee doesn’t stray too far to the left.

Jim Kessler, one of the authors of the 2013 piece warning that Warren would lead the party off the populist cliff, raved about the senator’s performance last weekend at the Black Economic Alliance candidate forum in South Carolina.

“Elizabeth Warren kills it at @BlkEconAlliance candidate forum. Love her entrepreneurship fund,” the Third Way co-founder tweeted Saturday.

“I don’t agree with 'Medicare for All.' I don’t agree with free college, … [But] her consumer protection policies are great. I think she has a good infrastructure plan,” said self-described moderate Democrat Reagan Gray, a health care policy and political consultant attending the Third Way conference. “I absolutely know and believe people are taking a second look at her. She now seems to be getting herself away from the Bernie Sanders grouping. People are taking a second look at her and saying, ‘Hmm. Some of her policies are good. Maybe she isn’t like Bernie.’”
Donald Trump

2020 Elections
Orlando Sentinel announces 2020 endorsement: Not Trump


Establishment and moderate Democrats haven’t necessarily been won over to Warren’s camp yet — many still point to former Vice President Joe Biden as their preferred candidate. But the tensions that once marked Warren’s relationship with moderate Democrats have begun to dissipate as she methodically lays out her agenda and shows a folksier, more accessible side that wasn’t always apparent in her role as a blue-state senator and progressive icon.

With 99 town halls and 30,000 selfies under her belt, Warren has offered a level of access that has disarmed some critics. She’s also made a point of traveling to some of the reddest of red-state locales — Mississippi, Utah and West Virginia, among them.

Jen Psaki, who served as White House communications director in the Obama administration, said moderates who might have been turned off by Warren in the past are now giving her a chance.

“I think [there] was a perception — and I'm not saying that's accurate — that she would only be able to speak to liberal parts of the country,” Psaki said. But skeptics now increasingly view Warren as “an alternative to Bernie Sanders on the progressive wing of the party and also someone, when you listen to her to policies, they’re palatable to people who wouldn't have thought they were palatable to them."
Audience members listen to Elizabeth Warren

Audience members listen to Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren speak at the Poor People’s Moral Action Congress presidential forum in Washington on June 17, 2019. | Susan Walsh/AP Photo

“I think she’s also learning how to campaign and how to speak to still keep her firebrand [persona], but also make people feel included in the conversation,” Psaki added.

That might explain why Donald Trump’s reelection campaign now views Warren as a threat after the president had dismissed her campaign just a few months ago as “finished.”

Polling suggests that at least one of Warren’s lightning-rod proposals — taxing the net worth of the wealthiest Americans — has support that extends beyond progressive circles. According to a recent Morning Consult survey, 61 percent of all voters favored her 2 percent wealth tax on households worth at least $50 million. Among Democrats, 74 percent favored the plan.

“What Warren has tapped into is that to most Democrats, it’s not about ideology [or] liberalism, it's about the economy’s out of balance. Nibbling around the edges and offering stale, old Democratic ideas of raising the minimum wage and shoring up Medicare and Social Security are just insufficient to dealing with the scale and scope of the problems we're facing in our economy,” said Dan Gerstein, who worked as a speech writer on the presidential and vice presidential campaigns of former Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman. “But she's doing it in a way that doesn't necessarily demonize business, but talks about the bad actors in capitalism. And again, very much differentiating [herself] from Bernie.”

Gerstein said Warren is finding a way to speak to deep structural imbalances in the economy and the fact that many Americans feel the system is rigged against them, but without raising alarms that she’s far outside the mainstream.

“She’s doing it in a way that doesn't suggest she's a socialist or she wants to kind of blow up the economy,” he said.

For the Democratic establishment and many moderates, that’s code for Sanders — the one candidate they cannot abide as the nominee.

Like many centrists, Bennett, the Third Way co-founder, views Sanders as destined to lose against Trump. But Warren is a different story.

“We really like the idea of using government to rectify market failure. And that’s what she’s about,” Bennett said. “We don’t agree on everything, but she’s fundamentally rowing in the same direction.”
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39377
    • View Profile
🗳️ The gloves come off in the Democratic primary
« Reply #1059 on: June 21, 2019, 01:07:47 AM »
Let the Games Begin!

<a href="" target="_blank" class="new_win"></a>


2020 Elections
The gloves come off in the Democratic primary

This was the week that the battle for the nomination got real.


06/20/2019 12:39 PM EDT

Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren is polling at 15 percent, virtually tied with Sen. Bernie Sanders, according to a Monmouth University poll. | Elise Amendola/AP Photo

The tenor of the Democratic presidential primary has verged on courteous from the start: To the extent that Democrats went after Joe Biden, it was usually not by name. And Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren kept their rivalry decidedly civil.

This week, with the first debates of the election season days away, the gentility came to an end.

Biden’s remarks at a New York fundraiser that “at least there was some civility” when he worked with segregationists in the Senate unleashed a torrent of criticism from his rivals and the left. And a story in POLITICO about centrists coming around to Warren as an “anybody but Bernie” alternative set off Sanders and his allies.

“We knew the primary wouldn’t be all puppies and rainbows forever,” said Ben LaBolt, a former adviser to Barack Obama. “And as the debates approach you can see a new dynamic emerging.”

The reaction from Biden’s rivals to his comments was fierce.

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, whose wife is African American, noted that one of the segregationists Biden invoked, James Eastland of Mississippi, would have outlawed his marriage. Sen. Cory Booker, who is black, took offense that Biden seemed to make light of Eastland calling him “son” but not “boy.”


The race for 2020 starts now. Stay in the know. Follow our presidential election coverage.

By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.

"You don't joke about calling black men ‘boys’,” Booker said.

Booker called on Biden to apologize but Biden took a different path. Outside a fundraiser Wednesday night, a defiant Biden said he had nothing to be sorry for and that it’s Booker who should apologize for questioning someone without “a racist bone in my body.”

“He knows better,” Biden said.

The crossfire marked some of the most direct and intense exchanges so far of the 2020 primary campaign. And it signals that with less than a week until the first televised debate, the field is done tiptoeing around.

“Running for president is no tea party. It’s a battle. And it is customary for candidates to begin to engage at this stage. The polite preliminaries are over,” said Democratic strategist and former Obama hand David Axelrod. “And since there is generally broad agreement on issues, if not solutions, the disputes necessarily turn on other things.”

In a separate episode, Sanders dispatched a tweet that was viewed as a sideswipe of Warren.

“The cat is out of the bag. The corporate wing of the Democratic Party is publicly ‘anybody but Bernie,’” Sanders wrote on Twitter, sharing a POLITICO story headlined: “Warren emerges as potential compromise nominee.”

Sanders faced his own backlash over the remark.

“If we had a multi-party parliament, it’d be pretty normal for Sanders and Warren to campaign against each other for leadership in a Social Democratic Party. That said, I still find this move pretty dissapointing [sic] and unnecessary. Draw contrasts if you want, but not like this,” tweeted Waleed Shadid, communications director of the progressive group Justice Democrats.

Shadid later noted that Sanders on CNN said his remark was targeted at the moderate think tank Third Way, and not Warren.

Still, the escalating tensions come as Warren is gaining on Sanders in polls. She leapfrogged him in recent surveys in Nevada and California. And a Monmouth University poll released Wednesday showed Warren and Sanders virtually tied for second, with Warren, at 15 percent, gaining five points in one month. Biden still led the field at 32 percent

“Biden’s numbers have held up higher than expected and a number of challengers are going after his gaffes more aggressively than before,” LaBolt said. “Warren has begun eating into Bernie’s numbers and he is trying to fend her off.”

Still, one Democratic veteran of the 2016 campaign, ex-Sanders adviser Mark Longabaugh, said the current tangles are nothing like what he experienced in that campaign. There’s plenty of time for it to get there, but it hasn’t happened yet.

“I don’t know if the gloves are off. I think the gloves may be getting a little loose — pulling out the fingertips to take the gloves off.” Longabaugh said. “Having been through the 2015-16 experience, I gotta tell ya, that was much more combative than anything you’ve seen in this race — not anything close.”

Not far from anyone’s mind are the first debates in Miami on Wednesday and Thursday next week.

“While this type of engagement is expected,” LaBolt said, “candidates should be careful not to cross any lines that could significantly damage potential nominees for the general.”
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39377
    • View Profile
Gotta love Liz in a Hardhat.  ;D


Elizabeth Warren thinks corruption is why the US hasn’t acted on climate change

Here’s how she intends to fight greenhouse gases and money in politics.
By Umair Irfan Jun 22, 2019, 7:00am EDT

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has tackled climate change in three key proposals. Scott Olson/Getty Images

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren has released not one, but three climate change plans as part of her campaign for president. So far.

Since April, she has outlined an agenda to counter growing greenhouse gas emissions and rising average temperatures through policies for public lands, the military, and US manufacturing. And more are in the works, according to her campaign.

Her piecemeal approach is distinct from the other Democratic candidates who’ve released climate proposals as a comprehensive bundle. Chief among them is Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who has made climate change the raison d’être for his run.

Warren isn’t making climate change the centerpiece of her agenda, nor placing it in an “environmental” silo. Instead, she is using different parts of her agenda to address the climate crisis. She is making the policy case that climate change is a national security concern, an economic threat and opportunity, and the consequence of a violation of public trust.

That’s because Warren doesn’t see climate change itself as the central problem; rather, the problem is money in politics. “The reason the United States is where it is on climate is corruption,” Chris Hayden, a spokesperson for the Warren campaign, told Vox. “We need to rein in the economic and political power of Big Oil to get serious about addressing climate change — which is why the first thing Elizabeth would do as President is pass her anti-corruption bill which would end lobbying as we know it.”

The open questions then are whether Warren’s strategy will make her agenda more palatable to voters, and if her policies would do enough to avert the most dangerous risks from climate change. Although Democratic National Committee has ruled out holding a climate change-specific debate, the issue is likely to come up in the first round of Democratic presidential debates on June 26 and 27 in Miami, a city struggling with sea level rise. Let’s take a closer look.
Warren has published three detailed climate change-related policies so far

Warren has laid out her climate agenda to date in a series of Medium posts. The first, published in April, deals with public lands. She observed that almost a quarter of US greenhouse gas emissions come from fossil fuels — oil, gas, and coal — extracted from territory administered by the federal government.

The profits from extracting these fuels mainly flow into powerful private hands, but the negative consequences — air pollution, degraded ecosystems, greenhouse gases — are borne by the public. “We must not allow corporations to pillage our public lands and leave taxpayers to clean up the mess,” she wrote.

On her first day as president, Warren would declare a moratorium on all new fossil fuel leases on public lands. “[T]hat’s pretty significant — putting all our federal lands, it’s nearly a quarter of our land mass, on the side of helping the climate instead of being a source of more carbon in the air,” Warren told Vox earlier this month. She would also reinstate an Obama-era rule that restricted the emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, from existing drilling and mining sites.

At the same time, Warren’s proposal calls from generating 10 percent of US electricity from renewable energy on public lands and waters through expediting permitting and approvals for projects. The royalties from these generators would then be used to further wean the country off fossil fuels.

Warren’s second climate policy pillar focuses on the US military, the single-largest greenhouse gas-emitting institution in the world. Its massive footprint with bases spread out across more than 70 countries devours huge amounts of fuel and electricity to move personnel and equipment. US tanks, aircraft, ships, and power generators together emitted 59 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2017. If it were a country, the US military would rank 55th in greenhouse gas emissions.

But climate change also threatens the armed forces. Extreme weather has already damaged major military installations and many more are at risk from rising sea levels. The massive population movements expected in the wake of looming droughts, severe heat, and storms exacerbated by climate change create could lay the groundwork for future conflict. That’s why military planners have described climate change as a “threat multiplier.”

To address these concerns, Warren introduced the Defense Climate Resiliency and Readiness Act in Congress. “It starts with an ambitious goal: consistent with the objectives of the Green New Deal, the Pentagon should achieve net zero carbon emissions for all its non-combat bases and infrastructure by 2030,” Warren wrote.

Warren also said that military contractors should also be held to these climate targets and that the Department of Defense should prioritize threats from climate change. The proposal also calls for more clean energy research, infrastructure upgrades, and an audit of climate vulnerability for all military bases.

Her latest climate policy released earlier this month centers on “economic patriotism.” This uses climate change to motivate a new economic development push. It puts meat on the bones of the “just transition” idea outlined in the Green New Deal and it’s the longest of Warren’s climate proposals (Vox’s Matt Yglesias explained the proposal in more detail).

The idea is that a sharp turn away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy demands coordination across the economy. The transition requires not just cushioning the blow for fossil fuel workers who would lose their jobs, but also creating a massive surge in demand for clean energy jobs.

In Warren’s proposal, there’s a Green Industrial Mobilization mandating $1.5 trillion in federal procurement for US-made low-carbon technology, a Green Marshall Plan to help foreign countries buy US clean energy technologies, and a Green Apollo Program to invest $400 billion in energy research and development over a decade. So her proposal doesn’t just zero out emissions in the United States; it aims to drive down emissions around the world.

“According to an independent economic analysis from Moody’s, my plan will meaningfully increase economic growth and create more than a million new jobs,” Warren wrote. “It will help reverse the massive manufacturing job losses of the last two decades that have hurt middle-class families and hit Black workers and communities hardest — all while allowing America to lead the global effort to address climate change.”

One place where Warren’s climate policies stand out from those of other Democratic presidential hopefuls is her frankness in how she intends to pay for them. Rather than just tax credits and working to “mobilize” private investment (as some other candidates have suggested), Warren is going back to the old-fashioned tactic of taxing wealth and corporate profits. “Her Green Manufacturing plan — just one part of her strategy to tackle climate change — is paid for by Elizabeth’s Real Corporate Profits Tax , ending federal oil and gas subsidies, and closing corporate tax loopholes that promote moving good jobs overseas,” Hayden said.

So Warren has a more tangible and snappier answer to the inevitable pay-for question that follows just about any climate proposal.
Environmentalists give Warren’s policies points for their depth, but want to push her further

Taken together, Warren’s climate policies to date are still not as far-reaching as those put out by Inslee, who has released three big proposals and says more are coming. His climate change agenda to date encompasses agriculture, financing, foreign policy, transportation, energy efficiency, and education.

But some environmental groups are nonetheless impressed with Warren. “There’s no question that the climate crisis can and will affect so many aspects of our economy, our society, and our lives,” said Sierra Club national political director Ariel Hayes in an email. “Senator Warren’s ambitious and strong plans recognize that reality thoroughly and propose solutions accordingly.”

Greenpeace upgraded its rating of Warren in its climate scorecard this week for presidential contenders in light of her green manufacturing proposal. It has her tied with Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and behind Inslee and New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker.

“We think that if she could put out a more comprehensive plan, she’d be able to touch on a lot of areas really in her wheelhouse,” said Tim Donaghy, a senior researcher with Greenpeace USA. “In particular one of the things we’re focusing on is trying to push the candidates to do more on fossil fuel supply.”

Donaghy pointed out that while Warren’s public lands plan stops new fossil fuel development, limiting planetary warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius this century, the more ambitious goal under the Paris climate agreement, requires aggressively clamping down on existing fossil fuel production. Without restricting the current output of fossil fuels, a clean energy program in the United States could simply end up leading to more fossil fuel exports, according to Donaghy.

Andrew Light, a former state department climate adviser under President Obama who contributed to the foreign policy portion of Inslee’s latest climate proposal, said that Warren’s approach to climate policy is compelling.

“I think what’s really good here is that climate change is not siloed into one bucket,“ Light said. Given that the impacts of climate change reach far-reaching impacts on health, the economy, social justice, and national security, it makes sense to bring it up those contexts. “I think that it’s important enough that you would have to bake it into how you’re thinking about public lands, a jobs strategy, or security,” Light said.

There’s also plenty of time between now and the first primary ballots, and Warren is still coming out with more proposals, so she could continue to fill in some of the gaps between her and Inslee.
Democrats are alarmed about climate change, but Warren’s strategy could help her sway voters in a general election

Polls show that Democrats are deeply concerned about climate change. One recent CNN poll found that climate change was the No. 1 issue for Democratic primary voters.

Among the US population as a whole, a growing majority are concerned about climate change and support policies to address it. But history has shown us that Americans have been this worried about climate change before. Climate change polled at similar levels in 2008 and was pushed to the backburner as the financial crisis and the recession took hold.

Warren’s strategy of framing climate change as an economic issue and a national security concern could help keep it front and center during another economic downturn or escalating international conflict. It could also be her opening to more climate change-skeptical general election voters who are not seeing rising sea levels or extreme weather firsthand.

“I think that it’s absolutely unquestionable that whoever becomes the next president has to be able to talk about all the issues that Americans are concerned about,” Light said. “They must appeal to states where they don’t see climate change in front of them.”

The true test of this will be at the ballot box, but we may get a sense of how well Warren’s approach stands up in the first round of Democratic presidential debates beginning June 26. Warren will share the stage with Inslee on Wednesday night.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39377
    • View Profile
🗳️ Elizabeth Warren jumps out to a big lead in MoveOn poll
« Reply #1061 on: June 26, 2019, 03:34:36 AM »
Liz has apparently drafted Mo Mentum, 7'2" Center in the First Round as her new Campaign Manager.  Mo is widely considered the best center to hit the Demodope Party since Lew Alcindor (Kareem Abdul Jabbar).  He combines mastery of the "Sky Hook" on offense with the aggressive defense and rebounding of Bill Russell. Due to his HUGE girth as well as Height weighing in at nearly 320 lbs, he also occupies practically the entire lane by himself. His "ape index" reach is so long it exceeds that of even Sonny Liston who measured a ratio of 11.5, thus giving him the nickname of "The Orang".  He has also mastered the "Windmill" form of defense pioneered by Phil "Action" Jackson playing 6th man sub for the NBA Champion New York Knicks in 1969.


Elizabeth Warren jumps out to a big lead in MoveOn poll
The survey comes a day before the first Democratic debate, hosted by NBC, in Miami on Wednesday and Thursday.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren Sean Rayford / Getty Images file

June 25, 2019, 2:02 AM AKDT / Updated June 25, 2019, 8:25 AM AKDT
By Ali Vitali

MIAMI — Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders top a new straw poll from the progressive group, illuminating how the packed field of candidates is coming into focus for more left-leaning Democratic voters just before the first debate of the 2020 cycle.

The poll, released Tuesday and first reported by NBC News, shows Warren is the top choice of 38 percent of MoveOn's members nationwide — and the top choice of voters surveyed in the early-voting states of California, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
Warren gains lead in progressive poll ahead of first primary debate
June 25, 201903:35

Sanders comes in second nationwide — 17 percent say he's their first choice — trailing Warren by more than 20 points. Former Vice President Joe Biden (15 percent) and Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana (12 percent), are the only other candidates to earn double-digit support; Sen. Kamala Harris of California comes in with 7 percent.

That Sanders, the Vermont independent, would do well in the progressive group's poll is no surprise: MoveOn backed him over then-rival Hillary Clinton in 2016's Democratic primary, and a majority of MoveOn members at the time said they preferred him to the former secretary of state. But that progressives are gravitating toward like-minded policy wonk Warren could be another sign of trouble for Sanders, who has been overtaken by the Massachusetts senator in some recent polls.

MoveOn's first straw poll of the 2020 contest found a mostly wide-open field, with almost 3 in 10 respondents unsure of whom they would support. At the time, former Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke edged out Biden for the top spot with 15.6 percent, and Sanders came in third with 13.1 percent. Warren netted only 6.4 percent of the respondents.

This latest poll, though, shows a massive shift. Now, only 2 percent of voters say they're undecided on their first choice. In 2018, almost 30 percent of the respondents deemed themselves undecided on whom to support or wanting someone else not listed among the 30-plus potential choices.

Download the NBC News app for full coverage of the first Democratic debate

The poll was online, emailed to MoveOn members and conducted June 17 to 21.

The field's top 20 candidates are set to face off for the first time in Miami on Wednesday and Thursday for the debate hosted by NBC News, MSNBC and Telemundo.

Ali Vitali is a political reporter for NBC News, based in Washington.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 16646
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: 🗳️ Elizabeth Warren jumps out to a big lead in MoveOn poll
« Reply #1062 on: June 26, 2019, 07:27:13 AM »

Elizabeth Warren jumps out to a big lead in MoveOn poll
The survey comes a day before the first Democratic debate, hosted by NBC, in Miami on Wednesday and Thursday.

Move On is a pretty left segment of the D party. and inclined to listen to positions on the issues, and also inclined to agree with Liz's positions on the issues, as am I. I have no evidence but suspect that the bulk of the democratic electorate is firmly in the "wake me after Labor Day 2020" category. IOW, leaving the selection to the motivated. Meaning it will be the insurgents versus the corpadems who themselves are ashlosh in political "donations."
“The old world is dying, and the New World struggles to be born: now is the time of monsters.”

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39377
    • View Profile

Fact-checking the first night of the first Democratic presidential debate

By CNN staff

Updated 1:10 AM ET, Thu June 27, 2019

(CNN)The first 2020 Democratic presidential debate kicked off in Miami with 10 candidates trying to stand out in a crowded field.
They took on taxes, equal pay, health insurance, gun control and immigration reform.
Here are the facts.

Insurance industry profits
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren said the insurance industry last year "sucked $23 billion in profits out of the health care system."
Facts First: It's true. Insurance companies' profits have been booming.
A study by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners shows the private insurance industry has seen "tremendous growth" raking in profits of $23.4 billion in 2018 compared to $16.1 billion the year before. That's the highest profit amount in at least 10 years.
It also shows that those companies' profit margin improved to 3.3% from 2.4% in 2017.
-Donna Borak and Tami Luhby
Crime stats in NYC
In a discussion on guns and crime, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said there needs to be a "different conversation about policing that brings police and community together. We've done that in New York City. And we've driven down crime while we've done it."
Facts First: While New York City's crime statistics have fallen in recent years during de Blasio's time as mayor, crime in New York has been falling for years, and it's unclear to what extent de Blasio's policies have contributed to that decline.
Last year saw the lowest number of serious and violent crime in the modern era, according to the NYPD. The homicide rate remained relatively flat while the number of robberies, burglaries, and shooting incidents all decreased from 2018 compared with 2017, the police department said.
De Blasio claimed that he has brought police and community together during his time as mayor, but a report from the New York City Police Department's internal Inspector General released Wednesday shows there's still work to be done, making 23 recommendations to the department about how it can improve handling biased policing complaints from its community.
-Ellie Kaufman
LGBTQ kids missing school
In arguing that the government needs to do more to support people who are LGBTQ, New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker said, "We don't talk enough about how many children, about 30% of LGBTQ kids, who do not go to school because of fear."
Facts First: Booker is correct, according to a leading LGBTQ education nonprofit, although a government study suggests the percentage is lower.
A 2017 national school climate survey conducted by GLSEN found 35% of LGBTQ students missed at least one day of school in the past month because they felt unsafe or uncomfortable. That number is even higher than the organization's 2005 school climate survey, which found 29% of LGBT students surveyed reported missing classes at least once in the last month because of feeling unsafe.
A government study suggests the percentage could be lower. A federal study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 2017 found that 10% of gay, lesbian and bisexual students missed school due to concerns over safety.
-Clare Foran and Jeremy Herb
America's wealth
Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan claimed that "the top 1% control 90% of the wealth."
Facts First: This is incorrect. Recent studies show the wealthiest 1% own around 39% of the country's total wealth.
According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan research institute, "the share of wealth held by the top 1 percent rose from just under 30 percent in 1989 to nearly 39 percent in 2016."
This concurs with a Federal Reserve study which found that in 2016, the richest 1% controlled 38.6% of wealth in the US.
According to a 2017 study by NYU economist Edward Wolff, the top 1% own 40% of the wealth in the US.
-Holmes Lybrand
A market for green products
Sen. Elizabeth Warren said, "There's a $23 trillion market coming for green products."
Facts First: According to a World Bank estimate, that's correct.
Warren was referring to a report by the International Finance Corporation, a division of the World Bank Group, which found that commitments made by emerging economies under the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement potentially will open up to $23 trillion in opportunities for investment in low-carbon technology and infrastructure.
-Lydia DePillis
Violence in Cory Booker's neighborhood
New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker often notes on the campaign trail that he lives in a low-income, inner-city area. During Wednesday night's debate, the former Newark mayor said that seven people were shot in his Newark neighborhood last week.
"I hear gunshots in my neighborhood," Booker said. "I think I'm the only one, I hope I am the only one that had seven people shot in their neighborhood just last week."
Facts First: It's sad, and it's true.
Six people were injured and one man died in two separate shootings in Newark's Central Ward, where Booker lives, the Tuesday before last, according to Newark Public Safety Director Anthony Ambrose.
Two women were injured and one man was killed in the first shooting, just before 4 p.m., Ambrose said in a press release. Five minutes and about a mile away, four men were injured in another shooting, Ambrose said.
Booker lives just a block away from that first shooting.
-David Shortell
Household income
Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan claimed that "the bottom 60% haven't seen a raise since 1980."
Facts First: This is incorrect. The bottom 60% have seen their income rise since 1980.
It's unclear where Ryan is pulling this statistic from, but a 2018 report from the Congressional Budget Office says that the bottom 60% saw an increase in household income of 32% -- adjusted for inflation -- from 1979 to 2015. 
Meanwhile the top 1% saw their income rise by 233%. 
-Holmes Lybrand
Gun control
New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker said, "If you need a license to drive a car, you should need a license to buy and own a firearm. And not everybody in this field agrees with that, but in states like Connecticut that did that, they saw 40% drops in gun violence and 15% drops in suicides."
Facts First: There is peer-reviewed academic support for this claim.
Booker was referring to the effects of a 1995 law that required a permit or a license to obtain a firearm, raised the age of people allowed to own guns from 18 to 21, and required 8 hours of gun safety training. A 2015 study published in the American Journal of Public Health found that the law was associated with a 40% drop in the firearm-related homicide rate.
A 2015 study in the journal Preventive Medicine found that the law decreased the firearm suicide rate by an estimated 15.4%.
- Lydia DePillis
Prison population
Former Texas Congressman Beto O'Rourke brought a stark figure into the debate on Wednesday night: "Tonight in this country you have 2.3 million of our fellow Americans behind bars. It's the largest prison population on the face of the planet."
Facts First: Comparing prison populations between nations is difficult because not all countries keep statistics in the same way. O'Rourke is broadly correct about the number of people behind bars in the United States but because of mass detentions in China, for instance, his claim that the US has the largest prison population on the planet is questionable.
According to an analysis of Justice Department numbers done by the Pew Research Center, there were about 2.2 million people behind bars in the US in 2016 between federal and state prisons and locally run jails.
China comes in at number two with 1,649,804 people imprisoned, according to the World Prison Brief, a database compiled by Birkbeck, University of London. 
But measuring prison populations in China isn't easy, the World Prison Brief notes, citing China's use of "administrative detention facilities" for some drug offenders and prostitutes. There may also be as many as 3 million Chinese Uyghurs, a Muslim-majority ethnic group, in government detention camps, US Assistant Secretary of Defense Randall Schriver said last month. 
-David Shortell
Medicare for All
Sen. Amy Klobuchar on Medicare for All: "I'm concerned about kicking half of Americans off of health insurance in four years."
Facts First: True. Medicare for All would cut private insurance for 150 million people.
The Senate's Medicare for All bill, sponsored by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, would essentially eliminate the private insurance industry after a four-year transition. Instead, all Americans would be enrolled in a government-run plan, which would cover virtually all medically necessary services. Private insurers could only offer other benefits, such as cosmetic surgery.
Currently, more than 150 million Americans get their health insurance through private plans offered by their employers, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Also covered by private insurance are the millions who buy policies on the individual exchange or through Medicare Advantage plans. All of these consumers would be shifted from the policies to the national plan under Medicare for All.
-Tami Luhby
Corporate taxes
Sen. Cory Booker singled out companies like Amazon and Halliburton for "paying nothing in taxes."
Facts First: Amazon and Halliburton's tax rates are low, but not zero.
We can't really know for sure because Amazon's tax returns are private. But The Wall Street Journal reported recently that the company's tax rate from 2012 through 2018 was 8%.
"From 2012 through 2018, Amazon reported $25.4 billion in pretax US income and current federal tax provisions totaling $1.9 billion," the Journal reported. "That is an 8% tax rate — low, but not zero or negative. Looking back further, since 2002, Amazon has earned $27.7 billion in global pretax profits and paid $3.6 billion in global cash income taxes, a 13% tax rate."
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 16646
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Round 2 winner: NBC with a knock-out
« Reply #1064 on: June 28, 2019, 09:55:18 AM »
Round 2 winner: NBC with a knock-out

June 28, 2019

Maybe Joe Biden didn’t see it coming, but NBC did.

The signature moment of Thursday night’s Democratic debate — as well as the must-see TV of the entire four hours over two nights of debates — was the exchange on race between Biden and Kamala Harris. As it developed, you realized immediately that we might be watching a pivotal moment in history. How did it happen? Debate moderators Chuck Todd and Rachel Maddow ignored the rules on time and simply let this hold-your-breath conversation play out for three minutes. It was actually Biden who stopped the tense exchange by saying his time was up.

On MSNBC’s post-debate show, Maddow said, “That was one of those things when you felt the weather shift. … That was a moment that, any time you’re preparing for a debate, that’s the moment that you want. But in this case, it had nothing to do with us. That was the candidates bringing that themselves. And it was magic in the moment.”

Now for the rest of the story: NBC fully anticipated the magic. NBC News chairman Andy Lack told Politico’s Michael Calderone after the debate that NBC was waiting for a Harris-Biden showdown because of Harris’ past comments.

Lack told Calderone that NBC “didn’t know how, when, precisely what the character of it would be. … It was a mystery to us what (Biden) was going to say.”

Lack added, “I’m in a (production) truck with 15 screens, and I’m looking at the two of them, and we’re directing shows, and the important piece for us (was) just to give them a chance to speak to each other in the way that they did. And it was quite compelling.”

That kind of anticipation and patient direction was not only the signature moment of the debates, but the shining moment for NBC, which gets high marks for its two-night coverage. Thursday’s debate was more interesting than Wednesday’s, and maybe that’s because Thursday featured more of the leading candidates. But NBC’s work stood out Thursday night when it didn’t get in the way.

When a debate is over and all the special moments involve the candidates, that’s usually a sign of a job well done by the moderators. Typically, the less you remember about the moderators after a debate, the more likely it is that they did a good job. You could make that argument Thursday night.

Yes, there were times when they struggled to keep the candidates under control. As veteran newsman Dan Rather tweeted, “I don’t envy the moderators. It’s like herding cats while conducting a symphony orchestra riding a unicycle.”

The moderators did OK on that front. It was actually Harris who did the best job corralling her fellow candidates when she (I’m guessing) used her talking-points cheat sheet for this line: “Hey, guys, you know what? America does not want to witness a food fight. They want us to know how we’re going to put food on their table.”

Some candidates (Marianne Williamson, Andrew Yang and John Hickenlooper, for example) might complain that they didn’t get enough time to talk and there might be a little to that. NBC did seem to concentrate on the candidates who were polling the best. Yet it did feel as if America heard from the most relevant candidates on the most relevant topics.

When asked about moderating, Maddow said, “This was absolutely freaking terrifying. … When we’re setting these things up, obviously, we’re studiously neutral between the candidates. We’re trying not to give anybody a particularly hard time or particularly easy time, trying to make sure that everybody gets on stage and the most important stuff gets litigated.”

If that was the goal, NBC succeeded.

For more content like this, subscribe to Poynter’s Morning Mediawire, our daily news headlines and critical analysis of the media industry. 

“The old world is dying, and the New World struggles to be born: now is the time of monsters.”


Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post

Started by Guest The Kitchen Sink

0 Replies
Last post October 13, 2016, 02:05:21 AM
by Guest
3 Replies
Last post November 08, 2016, 02:26:52 PM
by monsta666
24 Replies
Last post February 28, 2017, 06:54:54 AM
by RE