Dem Primary news week of 8/19

[Deleted]

Julian Castro has finally qualified for the September debate.

foxsanantonio.com/news/local/democratic-presidential-candidate-julian-castro-qualifies-for-next-debate

That makes 10.

[ESF]

This is awesome.

I think I read if there were ten, they’d split over two nights. I hope I’m right because ten is too many for one night.

[Deleted]

Aug 20, 2019 7:08:40 GMT -5 ESF said:

This is awesome.

I think I read if there were ten, they’d split over two nights. I hope I’m right because ten is too many for one night.

I think it has to be 11 to split. Tamara Keith of NPR tweeted that she suspects a lot of candidates are hoping one more will qualify so that they’ll split it. If that’s right, then I, too, hope an 11th qualifies (my hope would be Gillibrand). Ten people on one stage is too many.

[smock]

I've seen that Inslee is within 5,000 donors of qualifying. But I'm not sure he can make the polling cutoff. Same with Gillibrand. Even if she hits 130,000 donors, has she met the polling qualification?

[katieinthecity]

I don't know if this goes here, but Gillibrand is phenomenal on today's episode of The Daily. She's on the full half hour, discussing the Franken situation. She doesn't give an inch and is incredibly eloquent and convincing in defense of her decisions.

www.nytimes.com/2019/08/20/podcasts/the-daily/kirsten-gillibrand-al-franken.html

[Velar Fricative]

Aug 20, 2019 9:50:55 GMT -5 smock said:

I've seen that Inslee is within 5,000 donors of qualifying. But I'm not sure he can make the polling cutoff. Same with Gillibrand. Even if she hits 130,000 donors, has she met the polling qualification?

No, she needs 3 more and is still not quite at 130k.

Steyer is already 1 poll shy so he might make the debate since he already has the donors. Gabbard needs just 2 polls but I really hope she's toast. Inslee appears to have the donors now but needs 4 polls. 

[pixy0stix]

I've seen 3 Warren bumberstickers around the past week. It was firm Bernie country here last election, so I'm hoping this is a widespread change.

[Velar Fricative]

I've been daydreaming for weeks (since before the El Paso shooting) about Texas becoming a swing state and possibly turning blue in time for 2020. Castro could be a huge help with that and I've also become way less annoyed with Beto still in the race if he can actually deliver Texas for us (maybe even as a VP). I would open alllllll the champagne on election day if that happens.

[ESF]

Aug 20, 2019 10:01:16 GMT -5 katieinthecity said:

I don't know if this goes here, but Gillibrand is phenomenal on today's episode of The Daily. She's on the full half hour, discussing the Franken situation. She doesn't give an inch and is incredibly eloquent and convincing in defense of her decisions.

www.nytimes.com/2019/08/20/podcasts/the-daily/kirsten-gillibrand-al-franken.html

Gillibrand is the president of my feminist dreams.

[5kcandlesinthewind]

Aug 20, 2019 10:27:07 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

I've seen 3 Warren bumberstickers around the past week. It was firm Bernie country here last election, so I'm hoping this is a widespread change.

I regularly drive past a car that still has their Bernie stickers (and a "Fine, I'll vote for Hillary but Bernie was better" sticker *massive eyeroll*)  and I noticed this morning they've added a Warren sticker.  Progress!

[Velar Fricative]

Aug 20, 2019 10:45:59 GMT -5 ESF said:

Aug 20, 2019 10:01:16 GMT -5 katieinthecity said:

I don't know if this goes here, but Gillibrand is phenomenal on today's episode of The Daily. She's on the full half hour, discussing the Franken situation. She doesn't give an inch and is incredibly eloquent and convincing in defense of her decisions.

www.nytimes.com/2019/08/20/podcasts/the-daily/kirsten-gillibrand-al-franken.html

Gillibrand is the president of my feminist dreams.

Since I am doubtful she can get 3 more polls, I will settle for her being Secretary of HHS if Trump loses and is forcibly evicted from the WH.

[Velar Fricative]

I’m following Rachel Bitecofer on Twitter now after reading this interview. She nailed 2018 election predictions and makes me feel better by predicting a 2020 win for the Ds in the POTUS election and seems to be using better data. It’s also frustrating that the D party itself seems to not be focused on this particular data and think they won in 2018 because of Trump voters changing their minds on him. Nooooope.

www.salon.com/2019/08/17/this-political-scientist-completely-nailed-the-2018-blue-wave-heres-her-2020-forecast/

[Vespasia]

Castro released an animal welfare plan yesterday.
www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-08-19/julian-castro-announces-plan-on-animal-welfare-wildlife-protections

❤️

[nessness]

I saw about 10 people with pro-Tulsi signs on the side of the road the other day. It was like 105 degrees that day, so I was impressed with their dedication, though unimpressed with their choice of candidate lol.

@@@ (and CEP)
Anyone want to discuss Booker's "baby bond" plan? The gist is that every baby born in the US would get a savings account provided by the government, which they could access when they turn 18, and use for "wealth-building purchases" like going to college, buying a house, or starting a business. Kids from poor families would get more than kids from wealthy families, up to ~$46k.

It's an interesting concept, to be sure, and I think it would go a long way toward reducing income inequality. But I have some concerns too, like that kids would be pressured into spending the money on their families and it wouldn't end up benefiting them (I am 100% sure that this would have happened to DH if this program had been around when he turned 18). And I'd like to see the full list of eligible expenses, which Booker hasn't produced yet.


www.washingtonpost.com/politics/cory-booker-wants-a-baby-bond-for-every-us-child-would-it-work/2019/08/15/35003f16-b88b-11e9-bad6-609f75bfd97f_story.html?arc404=true

[msmerymac]

Aug 20, 2019 11:38:18 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

I’m following Rachel Bitecofer on Twitter now after reading this interview. She nailed 2018 election predictions and makes me feel better by predicting a 2020 win for the Ds in the POTUS election and seems to be using better data. It’s also frustrating that the D party itself seems to not be focused on this particular data and think they won in 2018 because of Trump voters changing their minds on him. Nooooope.

www.salon.com/2019/08/17/this-political-scientist-completely-nailed-the-2018-blue-wave-heres-her-2020-forecast/

Wow, her write-up is really good:

"Why is Trump in so much trouble in the Midwest? First, and probably most important, is the profound misunderstanding by, well, almost everyone, as to how he won Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania in the first place. Ask anyone, and they will describe Trump’s 2016 Midwestern triumph as a product of white, working class voters swinging away from the Democrats based on the appeal of Trump’s economic populist messaging. Some will point to survey data of disaffected Obama-to-Trump voters and even Sanders-to-Trump voters as evidence that this populist appeal was the decisive factor. And this is sort of true. In Ohio, Trump managed the rare feat of cracking 50%. Elsewhere, that explanation runs into empirical problems when one digs into the data. Start with the numerical fact that Trump “won” Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan with 47.22%, 48.18%, and 47.5% of the vote, respectively, after five times the normal number in those states cast their ballots for an option other than Trump or Clinton. This, combined with the depressed turnout of African Americans (targeted with suppression materials by the Russians) and left-leaning Independents turned off by Clinton (targeted with defection materials by the Russians) allowed Trump to pull off an improbable victory, one that will be hard to replicate in today’s less nitpicky atmosphere. Yet, the media (and the voting public) has turned Trump’s 2016 win into a mythic legend of invincibility. The complacent electorate of 2016, who were convinced Trump would never be president, has been replaced with the terrified electorate of 2020, who are convinced he’s the Terminator and can’t be stopped. Under my model, that distinction is not only important, it is everything."


Whereas, of course, other pollsters are saying PA and MI are winnable for Dems, but they are lamenting how tight WI might be.

[downtoearth]

Aug 20, 2019 14:13:06 GMT -5 msmerymac said:

Aug 20, 2019 11:38:18 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

I’m following Rachel Bitecofer on Twitter now after reading this interview. She nailed 2018 election predictions and makes me feel better by predicting a 2020 win for the Ds in the POTUS election and seems to be using better data. It’s also frustrating that the D party itself seems to not be focused on this particular data and think they won in 2018 because of Trump voters changing their minds on him. Nooooope.

www.salon.com/2019/08/17/this-political-scientist-completely-nailed-the-2018-blue-wave-heres-her-2020-forecast/

Wow, her write-up is really good:

"Why is Trump in so much trouble in the Midwest? First, and probably most important, is the profound misunderstanding by, well, almost everyone, as to how he won Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania in the first place. Ask anyone, and they will describe Trump’s 2016 Midwestern triumph as a product of white, working class voters swinging away from the Democrats based on the appeal of Trump’s economic populist messaging. Some will point to survey data of disaffected Obama-to-Trump voters and even Sanders-to-Trump voters as evidence that this populist appeal was the decisive factor. And this is sort of true. In Ohio, Trump managed the rare feat of cracking 50%. Elsewhere, that explanation runs into empirical problems when one digs into the data. Start with the numerical fact that Trump “won” Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan with 47.22%, 48.18%, and 47.5% of the vote, respectively, after five times the normal number in those states cast their ballots for an option other than Trump or Clinton. This, combined with the depressed turnout of African Americans (targeted with suppression materials by the Russians) and left-leaning Independents turned off by Clinton (targeted with defection materials by the Russians) allowed Trump to pull off an improbable victory, one that will be hard to replicate in today’s less nitpicky atmosphere. Yet, the media (and the voting public) has turned Trump’s 2016 win into a mythic legend of invincibility. The complacent electorate of 2016, who were convinced Trump would never be president, has been replaced with the terrified electorate of 2020, who are convinced he’s the Terminator and can’t be stopped. Under my model, that distinction is not only important, it is everything."


Whereas, of course, other pollsters are saying PA and MI are winnable for Dems, but they are lamenting how tight WI might be.

Hmmm... mulling this over. I thought a big part of Trump's win in Penn, Wisc, and Mich was 50+% of white women (who might also be more evangelical now and in the suburbs), and leaned more conservative and fearful in 2016 (thus Trump). Didn't they have a larger influence than Black turnout and left-leaning anti-Clinton independents? I'll have to look at her links from the article or look at her direct info. It's interesting to consider what Bitecofer says in that interview.

I would love to read if she has some take on this divide and it's implications for 2020...

The real story of white women voters is both more grim and more complex than the 53% figure reveals. The truth is that the 53% of white women who voted for Trump in the last presidential election was actually an improvement on even worse numbers from previous cycles. White women supported Mitt Romney at 56% in 2012, and supported George W Bush by 55% in 2004. Even these robust showings by Republican white women were down from their previous highs: Ronald Reagan won a staggering 62% of white women in 1984. All of these totals were lower than those for white men, who continue to support Republicans at alarming rates, but they were solid majorities nonetheless.
 
Preliminary results from this week’s midterm elections seem to suggest that the trend is continuing, with Republican candidates slowly losing the support of suburban white women across the country. According to the Wall Street Journal, white women’s overall support for Republicans slipped from the infamous 53% in 2016 down to 50% in 2018. CNN’s polling places white women’s support for Republicans just lower, at 49%. As the Republican party has shifted its rhetoric away from drab Romneyite fiscal conservatism and towards the sadistic racism that is Donald Trump’s stock and trade, there is some evidence that growing numbers of white women are turning away, repulsed.

This shift makes white women at once one of the largest voting blocs in the nation and also one of its most divided, least ideologically coherent demographics. No other race and gender group is so split. There is a battle on for the soul of America, between the peevish, racist cruelty of Trump and his supporters and a vision of inclusion, justice, and decency forwarded by an increasingly diverse coalition on the left. Much of that battle is being waged in white women’s hearts, with the left hoping that more and more of them will break with their historical loyalty to white supremacy and embrace a kinder, more sustainable model for the future.

But white women are not leaving the Republican party as fast as one might hope. If some white women are defecting from their traditional Republican loyalties, others – half – are staying. The trend of white women’s shift to the Democratic party, while real, also seems to be happening much more slowly than the most hopeful analyses predicted. Last month the New York Times ran a story on what it claimed was widespread support for the Democratic Texas Senate hopeful Beto O’Rourke among white evangelical women. The story contained accounts by white women who were disgusted by the Trump administration’s internment of refugee children at the border, and who had resolved to vote for Democrats. It suggested that the support of these white women could be decisive for Democrats hoping to make gains in a changing southern state. Instead, white women in Texas supported O’Rourke’s Republican opponent, the reptilian Ted Cruz, by 59%.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/09/white-women-vote-republican-why

[chw57]

Aug 20, 2019 10:27:07 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

I've seen 3 Warren bumberstickers around the past week. It was firm Bernie country here last election, so I'm hoping this is a widespread change.

Same with my area

[Deleted]

Has anyone looked at the NYT interactive tool with the candidates’ playlists? Beto and Bernie each have all of one whole song by a woman on their playlists.

Gillibrand’s playlist is like 75 percent women. That alone is moving me to her. SOMEONE POLL ME TO GET HER ON THR DEBATE STAGE!

[Dumbledork]

Castro and Gillibrand are the last two I wanted on stage. I’m really glad Castro made it on and I just donated to Gillibrand for the first time to hopefully help her get there.

I know it’s slim she has a real chance of getting the final nom, but I’m damn happy to have her up there pushing the debate conversation further left on women’s issues. With everything going on with PP and our Supreme Court, I would donate for that alone.

For Castro, FB reminded me that I shared a Politico article about him a few years ago when he was mayor. Reading it again, I’m all the more excited that he’s on the stage.

@@@
He created Pre-K 4 SA which provides “high-quality, full-day pre-kindergarten for disadvantaged 4-year-olds” in San Antonio.

Quality, affordable pre-k is a big issue for me. I hope he talks more about this and his plans for ECE.

www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/08/17/san-antonio-pre-k-program-mayor-julian-castro-215497

[shortcake2675]

I sent Gillibrand money as I hadn't yet. I'm so tickled Castro made into the debate.

[Velar Fricative]

Aug 20, 2019 17:18:47 GMT -5 @angryharpy said:

Has anyone looked at the NYT interactive tool with the candidates’ playlists? Beto and Bernie each have all of one whole song by a woman on their playlists.

Gillibrand’s playlist is like 75 percent women. That alone is moving me to her. SOMEONE POLL ME TO GET HER ON THR DEBATE STAGE!

I love the statement about Booker’s - “Chicken Soup for the Candidate Soul.” Seriously, I need to play that playlist anytime I’m in a funk.

[msmerymac]

downtoearth , I think her response would be that while it's happening slowly, it's happening enough. She says 90% of Republicans will vote for Trump, full stop. But the mindset of Americans has changed now that Trump HAS been elected (like - it really happened!) and he only won by 70k votes in the Blue Wall, which was honestly kind of a fluke based on a convergence of circumstances that likely won't happen again. Essentially, we don't need the 53% of white women - we need the people who didn't vote in 2016, or voted for Jill Stein.

(Nobody get complacent!)

[Deleted]

Um, are y’all seeing what’s happening on Twitter with Bernie’s campaign staff? This is a total shitshow. I cannot imagine these people being top advisors in a presidential administration.

[Dumbledork]

Aug 21, 2019 8:01:56 GMT -5 @angryharpy said:

Um, are y’all seeing what’s happening on Twitter with Bernie’s campaign staff? This is a total shitshow. I cannot imagine these people being top advisors in a presidential administration.

I need more info. Is there a hashtag linked with it?

[Velar Fricative]

Aug 21, 2019 7:28:56 GMT -5 msmerymac said:

downtoearth , I think her response would be that while it's happening slowly, it's happening enough. She says 90% of Republicans will vote for Trump, full stop. But the mindset of Americans has changed now that Trump HAS been elected (like - it really happened!) and he only won by 70k votes in the Blue Wall, which was honestly kind of a fluke based on a convergence of circumstances that likely won't happen again. Essentially, we don't need the 53% of white women - we need the people who didn't vote in 2016, or voted for Jill Stein.

(Nobody get complacent!)

Yup. We need to shout it from the rooftops for everyone in the back to hear - it is not about changing the minds of Trump supporters. It is about increasing turnout. Trump has shown people who didn't vote in 2016 who he is. We need to get those people who don't like what they see from him to turn out. They're not going to get excited about Biden or Sanders. TBH, as much as I love Warren, I'm a little concerned about excitement she can generate from non-voters. 

[Deleted]

Aug 21, 2019 8:58:44 GMT -5 Dumbledork said:

Aug 21, 2019 8:01:56 GMT -5 @angryharpy said:

Um, are y’all seeing what’s happening on Twitter with Bernie’s campaign staff? This is a total shitshow. I cannot imagine these people being top advisors in a presidential administration.

I need more info. Is there a hashtag linked with it?

It's just a bunch of attacks from Nina Turner and Briahna Joy Gray against Neera Tanden. As best I can tell, Tanden tweeted an attack on Susan Sarandon for not just voting, but also promoting a third party candidate in 2016. Turner quote tweeted Tanden to respond, so then Tanden called her out for third-party support. It devolved from there. I'm not saying Tanden's hands are 100 percent clean, but she did not attack Turner until specifically quoted by her, and she runs an interest group, not a presidential campaign.

[picksthemusic]

Jay dropped out. Got the email just now.

[anodyne]

Aug 21, 2019 20:39:43 GMT -5 picksthemusic said:

Jay dropped out. Got the email just now.

I hope he has a cabinet position.

[isabel]

Aug 21, 2019 1:53:50 GMT -5 shortcake2675 said:

I sent Gillibrand money as I hadn't yet.

Ditto.

[bronxgirl]

I hope more people start following Inslee's lead.