sigh...
Not Ellison too.
What about him? Did something happen?
sigh...
Not Ellison too.
His entire presidency is mainly going to revolve around him dealing with attacks/slights against himelf.
It's hard to associate Democrats with minorities when there are hardly any here. That's a southern thing, not New England."Independent" in the NE seems to mean "liberal scared of voters who associate Democrat with nonwhite people."
Tonight on the Factor! Bill O'Reilly compares the massive protests of the Trump administration to the fascist movements of the 20's and 30's, (for real) and suggests there's something "nefarious" going on with them, that they are being "whipped up" by some sinister, shadowy force, though the most specific details of his suspicions that he provides are "the internet". Charles Krauthammer tries to inject some sanity, while Bill harrumphs and shakes his head dismissively on the splitscreen! Don't miss it!
The far lefties get to come out of the crazy closet because you don't have minorities.It's hard to associate Democrats with minorities when there are hardly any here. That's a southern thing, not New England.
He described the CIA Memorial Wall that Trump spoke in front of, which commemorates employees killed in the line of duty, as "hallowed ground" and compared it to Arlington Cemetery.
"I think to go off and start talking about the press, talking about how many people were at the inauguration, I just think that frankly that was not appropriate," Panetta said. "I just think that the President needs to understand that he is president of the United States now. He's not just a candidate. He doesn't have to spend time embellishing himself or what he did."
"I just got the impression when he was speaking there that somehow he forgot that he was president of the United States," Panetta said. "That was not the appropriate place to start whining about what was happening in terms of numbers at the inauguration and what have you."
Maybe he'll be too distracted to actually legislate.His entire presidency is mainly going to revolve around him dealing with attacks/slights against himelf.
King isn't even a leftist, he's like a normal-ass center-left liberal.The far lefties get to come out of the crazy closet because you don't have minorities.
Maybe he'll be too distracted to actually legislate.
I've said before I'd rather have Pence running the show so I didn't feel constant anxiety over the US being attacked or something, but I'd also be worried about his competence. Obamacare would have been repealed Friday.
I'm pretty sure you could run as a Socialist in the Deep South and do pretty well as long as you were insanely racist.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. Supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) turned out en masse at ordinarily sleepy party caucuses earlier this month, electing a slate of delegates who could be poised to take over the largest Democratic Party organization outside of Washington, D.C.
As final vote totals trickled in, Sanders backers claimed to have elected more than 650 delegates out of 1,120 available seats chosen at this months caucuses. Those delegates will choose the next state Democratic Party chairman, along with other party officials.
Sanders supporters say they hope to change the very nature of the Democratic Party.
One of the issues were looking to do is transform the party, said Shannon Jackson, executive director of Our Revolution, the organization that grew out of the Sanderss presidential campaign. This is the first step in that process.
Our Revolution ran an on-the-ground get-out-the-vote effort to make sure supporters attended caucuses in each of the states 80 assembly districts. The group sent out more than 100,000 emails and delivered 40,000 text messages, Jackson told The Hill. More than 800 Sanders supporters signed up to run for delegate seats.
...
This is to basically force the issues that we vote on onto the legislators for action. So its a very serious sea change, said RoseAnn DeMoro, who heads National Nurses United and the California Nurses Association, groups that backed Sanders during his 2016 presidential primary.
The first test of the new Sanders bloc of voters will come in May, when California Democrats choose a replacement for outgoing state party Chairman John Burton. The nurses union backs Kimberly Ellis, a San Francisco-area party activist who runs Emerge California, a group that trains Democratic women to run for office.
Ellis will face Eric Bauman, who heads the Los Angeles Democratic Party and who backed former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election. Sanderss group has not made an endorsement in the race, though Jackson said Our Revolution would consider weighing in.
California is not the only state in which Sanders backers are trying to take over Democratic parties. The group is also organizing in Florida, Iowa, Colorado and Michigan, Jackson said.
Hopefully, within a year or two, well have a majority of the states covered, Jackson said.
...
Good old "National Socialism".
I missed this story from a couple days ago. Looks like Sanderistas are making a big push in California.
http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/315040-sanders-backers-take-over-california-democratic-party
Because they're know-nothings and I hate know-nothings, regardless of political stripe.King isn't even a leftist, he's like a normal-ass center-left liberal.
God why do you hate the left so much?
Yashar
Yashar‏ @yashar
CNN's Jeffrey Lord is saying NAFTA has caused women to come into this country who don't use tampons + that's hurting the dry cleaning biz.
What.Jeffrey Lord, ladies and gents.
Jeffrey Lord, ladies and gents.
Jeffrey Lord, ladies and gents.
Why? They want to win elections and get their guys in, I don't see the problem.Sanders' Stans should stay away from Florida.
This will surely end well.
Jeffrey Lord, ladies and gents.
Why? They want to win elections and get their guys in, I don't see the problem.
Jeffrey Lord, ladies and gents.
Why? They want to win elections and get their guys in, I don't see the problem.
Wasn't the problem with Sanders stans before that they were too obsessed with Sanders and needed to get involved locally if they wanted to make change?
Wasn't the problem with Sanders stans before that they were too obsessed with Sanders and needed to get involved locally if they wanted to make change?
So uh
Patient Freedom Act
GOP wtf are you doing
I've joked before that trump made his decision to run at the White House correspondents dinner where Obama trolled him. Clearly one of obamas bigger mistakes in hindsight
The current Florida democrats seem pretty damn incompetent so I'm not sure how new blood could ruin things there. Democrats have won two statewide offices since 2004 so like, I'm not sure how they'd ruin things further.Don't want to waste competitive seats (which there are in Florida) by nominating far-left people.
Like, nominating Todd Akin took a Senate seat away from the GOP.
And Sanders wasn't very popular in Florida.
Iowa and other states like that are fine.
While I don't agree with your premise, since there's not really much demonstrable evidence that Bernie people abandoned the party during the election, why would having a left Tea Party be a bad thing? The Tea Party has the power to do anything they want now.My problem with them has always been purity tests and a reluctance - if not outright refusal - to compromise. There's absolutely room for them in the party, but they've got to realize that "my way or the highway" is not the path to success
It would be easy to see that they could become the left's Tea Party. And that's not a good thing.
That's going nowhere, Dems won't go for it, and neither will hard right Republicans
What if Trump decides to latch onto it since it's the first thing out there that isn't a Paul Ryan thing?
If Trump freezes federal hiring, what happens to the 4000 or whatever administration positions he still needs to fill.
Not getting 60 votes in the Senate
Nothing about the ACA requires it to be national, really, so aside from a race-to-the-bottom type problem there shouldn't be anything preventing blue states from doing their own thing unless it's a money issue. In that case though, it's like, good luck convincing California to pay for New Mexico's healthcare lolIf x number of states were on Obamacare could that work? Like, Massachusetts did it alone, of course, but a network of MA, CA, VT, MN, etc. And then red states could have their Wild West thing.
It's why Medicare for all is what we need.Nothing about the ACA requires it to be national, really, so aside from a race-to-the-bottom type problem there shouldn't be anything preventing blue states from doing their own thing unless it's a money issue. In that case though, it's like, good luck convincing California to pay for New Mexico's healthcare lol
The ACA is much less successful in less population dense states. This is partly because those are usually red states whose governors don't take Medicaid, but also because the markets aren't big enough to incentivize good competition from insurers in the marketplaces.
If x number of states were on Obamacare could that work? Like, Massachusetts did it alone, of course, but a network of MA, CA, VT, MN, etc. And then red states could have their Wild West thing.
And btw, how long before Trump calls for nuking the filibuster so his policies can go through?
My public policy professor (lol alliteration) said today that the reason American health care sucks is that it's done through private insurers instead of publicly.It's why Medicare for all is what we need.
It's just fucking hilarious that we have to jump through so many hoops because a third of the country is so staunchly opposed to the most sensible and efficient thing to do.
The Swiss do just fine with private insurers.My public policy professor (lol alliteration) said today that the reason American health care sucks is that it's done through private insurers instead of publicly.
I'm on the "save the ACA if we can, but just expand Medicare in the future if we can't" train.
Switzerland is a dense, packed country, which is literally what I just said is the conditions the ACA works well in. It's basically pointing at Massachusetts and being like "why can't every other state be this way?"The Swiss do just fine with private insurers.
Your professor's opinion is awful. The reason US health care is bad is not because of how it's delivered, it's because it's attached to employment due to its origins in the wage caps of WWII.
Wages were capped, benefits were not. Health insurance started being added on as a bonus as employers fought for workers in a very tight labor market. It became an unofficial standard, and after the war, it didn't go away, and was later codified into law.
My public policy professor (lol alliteration) said today that the reason American health care sucks is that it's done through private insurers instead of publicly.
I'm on the "save the ACA if we can, but just expand Medicare in the future if we can't" train.
This doesn't change the point that private health insurance is much less efficient than public coverage?Then your professor is oversimplifying the issue if he doesn't even mention the fact that most countries in the world, including the US, are in desperate need of more healthcare workers.