In Case You Missed It (v117)

Finally - a busy writing week!

It's been a long time - just shy of a full year - since I had a week with enough posts to warrant a recap. Hopefully, it's the start of a regular posting habit.  In case you missed anything, here's what made it out of my head. 

I started and ended the week with a Quick Take post. The first was about Rep. Brandon Williams, my congressman, and how far off base he was when he dropped a Bible verse to recognize Martin Luther King Jr. Day, and then went about as far away from what the verse was about as one could possibly go when he talked about immigration. 

I'm not a religious person, but that doesn't stop me from looking up verses when I see them, particularly when they're offered up by politicians. As I interpret Isaiah 58, the basic question is "Aren't we doing enough?" and the answer is, pretty much, "No - you're not,"  if you continue to oppress others, finger-point and speak ill of them, and deny them food and shelter. 

Next up? Visits to the Sunday School classrooms, including chats with That Guy from Vermont (CNN State of the Union), Florida Man Ron DeSantis (This Week), and Joe Manchin (Face the Nation). 

 

Sanders thinks folks will eventually rally around Biden, but it's tough given the way things are going with Israel and what's happening in Gaza.

You cannot give billions of dollars to a country that ignores your wishes, violates international law. So, I would hope that the president follows through on his concerns and says to Netanyahu, this is unacceptable. You're not getting a nickel more from the United States unless you radically change course. We're not going to see hundreds and hundreds of thousands of children starved to death.

Manchin was asked whether he'll vote for Joe Biden; here's what he had to say about that.

I love my country too much to vote for Donald Trump. I love my country too much. And I think it would be very detrimental to my country.

In your Extra Credit, we heard from former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican, and David Axelrod, who made a name for himself during the Obama years. It was fun to hear their thoughts on Iowa, offered the day before the caucuses. 

Hogan noted that Donald Trump was going to win, but noted

I don't think it matters that much, because, for the past 24 years, the winner of the Republican Caucus in Iowa has not been the nominee. So it's really about the fight for second place.

And while he had good things to say about Nikki Haley's chances, Axelrod thought she had some things to be concerned about, notably polling showing a distinct lack of enthusiasm from her supporters.

... 49% of Donald Trump's supporters said they were extremely enthusiastic about voting for him, 23% of Ron DeSantis'. For Haley, that number was 9%. 

Turns out he was right. 

 I was Wondering on Wednesday about more abusive legislation on tap for Florida, where

the state legislature continues to attack people and things they don't like. Among the latest proposed bills is one that would effectively end legal recognition of trans people.

 When I first heard about this last week, it was in the context of driver's licenses and a required gender affidavit - and I couldn't help wondering if trans people were really worse drivers than anyone else.

That wasn't the reason - but it's only almost as silly as the reason suggested by one of the sponsors, which I included in the post.  

A fun bit of wondering was inspired by the tourism folks in Lexington, KY, who are looking to the Final Frontier for visitors. I'm not sure they thought the whole thing through, but you can decide for yourself. 

And finally, there was the second Quick Take, about endorsements and how they're treated by the media. When Sen. Tim Scott endorsed Trump yesterday, the media was all gaga over how important it was. It's not, really, if you consider this:  

According to the folks at 538, as of January 14th, Trump had picked up 185 endorsements,

including nine governors, 24 senators, and 116 U.S. representatives. By comparison, only 22 of them had endorsed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis or former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley. 

Help me understand: did Trump need Scott's endorsement, or did Scott make the endorsement for his own purposes? Why can't the media discern the difference, and report on it appropriately?

That's last week in a nutshell; be sure to check back this week for our regular features, and maybe a few extras.

Wondering on Wednesday 1/17/24

 

Ready... set... wonder!

I'd guess that no one was surprised with the outcome of the Iowa Republican caucuses; Donald Trump won, garnering more than 50% of the vote. Ron DeSantis (2nd) and Nikki Haley (3rd) got fewer votes - combined - than Trump. I have to wonder, though, why media outlets were calling the vote for Trump barely half an hour after the caucuses started? Sure, it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that he would win, but come on - at least let people go through the process.

Another thing I'm wondering? How many people stayed home, and why did they? As of last November, Iowa had 718,000 registered Republicans, but only about 110,300 people voted. 

Was it the weather? Was it an enthusiasm gap for DeSantis and Haley voters? Did the media's constant Trump-gushing have an impact? We may never know, for sure, but I think we can agree that an early declaration of victory like what happened this week is not helpful.

One last thing before we leave presidential politics,  I find myself wondering if Trump's abuse of Nimarata Nikki Haley's full name, following his promotion of the lie that she's ineligible to be president, is indicative of his concerns that she has a chance against him? Remember, he took this same approach to the candidacies of former President Barack Hussein Obama and Sen. Rafael 'Ted' Cruz. Of course, there's always a chance that he's just a jerk and can't help himself, so maybe we shouldn't read anything into it.

Meanwhile, back in Florida, the state legislature continues to attack people and things they don't like. Among the latest proposed bills is one that would effectively end legal recognition of trans people.

The bill starts by defining "sex" in a way that excludes transgender people and incorporating this definition at the beginning of Florida's legal code - Section 1.01.  It demands that every law in Florida adhere to this definition, effectively eliminating all transgender legal representation in a single move. It then goes through many areas of code and creates additional policies that allow for the tracking of transgender people's assigned sex at birth and the enforcement of laws that exclude or criminalize them.

When I first heard about this last week, it was in the context of driver's licenses and a required gender affidavit - and I couldn't help wondering if trans people were really worse drivers than anyone else. Come to find out, one of the authors of the bill says it's to protect law enforcement. According to Rep. Dean Black of Jacksonville, 

We need law enforcement to know what they are dealing with. If you can go change your gender on your driver's license on a whim, that can actually endanger law enforcement.

Not sure why officers will be 'protected' by knowing the birth gender of a driver, especially in a state that now offers permitless concealed firearms carry, but maybe that's just me.

We'll close with an interesting bit of tourism promotion from the city of Lexington, KY, where the Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) is going where no CVB has gone before: outer space.

The agency said it worked with scientists and scholars to beam the message toward potentially habitable planets in the TRAPPIST-1 solar system 40 lightyears away.

The effort was led by Lexington native Robert Lodder, who is an expert in computer engineering, astrology, and Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence.

If you're wondering, the message, which was sent with FAA approval, opens with

The first thing you'll notice as you descend through Earth's atmosphere above Central Kentucky is the lush green countryside that surrounds Lexington's vibrant city center. That's our famous bluegrass.

It includes recommendations where ET and friends can "stay and eat and shop." 

Now, I think this is kind of cool - I mean, why not have some fun, right?  But I can't stop wondering what's going to happen the first time one of the visitors stops at a horse farm, for example, and thinks it's a restaurant? 

What's on your wondering mind these days?

Sunday School 1/14/24: Extra Credit

 For your Extra Credit this week, I eavesdropped as  Democrat political operative David Axelrod and Larry Hogan, former GOP governor of Maryland, chatted with Jake Tapper in the CNN State of the Union classroom.  

It's interesting, now that we know the results of the Iowa caucus (Trump won, DeSantis was a distant second, and Haley was a close third), to hear their take on things.

Tapper asked Hogan who he wanted to win, and what the path to the nomination looked like for that person. Obviously, Hogan knew that it was "pretty clear that Donald Trump is going to win Iowa," but he also said

I don't think it matters that much, because, for the past 24 years, the winner of the Republican Caucus in Iowa has not been the nominee. So it's really about the fight for second place.

DeSantis, he said, put a lot of effort into Iowa, but he sees Nikki Haley as the one with the momentum. That matters, he said, because "what this race is really all about is to try to nominate the strongest possible nominee for November." Haley has the momentum, Hogan said.

...she has the potential of moving into second place, although it be at a distant second place, which gives her momentum heading into New Hampshire, where she's only seven points down. 

Tapper asked if that was an endorsement.  

I think we want to have the strongest possible nominee in November. Polls show that that is Nikki Haley, that she's 17 points ahead of Joe Biden, and it's a toss-up with Trump and Biden, and DeSantis is losing. So, yes, I think it's time for the party to get behind Nikki Haley. My friend Chris Christie dropped out of the race in New Hampshire. I appreciate his effort. But I believe that Nikki Haley is the strongest chance for us to put forth our best possible candidate for November.

Axelrod said that if DeSantis finished third, "he will be on his way back to Tallahassee, rather than New Hampshire," given the amount of time and money spent in Iowa. He also said if he were Haley, he'd be concerned about polling.  She was in second place, but "every other number would be a little concerning.," 

... 49% of Donald Trump's supporters said they were extremely enthusiastic about voting for him, 23% of Ron DeSantis'. For Haley, that number was 9%. And you have to ask yourself, if you're not terribly enthusiastic, are you going to drag yourself out on a night like this?

Also, "...half her support comes from independents and Democrats who say they're going to vote in the Republican caucuses."

Are they going to drag themselves out on a bitterly cold night to sit through two hours of discussion to cast a vote for Nikki Haley? It may happen. It could happen, but it looks worrisome to me...

And, he said if she doesn't beat DeSantis, in New Hampshire "the perception will be that she missed her mark." 

Tapper switched gears to the issue of a third party entering the fray. He noted that Hogan had stepped down from the leadership of No Labels, and asked if he was "exploring a run for president" on a No Labels ticket. 

Hogan admitted his move had "created a whole lot of speculation," but he didn't mean for that to happen, and his position on running hasn't changed.

I'm focused on trying to nominate the strongest possible Republican we can, which is why I'm urging everyone to get behind Nikki Haley. I wish my friend Axe could come up with a better nominee for the Democrats, quite frankly, because 70% of the people in America do not want to vote for Joe Biden or Donald Trump.

But, no, I'm -- I -- they're going to, I think, continue to try to get access to the ballot. They're going to wait and see if we're stuck with these two bad choices in -- on the November ballot. And I think they will make their decision in March or April, but my position has not changed.

Axelrod's glad Hogan stepped away, and said Trump's "best friends... are third-party candidates."

...if you look at polling, he tends to pick up marginally because of these third-party candidates. Certainly, that would be the case if No Labels fielded a candidate. And I think Larry was smart to step off of their board. And I would be sad, because I like him as a friend, to see him used in that way that would help Donald Trump in the election.

The final word went to Hogan. 

We would not be discussing any of this if Biden and Trump were not so weak. And so it's an interesting election. But I can tell you, I wouldn't want to be associated with anything that would be a spoiler for either Donald Trump or Joe Biden. And we will just have to wait and see. It's going to be a wild ride, I think, in 2024.

I suspect my favorite Republican is right on that last part.  See you around campus. 

TGIF 12/2/22

It's time for some good week/bad week accounting again. 

Let's start in Arizona, where the Board of Supervisors of Cochise County has finally certified November's election results. It wasn't out of the goodness of their hearts - it was because a court ordered them to.

Two of the three members - one Democrat, one Republican, voted to do the right thing. The third member - another R - didn't bother showing up.  The judge, Casey McGinley, noted

it is "clear" that the board was "duty bound" to certify the results and submit them to the secretary of state by Monday given that no results were missing from the county's totals.

McGinley said the board "exceeded its lawful authority in delaying the canvass for a reason that was not permitted by the statute."

The Dem supervisor who asked the court to issue a quick decision, had a good week; so did the judge, for requiring the board to do their job. And the supervisor who couldn't be bothered? Yeah, you know what list he's on. 

Let's shift to Texas, and the heartbroken city of Uvalde, where another lawsuit related to the school shooting there in May was filed this week. 

Survivors of the fatal mass shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, have filed a $27 billion class action lawsuit against multiple law enforcement agencies in Texas, according to court documents.

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in federal court in Austin, names the city, the Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District, the school district’s police department, the Uvalde Police Department, the Texas Department of Public Safety and a number of persons who are members or former members of the agencies listed as defendants. 

The lawsuit says

Instead of swiftly implementing an organized and concerted response to an active school shooter who had breached the otherwise ‘secured’ school buildings at Robb Elementary school, the conduct of the three hundred and seventy-six (376) law enforcement officials who were on hand for the exhaustively torturous seventy-seven minutes of law enforcement indecision, dysfunction, and harm, fell exceedingly short of their duty-bound standards.

This suit just the most recent one to be filed. 

One federal lawsuit filed earlier this week alleges nearly two dozen people and entities, including the gun manufacturer and store that provided the rifle used in the attack, were negligent and failed to protect a student who was killed. Other families filed a similar lawsuit in September.

No amount of money can ever make up for what happened in May, but there needs to be accountability somewhere in all of this. I'd say the folks had a good week for at least bringing the suits and trying to keep the accountability ball rolling.

And, to Florida, where a former president Donald Trump lost another court case. 

A unanimous federal appeals court on Thursday ended an independent review of documents seized from former President Donald Trump’s Florida estate, removing a hurdle the Justice Department said had delayed its criminal investigation into the retention of top-secret government information.

The three-judge panel, which included two Trump-selected Republicans, said

It is indeed extraordinary for a warrant to be executed at the home of a former president — but not in a way that affects our legal analysis or otherwise gives the judiciary license to interfere in an ongoing investigation...

The law is clear. We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant. Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so. 

The judges from the 11th Circuit who looked beyond who picked them, and did the right thing had a good week. And, of course, put another bad week in the books for the Florida Man.

Continuing our swing through the states, let's look at the Democrats and their plans to realign the early primaries. 

The Democratic National Committee voted on Friday to radically alter its presidential nominating calendar, following President Joe Biden’s recommendations to elevate South Carolina as the first primary state and to eliminate Iowa, breaking with a half-century of historical precedent. But there are still several logistical hurdles for the party to clear to make the new vision a reality.

Under the plan, South Carolina will go first on February 3rd, with New Hampshire and Nevada following three days later. Georgia would vote on February 13th, and Michigan on February 27th. Iowa's completely out of the early states. 

The full DNC still has to approve the plan, and the states that are moving up have until early January to certify they'll be able to meet the schedule. And, New Hampshire's required to go a week before any other state primary, so there's that.

Some people will suggest this was solely a move by the Biden camp to help ensure the octogenarian's chances in '24, but there are legitimate reasons to make some changes to crazy rules that give precedence to Iowa (31st in population, 90% white) and New Hampshire (41st/92% white).

Biden and the Ds had a good week on this; we'll see if it turns into a good week for voters if everything works out.

TGIF, everyone.

Wondering on Wednesday 3/24/21

Ready... Set... Wonder!

I've got an eclectic set of wonderment today. Let's dive in, shall we?

According to this article, the Biden administration is putting accountability back into the government, because "(a)gencies were clear, and unanimous, in their desire to have the earlier framework reinstated," according to an OMB official. The guidelines, which were removed on Christmas Eve, relieved agencies from having to set performance goals and track progress against them. One reason for the removal was that folks weren't reading the reports on Performance.gov. Another reason? The Trump administration was focused on getting rid of work that "doesn't lead to impactful change or measurable efficiencies." I'm wondering, how you can determine if measurable efficiencies have been made if you're not measuring them?

Moving from DC to Tennessee, if everything goes as State Rep. Jerry Sexton planned, the Bible will be the official book of the Volunteer State. Sexton gave a couple reasons why the Bible should be the official book, including to "reflect family heritage and underscore the multi-million-dollar industry that is Bible printing in Tennessee." Now, obviously the Bible is not critical to many Americans, including "Buddhist, or Muhammad or any of those religions," as Sexton called them, trying to be respectful to everyone's concerns and "just put the Bible where I feel that it belongs." 

His feelings aside, I wonder about the choice. While Bible publishing may be a multi-million- dollar industry," the healthcare industry in Tennessee is a multi-billion-dollar industry. Maybe the state's official book should be the manual on how to read an insurance claim form?

A researcher asked groups of voters to imagine that the Republican Party and the Democratic Party were each one person, and to identify the characteristics each of those people would have, or, as he put it, to “pretend that the attributes you associate with the Republican party were encapsulated in one person.”

• Five independents and one Democrat defined the Republican Party 'person' using these terms: Stubborn, Conservative, Unreliable, Selfish, Greedy, Ultra-capitalist, Closed-minded, Ultra-religious, Anti-immigrant, and Hypocritical.
• Three Republicans, two independents, and one libertarian used these terms: Fiercely loyal, Fiscally conservative, Responsible, Egotistical, More extreme, Rudderless, Narcissistic, Controlling, Elitist, Fearful, Passionate, Inconsistent, and Divided.

The same groups were asked to define the Democratic Party 'person.'

• The first group used these terms: Community-minded, Humanitarian, Open-minded, Fun, Caring, Globally aware, Accepting of other humans, Diverse in interests, Racially/gender diverse, Futuristic.
• And the second group? Stereotyping, Critical of ideas/of things they don’t like, Underdogs/Uncomfortable in the majority, Empathetic, Patronizing, Hypocritical, Messiah-complex, Utopian-driven, Spend a lot/not fiscally conservative,

I don't see any revelations there, but I do wonder about the Republican-Independent-Libertarian group being so harsh on their own party, and what that will mean going into the next election cycle.

Speaking of the next election cycle, C-SPAN is kicking off the "Road to the White House 2024" this Friday, with former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo talking up the Westside Conservative Club in Iowa. Whether Pompeo gets to run or not depends on whether The Former Guy decides to run again. With that decision seeming to be on hold until after next year's midterms, everyone else interested in running is forced to get out in front of voters - or at this point, are they just donors?  I also wonder who else will jump into the early fray.

And speaking of elections, how horrible must it be in Israel, I wonder? Yesterday's election apparently has resulted in another no-winner decision, for the fourth time in two years, if the exit polls are right. I can't even imagine having to go through that - it's hard enough having to put up with the mid-terms here. And if those polls are right, there'll be a fifth election later this year. 

Finally, news is breaking that New York's Senate, Assembly, and the Sonofa Gov have agreed to legalize adult recreational marijuana. I haven't seen the bill yet, but it was reported that Gov. Andrew Cuomo has said getting this done is "essential" to the state's social and economic well-being - and by that, he means the 9% state sales tax is essential. Some local governments can tack on an additional 4% sales tax. There's more - a whole nother hunk of burning bureaucracy to manage the weed, and fights over what to do with the tax money, naturally. I'm not wondering about all of that - that's the New York way, adding taxes and layers of bureaucracy, and fighting about all of it. 

Well, what am I wondering about? How do I go about getting "Don't Bogart That Joint" installed as our new state song? I respect the folks who picked "I Love New York," our current state song, but I just want to put this song where I feel it belongs. 

What are you wondering about?

Email of the Week (v9)

Thursday is 'Email of the Week' day, when I plow through a hundred or so emails from the handful of Democratic presidential candidates I'm following to see what's going on.

I received 160 emails this week from the gang of eight candidates I'm following.As usual, Mayor Pete led the way with 48 emails,  followed by Elizabeth Warren (29) Amy Klobuchar and That Guy From Vermont (24 each), Andrew Yang (20) the new guys, Mike Bloomberg and Deval Patrick (7 each) and Tom Steyer (1).

Fundraising, Iowa (pre- and post-caucus), upcoming debates, and New Hampshire were hot topics, as were pointed barbs at each other. 

There were even a couple of emails from Cory Booker, who's now running for his Senate seat instead of for President.  Here's one of them, with the subject line Trump is tearing our country apart.

I just walked out of the President’s State of the Union address.

What we heard from Donald Trump tonight was more of the toxic division that we’ve become accustomed to. He’s tearing us apart instead of bringing our country together.

I’ve always believed that the ties that bind us are stronger than the lines that divide us. As we work to elect a President and members of Congress this fall, it’s important that we choose candidates who will help unite us instead of pushing us further apart.

That’s where you come in, Sue.

I’m running for re-election to be one of those leaders. Please send in a donation now so I can keep a message of unity at the forefront of our national politics.

Our country is deeply hurting right now -- and the past three years of Trump’s hatred and bigotry have only added to the pain that millions of Americans are feeling.

As I said often during my campaign for president, defeating Donald Trump is only the floor -- not the ceiling. Once he’s out of office, we’ll then have to begin the hard work of healing a country so wounded that it elected someone like him in the first place.

I’m ready for the challenge before us, but I’m going to need your help. Invest in our campaign today to send me back to the Senate for another term.

Let’s also do everything we can to ensure that this was the last State of the Union address Donald Trump will deliver as our president.

Sincerely,
Cory

That was almost the winner, but since Booker is no longer running for president, I went back through everything, and that's when I found this one Andrew Yang. Short and sweet, it earned the coveted Email of the Week recognition.

Sue --

Last night during the Iowa caucuses, the entire nation realized something the Yang Gang has known since the beginning -- we desperately need a president who actually understands technology.

This is a HUGE opportunity for our campaign to win over every single voter who saw what happened in Iowa last night and is now looking for a president who is ready to lead us into a future that is already here.

If we act now, we can make sure all these voters know that Andrew will be that president. So make a rush donation before the end of the day to help us reach these voters!

Sure, he's asking for money - but in that first sentence, he hit the nail on the head.

We don't need someone who merely knows how to tweet and who thinks that Rudy 'The Butt-Dialer' Giuliani is a tech security expert - we need someone who understands that whatever the heck ends up being the result from Iowa, whenever we get it, we can't have leaders who don't understand how critical it is that our election technology is both world-class and works as intended.

And, honestly, that whatever we do, it cannot fall victim to something as simple as a bunch of goofballs calling in, jamming the lines, and preventing votes from being reported.

Users on a politics-focused section of the fringe 4chan message board repeatedly posted the phone number for the Iowa Democratic Party, which was found by a simple Google search, both as screenshots and in plain text, alongside instructions.

"They have to call in the results now. Very long hold times being reported. Phone line being clogged," one user posted at about 11 p.m. ET on Monday, three hours after the caucuses began.

"Uh oh how unfortunate it would be for a bunch of mischief makers to start clogging the lines," responded another anonymous user, sarcastically.

Some users chimed in, posting alleged wait times on hold, imploring others to “clog the lines [and] make the call lads.”

Because if the goofballs can take us down so easily, can you imagine what the professionals can do? 

Sunday School 2/2/20

The remaining 2020 Dem candidates - John Delaney dropped out a couple of days ago -  are busy, busy, busy, with the Iowa caucuses happening today. 

Three senators are making up for lost time, having been in DC under punishment of imprisonment for the impeachment; one candidate seems to be getting grumpier by the moment; they're taking harder shots at each other; their fans are taking shots at the past and apologizing for it, with the hope of preserving the future, and it seems everyone's taking shots at the DNC for one reason or another. And there's that polling debacle, too. 

Three candidates were in the classrooms - Andrew Yang and Amy Klobuchar each made an appearance, but Mayor Pete was in four classrooms:  Meet the Press, CNN's State of the Union, This Week, and Face the Nation. Here are some highlights from his appearances.

Two from his visit to MTP, first on impeachment:

Well, I think that the critical thing was to take the step of seeking to hold the president accountable... It looks like the Senate GOP has always viewed this as a foregone conclusion. And the most important thing that I'm sharing, especially with voters, with caucus-goers as I travel through Iowa, is I understand the sense of exhaustion that can come from watching this whole process play out. Where actually SNL's mockery of the trial almost seemed like it was a process that had more integrity than the actual trial, having no witnesses at all. And it beats you down. But, if the Senate is the jury right now, we are the jury tomorrow. And however frustrating it is to watch that process, you can't switch it off, you can't walk away, and you can't give up because this is actually the year where there is accountability for the president and for a lot of these senators because it's an election year.

And on fighting someone like Trump:

Well, for one thing, I'm not afraid of the kind of nonsense he's going to throw around. I've seen worse forms of incoming than a tweet full of typos...

But the thing about Donald Trump, he's kind of like a Chinese finger trap, where the harder you pull, the more you get stuck. He has this way of changing the subject. And so in dealing with him, it's very important if he tells a lie, you correct it. If he does something wrong, you confront it. If he attacks you, you push back. But then, you've got to very quickly return to what this election and every election is actually about, which is the voter asking the question, "How's my life going to be different if you're president instead of you?" And we've got the best answers on all of those questions. 

Two from SOTU, starting with whether or not Joe Biden can beat Donald Trump.

Here's my concern.

If you look at the lessons of history, over the last-half century, every time that we have won, every time my party has won the White House, it has been with a candidate who is new in national politics, who doesn't work in Washington or at least hadn't been there very long, and who was opening the door to a new generation of leadership...That is the best way to win.

And at a moment like this, why we -- why would we take a chance on anything else? Let's put together the best campaign to beat Donald Trump.

On choosing in a running mate:

Well, I don't want to say anything that would disqualify anybody from being considered.

 But what I will say is that a top consideration, not only for a running mate and for a vice president, but in building a Cabinet, is making sure that we have the gender, racial, professional, and regional diversity to really reflect this diverse country that we are.

Two from his conversation with George on This Week, starting with whether he knows what happened with the Des Moines Register poll.

Not completely but my understanding is that there was an issue, it was raised and they decided to respond by withdrawing the release of the poll and -- I do think at a moment like this where you got a president routinely attacking the press, it’s worth remembering the integrity and the seriousness with which reporters and press take the work that they do and wanting to make absolutely sure that it’s accurate and strong. 

And on the economy:

 Well, first of all, let's ask what it means to have a good economy. If one job is not enough, if wages, even when they go up, aren't going up as fast as the cost of long term care and prescription drugs and retirement and education and the cost of housing, something is wrong. When I'm president, we're not going to measure the performance of the economy by how the Dow Jones is doing. 

I get that if you have a building with your name on it not far from Wall Street, maybe the Dow Jones and the economy seem like one in the same. But, here in Iowa, and in South Bend, Indiana, where I live, and in most neighborhoods in big cities and small towns across this country, folks want to know when this good economy is actually going to start making their lives better. And we're going to measure the performance of the economy by the income growth of the 90 percent. 

And finally, two from Face the Nation, starting with why it's a challenge for him to grow support in the minority communities.  

Well, I'm competing against some candidates who have had years or decades to demonstrate who they are and how they can win. I recognize that I am newer on the scene and we're at a time when no one is feeling the pain of living under this administration more than Americans of color. It's one of the reasons why there is such a focus on making sure that we are the campaign that can bring an end to that and that can turn the page. But the process of proving that begins right here in Iowa. And this is our best first chance to demonstrate the kind of organizational strength that will help build credibility with folks I've talked to, especially when we're in the south who may appreciate and like our plans, but also want to know that I'll be in a position to actually deliver, to defeat Donald Trump, and to make good on those plans.

And the last word, on how he feels today compared to how he felt when he was 18 about Bernie Sanders.

Look, I still admire the qualities that I admired about him when I was in high school, but we're at a moment right now where our country is dangerously, frighteningly polarized and divided and we're at a moment where we have an amazing historic majority to do big things. I mean, even more than the majority that was available to President Obama, let's say 10 years ago. Among the American people right now, there is a strong appetite to step up and, for example, solve the health care issue. It's just that people aren't crazy about the idea of being kicked off their plans. There's a huge appetite right now to do the biggest transformation we've had on college affordability since the G.I. Bill. It's just that some Americans aren't crazy about the idea of paying even for the tuition of the children of millionaires and billionaires--

I think I'm the best candidate to bring people together now. And what we're seeing on the trail, including as I traveled to counties here in Iowa that swung in a big way from supporting President Obama to supporting President Trump, is that not only do we have Democrats dyed-in-the-wool progressives at our events, but we're seeing independents and a lot of people who self-identify as those future former Republicans I like to talk about in my speeches coming together, not pretending we agree on absolutely everything, but ready for a change. And actually, as united in what it is we're for, as what it is we're against. 

If you're eligible to caucus tonight in Iowa, please participate. Those of us not in Iowa, many of whom are envious of your unique opportunity to shape the presidential contest, await the outcome of your deliberations.

See you around campus.

Email of the Week (v7)

Thursday is 'Email of the Week' day, when I plow through a hundred or so emails from the handful of Democratic presidential candidates I'm following to see what's going on.

So, what was in my inbox? 116 emails from the candidates I'm following: Mayor Pete, Amy Klobuchar, That Guy From Vermont (TGFV), Elizabeth Warren, and Andrew Yang. I promised you I'd add Tom Steyer - and I did that, but just today. I also added both Deval Patrick and Mike Bloomberg. I can tell you that Steyer is now looking to get himself 250K donors so that he can be on stage in the February debate - I've seen a number of Facebook ads looking for just a dollar from me to help. 

Most of the emails were about the Iowa caucus, donations, and various fundraising deadlines (some met, some missed). We also learned of endorsements; Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren were both endorsed by the NY Times, and Klobuchar picked up the endorsement of the Quad-City Times.  Mayor Pete got a couple - former Obama Economic Advisors Council chair Austan Goolsbee, and actress Sharon Stone, who let us know that

Pete is a stark contrast to the typical Washington mindset that we're used to -- one full of anger and political warfare. He reminds me of why I became politically active as a young teen and fell so deeply in love with this democracy.

Elizabeth Warren let us know she'd gotten Megan Rapinoe's endorsement. Rapinoe, you'll recall, was the heroine of the USA women's World Cup championship. She's also a noted activist.

Every day, Megan is fighting for big, structural change, and we could not be more excited to welcome her on to Team Warren.

All of the candidates - with the customary exception of TGFV who has ignored all of the easy-peasy opportunities (Thanksgiving, Christmas, Hanukkah, New Year's) - sent messages commemorating Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. 

Andrew Yang spoke of King's championing of a "guaranteed income that would give those struggling a floor to stand on..." and of King's desire to eradicate poverty, noting

We are still fighting this fight. We are working to empower people to live their lives without scarcity, to be able to breathe easier, and to feel some relief from daily struggles.

Senator Klobuchar's message was simple and direct.

At a time of blistering rhetoric and divisiveness, I believe there is still more that unites us as Americans than divides us. We must heed the words of Dr. King, that we are all “tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly."

Senator Warren said, in part, we honor "His struggles and his triumphs, his courage and his conviction." And, she said,

Dr. King was the heart and hope of the civil rights movement. His dream shocked the conscience of our nation and challenged us to live up to our highest ideals... As I've traveled the country on this campaign, I have seen first-hand the dream that Dr. King imagined so many years ago... 

And Mayor Pete noted, in the longest email, that

In 1967, Dr. King created the Poor People’s Campaign, calling on the country and the American people to bridge race, class, and faith to live up to the teaching: “I was hungry and you fed me. I was a stranger, and you welcomed me.”  

And strange as it may seem right now, what I have seen in my life and my travels around this country fills me with hope. 

But the coveted Email of the Week goes to TGFV, who on MLK Day shared a vision not of the past, or of today, or next year, or even the year after that. Nope: he shared a utopian vision of four years from now.

Friends - 

Imagine four years from now. President Bernie Sanders - having passed Medicare for All, a Green New Deal, and canceled all student debt - will be gearing up for a re-election campaign to continue our incredible progress transforming our country. 

Imagine college for all. Imagine health care guaranteed as a right. Imagine all that we can do for working people. It CAN happen. And when it does, we will look back to right now. 

Sixteen days from today is the Iowa caucus. If we win Iowa, it will set us up to do VERY well in the rest of the primaries, no matter what the corporate media and political establishment throw at us. Victory is in sight.

It starts with as many Bernie supporters as possible making a contribution to our campaign today. 

Can Bernie count on you for a $2.70 contribution to our campaign today? Every donation puts us on the path to a future with President Bernie Sanders.

Our donations we make to Bernie add up very quickly. All of sudden, it's ten more organizers, and then another day of advertising in a key state. And then we win - and get to the business of transforming our country.

Thanks for all you do for our campaign. 

I'm not sure I'm ready for utopia - his version, or anyone else's - but I guess you've got to give his team credit for putting this out there.

See you next week.

Sunday School Extra Credit 1/12/20

I wanted to spend some time with one of the roundtable gangs in this week, and chose the panel from ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos, since they had House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to talk about.

This Week's group included former NJ Governor Chris Christie; former Obama administration ambassador to South Africa Patrick Gaspard; Rachael Bade of the WaPo, and Molly Ball from Time Magazine.

For background on the panel's discussion about impeachment, I've included some of Pelosi's comments from her chat with George. First off, she said she always intended to send the articles, so "there shouldn't be any mystery to that."

What we did want, though, and we think we accomplished in the past few weeks, is that we wanted the public to see the need for witnesses, witnesses with firsthand knowledge of what happened, documentation which the president has prevented from coming to Congress as we review this. 

And, in response to George's statement that Mitch McConnell (R-White House) still isn't promising there'll be any witnesses, Pelosi said

Well, he has -- he will -- I think that he will be accountable to the American people for that. Over 70% of the American people think that the president should have those witnesses testify. So, again, it is - it's about a fair trial. They take an oath to -- to have a fair trial. And we think that would be with witnesses and documentation. So, that dynamic has - now the ball is in their court to either do that, or pay a price for not doing it. 

How did the panel react?  Rachael Bade noted that Pelosi was "clearly putting a positive spin on what a lot of Democrats have privately said was a failed strategy." She didn't get any commitment on having witnesses, or on how the trial would be run - and, the "revelations" that dropped over the past weeks, including John Bolton saying he'd testify if asked to, "probably would have happened regardless" of Pelosi's actions, adding

And, in fact, there might have been even more news focused on those things, if everybody wasn't asking, 'what is Nancy Pelosi doing (with) the articles?' So, I do think there are a lot of Democrats who, while not going on the record and saying it, a lot of them have concerns about this.

Molly Ball talked responded to George's statement about Dems who suggested (again, off the record)  Pelosi didn't have a choice because McConnell can't be trusted, particularly "that maybe he might even move quickly to dismiss."

Ball said the standoff between Pelosi and McConnell was "very sort of unstoppable force meets immovable object," noting they're both "very clever" tacticians - but she discounted the quick dismissal theory.

I think that that was probably never a strong possibility, just because of president Trump. It's been clear from the start that he always wanted to have the exoneration of a Senate trial, not a mere dismissal. And he has been putting pressure on McConnell behind the scenes this whole time. And so that - if there was any leverage on the part of the Democrats, that was where the leverage sat. 

Stephanopoulos suggested, though, that the president had come around to McConnell's strategy of having no witnesses, if it's actually successful. Chris Christie thought that shift was "inevitable" - because, he said, "nobody does this better than Mitch McConnell."

And that's what Nancy Pelosi learned over the last three weeks, and what Chuck Schumer has learned time and time again.. And the president has learned over time, by watching all the judges he's gotten confirmed, and all the ways he's done things to make the president's legacy even better, that it's probably smart to listen to McConnell on this. 

He pointed to Pelosi's "serious error in political judgment"- holding back the articles - as the primary reason "this has been a really good three weeks for the president." He also noted that during this time, we haven't had the media doing special reports on the start of the trial and whatnot - so Trump was able to talk about other stuff, as he chose.

Patrick Gaspard did not agree with Christie so much, noting that they're "arguing balls and strikes after the game's already been decided."

The president of the United States has been impeached by Congress.... And you right that nobody's better than Mitch McConnell at obstructing governance."

Needless to say, there was some laughter when Christie pointed out that wasn't exactly what he said.  Gaspard continued, noting that

now the pressure is on him and his caucus and senators in states that were won by Hillary Clinton last time whose names are on the ballot now. And they have got to defend this process. 

Christie said the game was over, noting Trump's "not going to be removed;" he also expressed confidence that there won't be witnesses - and Bade agreed, even as Stephanopoulos mentioned both Mitt Romney and Susan Collins said they'd like to hear from folks. She pointed out they need four Republicans to go along with the Dems, and "that's going to be an uphill battle" given how well McConnell manages his caucus.

She's also watching the Trump-McConnell dynamic, which she finds "really interesting," pointing to their contrasting styles.

And yet, throughout this whole past few weeks, Trump has been deferring to McConnell over and over again regarding witnesses. McConnell privately convinced him, 'let's not call in Hunter Biden, let's not call in Joe Biden, let's do no witnesses, because if they bring in someone like Bolton, it's mutual assured destruction' is what he's told his members. 

Moving to the three Democratic candidates who are also senators -  Amy Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren, and That Guy from Vermont - they talked about how the impeachment trial might impact them. Joe Biden and Mayor Pete - who don't have to worry about it - could gain some ground if they're out there pretty much alone.

Molly Ball agreed with Stephanopoulos that Iowa is "anybody's ballgame right now" and that the impeachment trial is on everyone's mind, particularly the Vermonter,  now leading in the polls, who

is not going to be able to be out there on the stump. And it's a potentially big problem to try to do these things simultaneously. The senators are required to be there at the trial, but they can't talk, and so they're sort of sitting on their hands watching the clock wind down.

She also noted that the debate this week "is going to be very important" given how tight the field is.

The issue of witnesses may also make a mess of things in New Hampshire - and beyond, conceivably, which Rachel Bade recognized. For the Dems, it's a blessing and a curse, she said. On the one hand, Dems have been waiting for months to hear from first-hand witnesses.

I mean, the top Republican talking point pushing back against these charges against the president has been, 'oh, your witnesses are second-hand information. None of them have actually talked to the president.' Well, Democrats want to hear from those people who have been talking to the president, Bolton. Mick Mulvaney. 

On the other hand, she said,

But if they decide, at the end of it, it's going to take about two weeks for them to go through opening arguments... if they get that fourth Republican to call in, you know, Bolton or some of these first-hand witnesses, then that could mean another two to four weeks, I mean, of impeachment trial all throughout the various caucuses in the states.

And that could be a big problem for Sanders and Warren, she said.

Christie got the last word on this., saying that the presidential candidate senators are "real fans of the -- of the Pelosi strategy, I guess, right?" and adding

Three weeks - three weeks they've waited now. And that extends them even further into the - into the season. Nancy Pelosi is not going to be getting any cards or letters from those four thanking her for her great, failed strategy.

Christie included Booker, who was still in the race when the panel was having their conversation - he dropped out today - and whether there are four senators in the hunt or only three, I suspect he's right on his point that none of them are thanking their lucky stars for Pelosi right about now.

What will be interesting is to see what Mitch McConnell does once he has the articles in hand. Does he rush forward to put the president out of his misery, or does he put the brakes on a little, to make it a little less comfortable for the candidates?  Stay tuned.

That's your extra credit -- see you around campus.

Sunday School 12/22/19

Amy Klobuchar and Cory Booker made long-distance classroom appearances from Iowa, with Klobuchar on both Face the Nation (CBS) and State of the Union (CNN), while Booker did the Meet The Press (NBC) thing. Let's start there.

The Senator and Chuck Todd (recently referred to as "National Menace" Chuck Todd by a local college professor) talked about impeachment right off the bat, with Booker being asked what he thought a Senate trial should look like, with so many Senators having openly stated - or least signalled - how they're planning on voting. Among other things, Booker noted that

As a guy who's a big competitor, I want to beat Donald Trump mano a mano. I want to face him down on a debate floor. So this is not something that I want to do. And yes, I'm going to evaluate the facts objectively and honor the oath that I swore, even though I think Donald Trump has violated his oath of office.

They talked about Speaker Nancy Pelosi holding the articles, not sending them to the Senate. Booker said he feels she's really trying to do what she can to ensure there is a fair trial in the Senate. And, in response to Todd's question about whether calling the Bidens to appear was just a plan to "sort of make the witness requests a mutual assured political destruction?" Booker's answer was perfect:

I'm exhausted, frankly, of the Biden aspect of this.

Because, he noted, the Bidens don't speak "in any way that's germane to the president's behavior," and he's 1000% right. This should be about the president, not about the Bidens.  

Noting that Booker was not on the stage last week and my not be in January, as the DNC has raised the bar again, Todd wondered what "was missing" from the debate that Booker would have added. The senator didn't really answer the question, instead pointing to the strength of his campaign in Iowa and instead asking how it makes sense that he wasn't on the stage. 

Next up: Klobuchar and Margaret Brennan, who opened with a clip from SNL's cold open featuring, among others, Rachel Dratch as Klobuchar. The Senator thought Dratch did a good job. And, when Brennan asked about her "aggressive" performance, Klobuchar denied that she's changed her tactics since her middle-of-a-blizzard candidacy announcement. She also noted

I have passed over a hundred bills in the United States Senate during a really difficult time. And I have won in the reddest of red districts and won with suburban and rural voters and Republicans and independents and a fired up Democratic base. I think that's a good case to be made.  

She also said the tried to make the case that she should be the one debating Trump in the general election, saying 

And I think it is more than just the nitty-gritty of policy. It's also a value statement because so many people want a values check on this President. They want someone who gives them a decency check, a patriotism check.

Brennan wondered how the impeachment trial would impact her campaign. She pointed to how aggressive and active her campaign has been, said she doesn't need a lot of sleep and works very hard. She also mentioned her endorsements, and that she's got a lot of folks who can - and are already - standing in for her on the campaign and she's got Skype for town halls. 

Brennan wondered if Klobuchar's campaign was going to ask for a rescheduling of the January debate, noting that it could fall in the middle of the impeachment trial. Klobuchar noted that there has to be a January debate, even if it has to be moved closer to the caucuses - but "we have to have an Iowa debate." And is that currently being discussed, any kind of scheduling change?

I don't know - I have made it very clear that there should be no excuses. I am ready to debate at midnight if that's what we have to do. We have to have a debate before the Iowa caucuses. That would be to my advantage if it was at midnight. I'd be happy.

They also talked about how the Dems can get witnesses to testify. Klobuchar noted you need the key witnesses, and specifically mentioned Mick Mulvaney associate Michael Duffy, the guy who sent the email around saying the Ukraine aid needed to be held shortly after the call between president Trump and President Zelensky. 

He sent this email... And this is what he says: he says, "Given the sensitive nature of the request, I appreciate your keeping the information closely held to those who need to know." ...That's a question I want to have answered.

Brennan said the aid was on hold before that, but Klobuchar pressed on Duffy and his email, asking why was it sent, and noting that

If the President is so innocent and shouldn't be impeached, why is he afraid to have these people come forward? That's what people are asking me when I am at these town hall meetings.

And that's where they ended it.  So let's move on to Klobuchar's discussion with Dana Bash, who announced the state of the union being "at a stalemate." This conversation started with the stalemate surrounding the impeachment and the clash over witnesses (the Dems want some, the Rs do not). Bash wondered if Klobuchar would vote to start the impeachment trial if there was no agreement.

I think that there will be an agreement and this trial will go forward.I think what is shocking to me is, right now, despite the president claiming his innocence, claiming that he wants to present witnesses, he's the one blocking the witnesses...

She again referenced the Michael Duffy email, and also noted that even Richard Nixon had "all the president's men testify. He had major people testify from his administration." Klobuchar doesn't know if there will be separate votes on witnesses or how it will all go down, but knows they have "a constitutional duty to take on this very important case." And, 

I'm in the leadership team. And I'm being very clear. We should do whatever it takes. And I can still run for president. I'm a mom. I can do two things at once.

They moved on to the debate, particularly the point at which Klobuchar criticized Mayor Pete Buttigieg about his "lack of experience" and Bash played a clip of Buttigieg talking with CNN after the debate, in which he said he understands the ways of Washington, he just doesn't accept them, and that maybe it's time for "change to come from outside the Beltway.

Klobuchar reiterated her comment from the debate, that experience matters, because it has gotten results, pointing to work by Senators Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker and Kamala Harris.

I just think the fact that someone has experience can be a really good thing right now, when we have a president who went in there with no experience, and has done nothing when it comes to helping regular people.

Bash asked her about her votes on Trump judges, noting that one she voted for had "further dismantled Obamacare this week" and that Klobuchar has voted to approve around 50% of Trump's nominees, and wondered if that was a mistake. Klobuchar noted the the judge in question had been supported by President Obama, Ted Kennedy, Bernie Sanders and many others, too. 

So, my point here is, what's really going on is that the Trump administration brought this case. They're trying to dismantle the Affordable Care Act. And some of my colleagues on that debate stage want to actually start over with Medicare for all.

Bash pressed her, asking specifically if she regrets her votes. Klobuchar said she'd have to look at each of the judge votes, but noted she makes her best judgment, as the other candidates who are Senators do.

I don't carte blanche make a decision about each judge based on whether or not Trump nominated them... My track record of recommending judges to Barack Obama -- and he took every recommendation I made -- have been some excellent, excellent judges. 

Moving on to the January debate, and noting that "So far, only five white candidates have qualified," Bash wondered why Klobuchar thought that happened. 

Klobuchar said you'd have to look at each of the campaigns to understand that, while mentioning both Cory Booker and Andrew Yang and hopes they'd be there in January. And she pointed to the "huge momentum" around her campaign. As Klobuchar ticked off items pointing to that momentum, not just in Iowa but in New Hampshire and the Carolinas, Bash turned it to the SNL skit. Klobuchar laughed, noting the impression was good and looked back at last week's debate. 

Yes, well, that was a pretty fun part of that debate, actually, when I pointed out there -- that discussion that gone so long, so I suggested that maybe we should go to the Wind Cave in South Dakota, which is a national park. And what you would like to know, Dana, is, now I have a number of spelunkers, right, that are now really excited about my candidacy. So, you know, in a close primary like this... you just have to keep reaching out to these groups...

Bash joined in, saying "One constituency at a time," allowing Klobuchar the last word.

That is exactly how I'm going to win this. 

See you around campus.