TGIF 10/23/20: The Final Debate

TGIF indeed - it's Friday, and that means we don't have any more presidential debates this cycle. And it means that, whether he wins or loses, the president won't be participating in any more of these debates.  

Stepping away for a moment for a standing ovation is fine; I did the same, I surely did. And I remembered reading about the 42-minute-long standing ovation Leontyne Price received at the Met back in '61, and immediately thought that Trump will get a longer one if he loses. 

He'd be proud of that, I'm sure, and he'd tout it in his next book, I'm sure, as one of his great accomplishments: 

When I lost the rigged election, it was rigged and I fought but in the end I lost because everyone was against me, the deep state and the IRS and Pelosi and even the Supreme Court, after I put those three judges there, they all turned on me in the end, you can't trust anyone these days, they turned on me, and all the blue state governors I helped so much during the pandemic when they were nice to me - I helped them, even they admit it, just ask them, at least they did admit it when it was good for them but not any longer, I guess - I got the greatest standing ovation, probably even greater than the late, great Abraham Lincoln - he was almost as great as me, they say, at least some people say, maybe, I don't think he even comes close, really, but that's what they say -  "Sir, Lincoln was almost as great a president as you," that's what they say, I don't know; I got the greatest standing ovation since Lincoln attended that play, or maybe since that black lady sang that song in NYC, horrible what happened to NYC, I used to love it there, but I had to move, like everyone else, bodies piling up everywhere, and taxes, it's horrible what de Blasio and Cuomo did to my city - she was an opera singer, right? I didn't know blacks could sing opera, did you? And she wasn't even fat - how can you sing opera if you're not fat? I mean, that's where the whole 'it ain't over 'til the fat lady sings' come from, right? Fat lady opera singers? It's a good thing they can sing, no one likes a fat lady, right? I remember one time I said I'd go into the crowd at one of my rallies and kiss all the beautiful women, and the good-looking men, and I even said I'd kiss the rest of them, but not, you know, the 'opera singers,' if you know what I mean... Great ovation I got - the people stood and clapped for hours, not just 42 minutes like they did for her. I think some of them are probably still clapping now. Greatest ovation ever, by far, especially if you count the internet and all the networks, even MSDNC and fake news CNN and the papers, the failing New York Times and the Bezos Post and all the rest, add it all up and it was probably the greatest standing ovation since Jesus. I love the evangelicals, and they love me, and I can imagine how hard they clapped for me, all I did for them. I did a lot for them, and they know it, and they hopefully will never forget it. What an ovation, it was really something, wasn't it? Greatest ovation ever.

Anyway, back to the debate. 

Kristen Welker of NBC was the first debate moderator of the modern era - the era in which we use long-available technology to threaten to silence, or actually silence both the loudmouth bully and the folksier interrupter, so that we could actually hear their messages.

At the beginning of the festivities, the president looked for all practical intents and purposes as if he was sedated. He seemed to more resemble the cardboard cutout of him I have in the corner of my office, with an impeached sign hanging around his neck, than the image he typically presents. Whether it was drugs, or some kind of shocking device (maybe Melania had a voice-activated one hidden in her mask?

I told the Donald, he can't keep bullying everyone. He needs to #BeBest and like a great First Lady, I will help my husband when he needs me. I know the signs and when I see them, I will shock his bone spurs and he will straighten up and he will not be a bully to the poor old man or to the woman at the desk. He needs to be nicer to the woman at the desk, he needs the women to vote for him. Or we will have to go home. Except we can't go home because he moved us Florida. I miss New York. There is nothing to do in Florida. Maybe if my voice thing doesn't #BeBest I can go home. I want to go home. Je veux aller a la maison. Quiero ir a casa. Ich will nach Hause gehen. Voglio andare a casa. If it doesn't work, "I don't really care, do u?"

Anyway, they talked about a bunch of stuff, including the pandemic, American families, race in American, climate change, national security and leadership.  The president talked about himself, and about Biden's money and "houses all over the place" which was one of the funniest things he's ever said, and about Obamacages and about maybe one day having a thought about having an idea about having a great health insurance plan and protecting pre-existing conditions, as if the goal is to make sure people have them, not that they have insurance that covers them.  Biden talked about the people, and about being a president for everyone whether they voted for him or not, and about not China, and about who the president was running against.

If I were to sum up the night as simplistically as possible, it would be like this: in Donald Trump's world, we'll be kept all warm and fuzzy by surrounding ourselves with piles of really outstanding 401(k) statements and oil company stock certificates and drugs and vaccines while we sit in bars sharing food off the plates of strangers, and if we need them, we have cages for people who don't want to do that, really nice cages Obama built, while in Biden's world, we'll be kept all warm and fuzzy by masks and by surrounding ourselves with allies that trust us, and 'we' includes everyone no matter where they live, even if they were brought here as babies and toddlers from another country by their parents. 

Of course, all of this could be just the hangover fog from the cider donuts and wine that I consumed during the debate.

#MAGAMA.  Please, vote like your life depends on it. Because it does. 

In Case You Missed It (v58)

Last week was a sparse week for posts - I decided to spend time enjoying life rather than aggravating over all of the craziness out there in the world.  

That said, here's your week in review; grab your cuppa, a mimosa, or a Bloody Mary and dive in.

For your Sunday School entry, I checked in with Margaret Hoover, who does some pretty good interviews with folks on Firing Line. A conservative, Hoover's not trying to break news on her show, I don't think; instead, she's trying to give us a good look at a single interviewee over the course of her 30 minute show. I think it's an effective format, and I'm going to pay more attention to her show. 

Last week, she talked with Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) about the stimulus (she prefers a comprehensive bill because it allows for negotiation more than one-off bills do) and about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's 25th Amendment bill (wrong thing, wrong time), and about the coronavirus pandemic. Here's an exchange on what might have been different under a Democratic administration.

It's not even about a Democratic alternative. If the COVID response had actually even just followed any type of scientific recommendations you would see a much better response and fewer death rates and spread of the virus than it had under President Trump.

But, she added, it's more than that.

I've watched Republican administrations respond to pandemics, specifically as President Bush did. So I would think it's not just about Democrats or Republicans, it's about president Trump's failures. 

Not sure anyone can really argue with that.

Your Extra Credit entry included Margaret Brennan's um, question-and-no-answer session, I guess you'd call it, with RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel. I'm not going to quote that one here; you can read it and weep at your leisure. 

Also on the show? Leonard Schleifer, the head of Regeneron, the company that makes the 'cure' that the president got at Walter Reed when he went there to work for a few days, and have his picture taken and stuff. Oh, sorry -- and to get treated for COVID-19, sorry. Among the things we learned? His company has a huge government contract to make the drug, which was worked out 

...before we actually had any data from randomized trials. They went ahead and said, listen, you start manufacturing the product, we will commit to buy it from you. Stop manufacturing the other products that you're working on or move them elsewhere. And let us make sure that if it does work, it'll be available. And what the government said--

That's a $450M contract for Regeneron, and Brennan wondered how much supply that will buy.

Well, they bought from us several hundred thousand, maybe around three hundred thousand doses, which they are going to make it for free. What I think that the administration has been working recently-- I saw an announcement with-- with AstraZeneca. Look, we need-- Regeneron can't do this alone. We need the entire industry. And I'm so proud the industry has risen. We have companies like Lilly, great companies. We're partners with Roche, one of the best companies in this whole field. Amgen is involved. AstraZeneca is involved. Black-Scholes is involved. We all have to step up-- if we're going to provide enough of this.

Brennan pointed out that, last Friday alone, we saw nearly 60,000 new cases, and in Regeneron's FDA application for emergency use authorization, the company said they had 50,000 doses - less than a current one-day supply...

It's important to note that Regeneron is just one of several companies the government has committed a boatload of taxpayer money to - some $2B -  on the hopes that their therapeutics and vaccines will work. 

Mid-week, I was Wondering on Wednesday about the SCOTUS hearings in the Senate, about the 'too bad, so sad' outcome of the DOJ's investigation into the 'unmasking' of Michael Flynn - no charges will be issued -  and about masks and stuff. On that last point, I shared this experience from a visit to a restaurant when My Sweet Baboo and I were on a road trip. 

Two gentlemen and  'face coverings required for entry' signs attracted my attention.  Gentleman A came in with who appeared to be his wife and two kids, fully and appropriately masked. However, his mask was tucked firmly against the underside of his nostrils. Gentleman B, one of two who arrived together on separate motorcycles, apparently didn't have a mask or doesn't wear one, but he tried to rise to the occasion today by holding his t-shirt in his teeth and tucking his nose down so it pointed into his shirt. 

And I wonder, first of all, why they thought what they were doing was appropriate and in keeping with the requirement? And secondly, why did the waitress allow them to come in when clearly the potentially dangerous parts of their faces were uncovered? And finally, specifically regarding Gentleman B, how on earth did I keep from busting out laughing? 

How, indeed. 

By far, my favorite post of the week was Thursday's: my  Town Hall Questions for the Candidates, in which I asked the questions I've always wanted to ask Trump and Biden. For example, since the media only talks to Biden about the coronavirus, and his campaign primarily talks to us about the coronavirus, I thought I'd ask about policy. You know - immigration, Middle East Peace, infrastructure, and so on. And, I asked about education:

Do you believe that public education funds should be given to parents, directly or through tax breaks, to help cover the costs of sending their children to private elementary or secondary schools?  Please explain your position.

For the president, who likes to focus on 'promises made, promises kept' in his campaign materials, I wanted to know a couple things from him that are immigration-related. For example, 

How much money has the United States charged Mexico for the border wall, how much of that has been paid, and what are your plans to collect any outstanding balance from the Mexican government?

And this one, too.

What specific steps has your company taken to ensure that you no longer hire undocumented workers at your properties, and should other companies be required to take the same steps?

Promises, blah blah blah. 

That was all I published. I did have a TGIF post that I threw in the trash, because the words weren't really flowing well. All I managed to get on the page was this picture.

It seemed unfair to post that without any explanation - do you agree?

Have a great day - - I'll be back later with your Sunday School. 

Town Hall Questions for the Candidates

As you know, we were supposed to have a town hall-style debate tonight, but then the president got COVID, went to the hospital, went for a ride, went home, and such. And so, we were going to have a virtual debate instead of a joint town hall. 

But the president thought that was stupid, so he refused, and the debate was cancelled. But then he was cured of COVID, and decided that he'd have a town hall opposite the one that Joe Biden decided to have once the debate was cancelled. So, Biden's on ABC from Philly, and Trump's on NBC from somewhere in Florida. 

No one asked me what I wanted to ask them, but regular readers know that I don't really worry too much about stuff like that. Heck, if I waited for someone to ask me what I thought, we wouldn't be having this conversation, would we?

So, without further ado, here are my questions, first for Joe Biden:

1. What is your highest immigration policy priority, and what specifically would your administration do to address it?
2. Do you believe that public education funds should be given to parents, directly or through tax breaks, to help cover the costs of sending their children to private elementary or secondary schools?  Please explain your position.
3. Would you work to re-open negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, to try and come up with a two-state solution? If yes, how would you approach this? If not, why not?
4. Would you support a 21st century Works Progress Administration and Civilian Conservation Corps to help put Americans to tackle infrastructure projects and maintenance in our national parks and forests? If not, why not?
5. What are three things (other than filling Cabinet and other key positions) a Biden/Harris administration would focus on in the first 100 days?

And for Donald Trump:

1. Many people think you are a bully, obnoxious, and a bad role model for young people. Looking back on your behavior throughout your first term, what if anything would you do differently to help change that impression of you, and what if anything will you do differently should you be re-elected?
2. How much money has the United States charged Mexico for the border wall, how much of that has been paid, and what are your plans to collect any outstanding balance from the Mexican government?
3. Who is your favorite dictator, and why?
4. What specific steps has your company taken to ensure that you no longer hire undocumented workers at your properties, and should other companies be required to take the same steps?
5. If you weren't talking about yourself all the time, who would you be talking about?

I don't expect we'll hear anything like this during the town halls tonight, but hey - you never know.

Wondering on Wednesday 10/7/20

Ready... Set... Wonder!

I wonder what we should call tonight's vice presidential debate? Will it be the #UghfestinUtah or the #KnockoutinKingsburyHall or the #SmackdowninSaltLake -- I can't pick my favorite, but I can pick what I hope they get to talk about: something OTHER THAN the coronavirus pandemic. I get that the Biden/Harris team is running in large part on how poorly the Trump/Pence team handled things, and I know that Pence is the alleged head of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, but we really need to hear from the teams, without all the shouting and interrupting and gurgling and whatnot, what the heck these folks want to do if they're declared the winner after voting ends on November 3rd. 

And speaking of November 3rd, I see that Facebook is now saying they won't run any political ads after voting ends that day. And I wonder, who's still going to be running ads at that point, other than Trump and his main man #SnittySnittyBillBarr - I mean, I'm sure they'll still be screaming about election fraud even as ballots are being received, or removed from their locked boxes and then opened and inspected in accordance with each state's rules, but is anyone else going to be running ads then? If not, why doesn't Facebook just tell the Trump team to "stand back and stand by" (aka sit down and shut up) until counting is done?

And speaking of voting and interference and lies and fake ads and stuff, today FBI Director Christopher Wray had a virtual press conference reassuring Americans that our election will be safe. And I wonder, will Trump wait until after the election before firing Wray? Or will he do it first, just to make sure he has the chance?

What else is going on? Will there be a stimulus payment for Americans who are struggling and those who are not? Will there be a bailout for the 'too big to fail' airline industry?  Do we have to wait until after the election, when Donald Trump says he will be elected, before we'll see a rescue plan - for anyone? Or, maybe, those hearty, wholesome, crime-free red states will get some stimmy, and us blue-staters will have to wait until... when, I wonder? But the big wondering is, what happens if we hold off on handing out any relief until after the election and (drum roll please) Donny gets sent packing?  Who gets the bump then? Blue states? Blue states and maybe purple swing states that voted for Papa Joe and Mom-ala? I mean, has Trump thought this through, I wonder?

Um, let's see -- we're getting October surprises almost daily, it seems. Or maybe it's Trump's 'roid rage, not sure. Today he lost another case on his taxes, and he's declassifying documents going back to Abraham Lincoln, I think... oh wait - Hillary Clinton, not Abraham Lincoln. Sorry -- different three-syllable, two syllable name there. My take on the document dump? No one will read them.  

Instead, the nation will turn its lonely eyes to Fox and Friends, or Don Lemon, or Chuck Todd, or Judge Jeannine, woo woo woo, and be told what to think about what they haven't read. And, if all goes according to Trump's plan, his base will vote for him, and Biden's base will vote for him, and nothing really matters any more... 

When did the president last test negative before being diagnosed with COVID-19, I wonder?  Bueller? Bueller? Anybody?

Mike Pence's aide Katie Miller is married to immigration psychopath Stephen Miller, who has tested positive. Mike Pence attended the #2020RoseGardenSuperSpreaderParty for Amy Coney Barrett, sitting in front of Sen. Mike Lee who has tested positive. I'm impressed with his negativity, I am, no wondering about that. 

And according to something I just heard, there are now 34 cases stemming from that little party. Anyone wondering how long before Kevin Bacon tests positive? 

The president said that his getting COVID was a blessing from God. I'll let you wonder about that one, and whether the 210,000-plus people who have died from it since the pandemic began would think the same thing.  And speaking of blessings and bizarre statements, don't forget that Trump's 4th chief of staff Mark Meadows, said that sticking by Trump while he was doing photo ops  undergoing treatment at WRMC was a message for our military men and women and boy oh boy, if you're not wondering about that, I don't know what you ARE wondering about...

And finally, about tonight's debate, I'm not wondering at all which of them will answer fewer questions: that's Pence, for sure. He is a professional question-non-answerer, and we've got proof.  Even though his chief of staff just said Pence is a "gifted communicator" - blecch.

Get your snacks, your beverages, and your bingo cards, if you're so inclined. We can compare notes tomorrow. About that, there's no wondering at all.

TGIF 10/2/20

What a strange week this has been - a chaotic, depressing, annoying, loud, tantrum-filled debate on Tuesday, and the president being whisked off to Walter Reed Hospital on Friday... 

I've said about all I care to about the debate debacle, other than to reiterate that they better get things under control for the next one, assuming there's even going to be a next one I suppose it could all depend on the president's condition going forward. 

And if the president is still in the hospital, will Mike Pence be able to debate Kamala Harris next week, or will he be too busy acting as the president (well, hopefully, acting better than the president...)? That's probably our only chance for a real debate, and to think it might be lost...

On the president and the First Lady being diagnosed with COVID-19, I've got lots of thoughts, but first, a confession right off the bat: I have, off and on throughout the day, both laughed at and made inappropriate comments regarding the president's diagnosis. I don't wish him any harm, really - I want him out of office, that's a well-known fact, but I shouldn't be laughing at the karma or the fact that he brought this on himself by not doing the right thing, and about Melania having to quarantine with him, and other thoughts that, quite frankly, are representative of how HE treats people than the way that I like to treat people.  And I shared those thoughts with two of my most irreverent friends who, if they ever publish our text messages, will make true our surmisal that we're going to end up in hell. 

OK  - confession over, on to the thoughts.

I shouldn't be surprised at how many people who have never publicly offered a single thought or prayer for anyone who's been infected with the virus, and who have been quoting the president almost verbatim from the very beginning, whether it was on minimizing the virus, mocking people who wear masks, calling out the scientists for trying to bring the president down, or any number of other ridiculous comments, are now calling on everyone to flood the first couple with tons of both.  I find that hypocritical, I really do.

It's also interesting how many people who have never uttered a conspiracy theory in their life are contemplating that this whole thing could be a fake-out by the president and his handlers, an attempt to get him under lockdown, off the TV cameras, off the phone with the folks on Fox, and off Twitter, so people will stop talking about him, the debate, and the damage that Tuesday night did to the campaign? 

Is this his way of not having to do additional debates? Of not being told he can't hold his beloved rallies because he refuses to respect local restrictions on large gatherings? Is this the way the president can not lose, but go out #winning instead?

Or is it just a way to get those suburban women voters, the ones who worry about their parents, their children, their friends at church getting the virus? After all, if the president comes through this well, and quickly, that only adds fuel to his fire that the virus is nothing to fear, and that businesses and schools and everything else that's closed or partially so should reopen.

And how horrible is it, that the president and his entire administration have lied to us so many times that those thoughts, or other similar ones, can actually be entertained by reasonable people?  How much trust have people lost in the president, the presidency, the White House?  And will we ever get that trust back again?

We also had a release of the president's taxes, and an analysis by the NY Times that Trump paid less in federal income taxes in 2016 and 2017 than I spent on ice cream, chocolate chip cookies, or cat litter during the same time period - and that his measly $750 tax payments may have been perfectly legal. And, more frighteningly, that he's got some $420 million in debts and loans coming do during a potential second term. Who he owes that money to is still up in the air - we will not find out until after the election, we're told. 

We've also been told that Melania doesn't much like her responsibilities for decorating the White House for Christmas, and that she doesn't like being called complicit in her husband's policies. Those things we learned because the First Lady was secretly taped by a former staffer (and friend of more than a decade). There's a book, of course. There's always a book. I've said it before and it becomes more true almost daily: if nothing else, the administration has been good for book contracts. 

TGIF, everyone - and wear your damn mask.

Wondering on Wednesday 9/30/20

Ready... Set... Wonder!

Random wondering, in no particular order, from the so-called presidential debate.

• What the hell was that? I turned off the #CaterwaulinginCleveland before the end of the first segment last night - I didn't even make it ten minutes - but I did watch the entire thing this morning. I found myself alternately wanting to scratch my own eyes out, and wanting to stick lit firecrackers in my ears to make the noise stop. I just wanted it to stop.

• Chris Wallace is taking a lot of crap for not doing a better job moderating the debate. Anyone who's giving him crap should be forced to sit in the moderator's chair for two minutes and prove they can do better. Off the top of my head, I can only think of people who would have done worse, other than maybe Jim Lehrer and maybe Gwen Ifill, or maybe Peter Jennings... 

• In that same vein, can you imagine if it had been the team from NBC/MSNBC trying to wrangle that #CockfightinCleveland last night? Chuck Todd, Hallie Berry, Andrea Mitchell, Savannah Guthrie - who knows how many moderators the peacock network would have thrown at it?

• Joe Biden wasn't wearing a wire, Trump was wired, and never have I wanted a mic kill switch like I wanted one watching the video today. Or a Dick Brick. Probably 20 years ago, maybe more, a handful of  us  fun people, all now former smokers, came up with the idea of having a foam 'brick' we could throw at the television whenever Dick Vitale was broadcasting SU basketball games. We hated him, we did, and furiously threw ideas around, how we'd market it and all that... Alas, our dreams were big, but our smoke breaks were short; by the time we really gave it some thought, someone had beaten us to it, absent the Vitale reference. 

• Is it too late to create a #MAGAMA brick, I wonder? I mean, it's not too late to cram through a SCOTUS nomination, right? 

• Speaking of sports references, there was a long-time sportscaster here, local guy named Joel Mareiniss, who had a kind of funny way with words. I thought of him, and of my dad, while watching the #ChaosinCleveland, when it occurred to me that if my dad were alive today, he'd be spinning in his grave. That's how confused I was...

• My confusion pales in comparison to that of Portland-area sheriff Mike Reese, who learned watching the #CatfightinCleveland that he was a Trump supporter. Except, of course, he's not one. Fun times for him, right? 

• How on earth, "for the love of all the corn," as a friend of mine says, does the president of the United States of American not immediately seize on the opportunity to condemn white supremacy? Seriously - for all the kernels on all the ears of corn on all the corn plants in all the cornfields on all the farms in all the states in all of the entire country, why didn't he just say "yes" to that question? Instead, he gives marching orders to the Proud Boys? #whattheactualhell

• Again, but we can use all the peas in all the pods on all the plants on all the farms and in all the gardens in all the backyards in all the states in the entire country, isn't the very first thing a Republican does, when hearing that their Fearless Leader didn't say "yes" to that question, is IMMEDIATELY go out on social media, call their local radio station, show up at their local TV station in their Donald John Trump footed pajamas  with the presidential seal on the fanny and declare their wholehearted and unequivocal condemnation of white supremacy? And why is it that so few of them did that, and why are so many of them simply saying "what he said" in reference to your comments, Sen. Tim Scott? Any ideas? 

• I saw a tweet last night suggesting that Latinos watching the debate on Telemundo thought that Trump won the debate. And that got me wondering what it must have been like being the translators and closed-captioners for the #CacophonyinCleveland - I picture it looking something like this: fkjg;h$(*Y lkjaoia4[ #$(*&#P$( )$5385-#$$^%(^(@*#pao48yp983y4t  -- and I hope I've not offended anyone with that effort. For all I know, I've typed a top secret Qanon password or something, and my fervent hope is that's not the case.

• Should there be another debate, you may be wondering? Yeah, you and everyone else in the world, after the #CarriedawayinCleveland debacle last night. At least so far, the next one, a Town Hall catering to undecided voters in Florida (don't even get me started on that), is still on the schedule. The Commission on Presidential Debates has said they're looking for ways to add more structure to the process, because "more orderly discussion is needed." That's gonna be fun for them, don't you think?  

• And I wonder, what you would do to help drive "more orderly discussion" the next time out? Muzzle the candidates?  Take away time for interruptions and talking out of turn? Trump's mic would have been turned off with about ten minutes left, and Biden's not all that much later, if that had been in place last night. Although, to his um, 'credit,' Biden made more quick hits (telling Trump to shut up, calling him a clown, saying he was the worst president ever, and so on) compared to Trump's more rambling, long-winded  interruptions. Either way, I'm not looking forward much to the next round. 

• Overall, I had very low expectations for what became the #ClamorinCleveland - Trump's a bully, for sure - everyone knows that - but he exceeded my expectations by behaving even way more worser than usual. I was not sure how Biden would handle it, whether he'd "stand back and stand by." as it were, or if he'd go to the center of the ring to engage. There was more of the latter than I thought, but I don't know that it helped all that much. 

I  came away from the #CagefightinCleveland with full comfort knowing that my opinion of Trump was, and is, the correct one. As Biden said to Trump about the pandemic, "it is what it is, because you are who you are." 

And who is he? A man completely undeserving of the honor of being called the president of the United States.  About that, I have no doubts.

What are you wondering about?

Sunday School Extra Credit 3/15/20: Debate Winners and Losers

I'm taking a bit of a different tack for our Extra Credit entry this week. Instead of going with the morning classrooms and more discussion about the coronavirus, I decided to check out how folks saw the winners and losers of last night's (old) mano a (old) mano debate.

CNN's Chris Cillizza (CNN hosted the debate, in partnership with Univisions) picked these winners:

• the women who might be Biden's veep, including former challengers Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Amy Klobuchar, and Stacey Abrams, who served in the House of Representatives in Georgia and most recently lost the gubernatorial race, in 1918. Biden, as you probably heard, promised he'd put a woman on the ticket. 
• Donald Trump, who managed to generally escape mention throughout the debate, as Sanders attacked Biden and his votes over the years (OK, decades) in the Senate. Not only was time wasted not going after the real opponent, the debate just handed more ammo to Trump.
• No live audience. Lamenting the reason for not having a live audience, Cillizza "thought this debate was FAR better" than others recently. And, he said, the DNC shouldn't be the ones who get to pick who gets to attend. Hear, hear!
• Sticking with coronavirus influences, the elbow bump was a winner, even though "it looked sort of weird."
• Anf for some reason, The You Tube was a winner, thanks to Sanders telling people to go there. 

And now, the losers:

• That Guy from Vermont and Papa Joe Biden, for attacking each other for two hours in a way that at times caused people to tune out. (Case in point? A friend turned from the debate to American Idol.) And, Cillizza noted, "Both men looked small more than they looked big." Not only that, but neither of them inspired the other guys supporters to come on over - which I'd have to agree with, as did most folks in the Twitterverse. 
• Ambitious male Democratic politicians: similar to his picking the women who dropped out as winners, he picked Mayor Pete, Cory Booker, and Andrew Yang here, saying the best they'll do is being picked for a job on Biden's cabinet should he win. 

The Opinion gang at the NY Times scores the candidates on a 10-point scale. Here's how they collectively saw the debate:

• Papa Joe: 7.6 out of 10: two folks gave him 9 out of 10, with one noting he made rational arguments, didn't stumble, and scored with a comment about Italy having a single-payer system. The other said that, other than promising putting a woman on the ticket, "tying a revolution to disruption" was his boldest move. His two lowest scores were 6 out of 10; one said "Biden is here to assure them that we can... live in 2013 forever." The other said Papa Joe is "selling competence" and that his performance in the debate was, well, competent, but lacking in charisma and charm, things he's been known for.

• TGFV: 7.1 out of 10: he scored five 8 out of 10 scores, for (among other things), his "breadth of interests;" his consistency; his push for "big structural change," mentioned by more than one person on the panel; him turning down the volume and turning up the compassion; and , one said, "he essentially vetted Biden for the progressive wing of the party" because he's going to be their nominee. On the low end, the person who gave him 6 out of 10 said that TGFV has a "command of legislative detail" and of his big picture, but he "hasn't shown he can build coalitions to make his dream real." His worst score (4 out of 10) came from a feeling that"it's not a good time to be an ideologue" and because, now, "his arguments are sounding tired..."

From the Washington Post, here are the winners:

• Papa Joe: TGFV spent a lot of time on things Papa Joe did years ago that, but Biden stayed focused, pointing out repeatedly that he "got things done" and he questioned the whole revolution thing. The lack of an audience likely hurt TGFV, they said, and Biden "drove home the point" that he'd be a "steady, pragmatic hand."
• Harris, Klobuchar and other would-be female VPs: Also mentioned here, as by Cillizza? Warren and Abrams. They noted that TGFV waffled on making the female running mate. 
• Audience-free debates: "Let's hope it's not the last" debate to forgo the studio audience;  the debate "was certainly better thanks to the lack of cheering and booing."

And the losers?

• TGFV on the coronavirus: they faulted him for his always falling back on his whole economic message, something he also did in the '16 campaign, and last night he did it again. When talking about the coronavirus pandemic, Medicare-for-All was his answer. As noted above, Biden scored on that point, and also when he said that coronavirus "has nothing to do with the legitimate concern about income inequality in our country." But...
• Biden's Medicare-for-all attack: while one of the NYT folks thought Biden's attack here worked, WaPo didn't think so, because he started the argument but didn't finish when TGFV pushed back on Biden's support from insurance companies. 

And finally, let's hear from the NY Post, who picked Biden as the winner, saying he "walked out of Sunday night's debate in a commanding position" after TGFV didn't land the punches he needed to, according to the paper's debate expert, Eric Phillips.

Bernie Sanders had to change the trajectory of this race and he did not do it. I think we're talking about a matter of days before Sanders has to give it up.

Phillips also had kind words for Papa Joe.

The Biden we saw Sunday night - when he's rested and put in a position to project steady leadership - can absolutely go toe to toe with Donald Trump. Biden did what he had to do and in a moment when everyone is understandably nervous about leadership, Biden was the one on the state who projected it. 

And that's where we'll leave it.

See you around the virtual campus.

In Case You Missed It (v25)

Relaxing and not panicking about Corona (the virus or the beer) and watching college basketball, and waiting for the polls to close in an hour and a half or so down in South Carolina... what better time to look back at this week's posts?

This week's Sunday School was a review of part of the panel discussion on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos. The panel was split - two Republicans and two Dems, and while the Rs seemed to be on the same page, the same was not true for the Ds. Rahm Emanuel was one of them; the other was Yvette Simpson, the CEO of the Burlington, VT-based Democracy for America, a progressive PAC.

There was lots of talk about That Guy From Vermont, him being the front-runner and all. Among the comments?

The "broader point," Fagen said, is the lack of vetting for TGFV. "Now, he's the front-runner, and it is coming to him. And we're starting to see the drip, drip of comments about communist leaders around the world and socialist leaders around the world..." We'll have to see how he stands up to having the spotlight on him, she said.

Keep that point in mind as you read the post on debate winners and losers - you'll hear it again...

On Tuesday (before the debate, of course), I tossed out debate drinking game keywords. I had to work at it for a bit to some up with some; as I noted in the post, I was

...trying to stay away from the really obvious drinking game words, of which there many: Medicare for All, billionaires, 1%, Super Tuesday, socialism, African-Americans, coronavirus/COVID-19, frontrunner, and the like.

You can see what I ended up with in the post; how did my list compare with yours?

Wednesday's first post came from The Update Desk, and recapped of how I did with my debate drinking game. Now, before I go any further, I didn't really drink each time my keywords popped up during the two hour slug-fest, because if I had, I'd likely be needing treatment.  Here's a look at how I did.

I actually had a well-hydrated night, looking at my pre-debate list of keywords.  Here's how I did, per the debate transcript. Bolded words are winners.

• Castro, Cuba, Fidel, communism. There were multiple Cuba references and one reference to communist countries, so I'm taking a sip - but not a Big Gulp, since I'm an anti-0besity New Yorker - on that last one.
• Jim Clyburn - he's the most powerful Democrat in South Carolina, and both Klobuchar and That Guy from Vermont dropped his name.

On in the second post on Wednesday, I offered up what the pundits had to say about the winners and losers of the South Carolina debate. I didn't necessarily agree with them, except on the moderators and voters being losers - again - because we're having cage fights instead of policy debates. But I guess that's what we like now, I don't know.  Here's how folks at The Hill looked at things.

From The Hill:

• Winners:  Papa Joe (Above all, Biden sought to portray himself as someone with the political and strategic chops to get things done rather than merely talk about aspirations),Warren (“I don’t care how much money Mayor Bloomberg has,” she said, “The core of the Democratic Party will never trust him.") and TGFV (Sanders won on Tuesday by not obviously losing.)

They weren't the only ones with that take on things, but what a low threshold for TGFV - just don't blow it, and you'll be a winner... Sigh.

In Thursday's Email of the Week post, I took a slightly different approach, it being a debate week and all. Instead of one winner, I published the first post-debate email from each of the five candidates I'm still following.  And, in addition to that, I provided this week's stats. Take a look.

Here's how the week went, with 124 emails filling my mailbox. No surprise (again) that Mayor Pete was the volume winner (again), or that Bloomy brought up the  rear (again).

Yesterday's TGIF brought us a little bit and of that, including some endorsements picked up by Papa Joe and Bloomy, some bizarre comments from Mick Mulvaney, and some fun with NY's Sonofa Gov.  And, there was this.

Speaking of Bloomy, he had to spend a bit of time defending himself in a PBS NewsHour interview with Judy Woodruff, on Muslim surveillance practices in NYC after 9/11. I half expected the Rs to be supporting him on this, given how readily they fell in line with Trump's travel ban, but I haven't seen much support for him.

So, now you're up to date on this week's veritable pastiche. Subscribe, if you're so inclined, in the Instant Gratification box on the right sidebar, and you'll never miss a post.

See you tomorrow for Sunday School, where I'm sure two topics will be the South Carolina primary, and the coronavirus...

Email of the Week (v12)

Thursday? Already?

Again this week, I divided the candidate emails into pre-debate day, debate day, and post-debate day buckets, so we could see if the approach changed at all for any of the gang.

Here's how the week went, with 124 emails filling my mailbox. No surprise (again) that Mayor Pete was the volume winner (again), or that Bloomy brought up the  rear (again).

So, will there be a surprise for Email of the week?  

Well, I guess the surprise is that I'm sharing one post-debate email from each of the candidates. 

After toni‌ght's debate -- after a lot of talk, plenty of attacks, and not many solutions from the other candidates -- I'm more committed than ever to building a coalition of Americans who can make Donald Trump a one-term president.

After three months of campaigning across the country and listening to people in their communities, I know that the conversation we need to have is not what I saw on stage tonight. Americans from all walks of life know we need to pull this country back together. They know this election is too important to stay divided. And they know America cannot afford another four years with Donald Trump in the White House.

Super Tuesday is one week away and millions of people are already casting their votes. It's more important than ever to have a real conversation about what's at stake.

That's why I'll be getting on the phone to speak with folks all across America tomorrow morn‌ing. Will you call 850-679-6453 tomorrow and tell us why you're in this fight?

Now is the time to make sure that we have the strongest coalition possible -- for Super Tuesday and beyond. I hope you'll call 850-679-6453 tomorrow and share why you believe this election is so important.

Thank you,

Mike

I just left the stage of tonight’s Democratic primary presidential debate. What I try to do when I’m up there is share the story of our progressive majority -- an American majority -- that wants to see real change.

I hope I did that just now. Every day of this campaign, I’m working to be worthy of your belief and support.

If I did that tonight, I would be grateful if you would donate to help us raise the $13 million we need to stay competitive to and through Super Tuesday.

If you think the last four years have been chaotic, divisive, toxic, and exhausting, imagine spending the better part of 2020 with Bernie Sanders versus Donald Trump. Think about what that will be like for this country.

We are facing a make-or-break moment in our nation’s history. For too long, our leadership has either ignored the problems that are most urgent, like climate change and gun violence, or actively made things worse. We need a new way forward.

To answer the call of this historic moment, we need to give people a reason to come together -- a reason to hope again. We can do it with solutions bold enough for the challenges we face and big enough to bring the American people together.

Thank you for all your support. It means the world.

Pete

I just stepped off the debate stage in South Carolina.

I hope I made you proud tonight. And I hope you’re ready to join me in doing everything we can to win big and defeat Donald Trump! Are you with me? Please donate now.

Tonight I talked about how we will defeat Donald Trump and my plans to get our country back on the path to progress. But we have a lot of work left to do and we have to make the most of this moment.

This was our last debate before South Carolinians go to the polls in just four days. And people in the Super Tuesday states will make their choices in just one week. So I need your help now more than ever before: Will you donate right now to help me take on Donald Trump and win the White House?

Thank you for being on my team,

Amy

It’s us against the entire damn political establishment.

Tonight it was the candidates taking aim at Bernie on the debate stage. Tomorrow it will be their super PACs and their personal billions taking aim at us in television ads.

But we have something they don’t have: people. Lots and lots of people.

That’s why your $2.70 means everything to this campaign. Because it’s not just your $2.70; it’s the $2.70 of thousands of people donating at this very moment with you.

And when you add up all those $2.70 donations, that’s the difference between winning and losing — between a president you can trust to fight for you, and a president you’re just hoping won’t lose to Trump.

So what do you say? Let’s elect the one we trust:

Can you make a $2.70 contribution to help Bernie fight back against these attacks and win the nomination? He needs you tonight.

Thank you for standing with Bernie tonight. A record number of individual donations has put us in a position to win. Your $2.70 will finish the job for Bernie.

All my best,

Faiz Shakir
Campaign Manager

If tonight made you even more ready for Elizabeth to win the nomination, defeat Donald Trump, and make big, structural change from the White House, chip in $2 or anything you can right now.

Tonight, Bloomberg did get something right about Elizabeth: "With this senator, enough is never enough."

When it comes to fighting for working people, enough is never enough.

Elizabeth didn't stop fighting when people told her the big banks would never let her create the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. She didn't stop fighting when people said she couldn't beat a popular Republican incumbent. She won't stop fighting now that billionaires say we can't make big, structural change.

And we won't stop fighting by her side.

Elizabeth can't do this alone. She relies on grassroots donors to power this campaign so we can continue the fight for big, structural change. Can you chip in $2 or whatever you can today?

Thanks,

Team Warren

So, there you have it: five of the seven remaining at least semi-viable candidates, and their key "after the debate ended" messages. And here's how they're doing with the fundraising they mentioned in those emails:

• Bloomy is not asking for our money, he's got plenty of his own.
• Mayor Pete set a goal of raising $13M before Super Tuesday; as of this afternoon, he was shy of 50% of the way there.
• Klobuchar did not set a specific goal, and did not provide a specific update on how much has been raised.
• That Guy from Vermont chose to set a donor goal, rather than a dollar goal: 500,000 donors by Saturday's monthly FEC filing deadline. As of this afternoon, he was just shy of 50% of the way there. 
• Warren, too, was focused on the FEC deadline, and while her team's emails didn't specify what she was looking for, in an email yesterday afternoon they indicated the had not met the daily goal, and reiterated that again in an email this afternoon.  

It's a jungle out there - a money-hungry, vote-hungry jungle. We'll see who's still standing by the time next Thursday rolls around. 

The 10th Debate Drinking Game, 2/25/20

Everyone ready for tonight's debate?

CBS is hosting the shindig, with moderators Norah O'Donnell and Gayle King, Face the Nation's Margaret Brennan, CBS News chief Washington guy Major Garrett, and Bill Whitaker of 60 Minutes making up the panel.

The candidates, in left to right order on the stage (from your viewpoint, not theirs), are: Bloomy, Mayor Pete, Elizabeth, Bernie Sanders (That Guy from Vermont, or TGFV), Papa Joe, Amy, and Tom Steyer, The Other Billionaire (TOB).

I'm trying to stay away from the really obvious drinking game words, of which there many: Medicare for All, billionaires, 1%, Super Tuesday, socialism, African-Americans, coronavirus/COVID-19, frontrunner, and the like.

Here are the keywords I'm going with tonight:

• Castro, Cuba, Fidel, communism
• Jim Clyburn 
• Palmetto (because someone will have to say it)
• coalition 
• Russia, bots 
• convention, contested, superdelegates
• HBCU, HBCUs
• firewall
• Israel, peace, settlements
• turnout
• inheritance tax
• Green New Deal 
• Operation Chaos
• establishment (all types of it)
• vice president
• expectations

Obviously, I'm hoping for an informative couple of hours, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

And the drinking game? I have no idea how that'll turn out, either. With any luck, I'll have fun, but not a Taco Bell-worth hangover tomorrow. 

Good luck to the candidates, and to you with your keywords.

Wondering on Wednesday (v198)

Ready... Set... Wonder!

So, how's everyone doing today? Getting ready for the debate with five moderators and six candidates? I really hope NBC comes up with another person so every candidate can be matched with an individual questioner... and if they don't add one, I'll really have to wonder about their sense of adventure.

I'm going to be watching - and celebrating National Wine Day at the same time, even though I'm a day late on the latter. But no point wasting a good drinking game night, right? Here are some of my keywords for tonight: delegates; family values; Super Tuesday; South Carolina; people of color; Nevada Culinary Union; pardons; stop and frisk; media bias; raise your hand; front-runner; Elizabeth Warren (since she's been inexplicably missing from recent polls); and farmers. My bonus word? Equal Rights Amendment, or ERA.

Now, we won't have a 'debate' or anything close to that -- what we'll likely have, as we usually do, is a group interview, with a little bit - or maybe even a lot - of sniping at each other, particularly the designated front-runners: That Guy from Vermont, who is tied with a former mayor in delegates, and the other former mayor, the billionaire Mike Bloomberg, who hasn't been on the ballot anywhere, so has zero delegates and zero votes.

And speaking of billionaires, let's take a moment to wonder about the other billionaire in the race, Tom Steyer, the one who's actually on the ballot in Nevada, but who didn't make the debate stage.

That other billionaire, the impeached president, is still out there, not spending a dime of his own money, but continuing to make money off everything political. That's right: according to this Forbes article, 

Billionaire Donald Trump still has not donated a cent to his 2020 campaign, opting to fund the effort with money from supporters around the country. At the same time, Trump’s private companies are continuing to charge the campaign for expenses like rent and consulting, according to the latest federal filings. That means that since January 20, 2017, the day Trump officially declared his intent to run for re-election, his campaign has put $1.9 million of donor money into the president’s private business.

So, where's the money going?

• $1.3 million to Trump Tower Commercial LLC, in which the president has a 100% interest from his re-election team, with additional money coming from the RNC;
• $259,000 to the Trump Corporation, in which the president has a 100% interest, for legal and IT consulting;
• $126,000 to the Trump International Hotel;
• $60,000 to the Trump Hotel Collection, a management company also called Trump International Hotels Management LLC, solely owned by the president;
• $84,000 to Trump Plaza LLC, owned outright by the president; and
• $3,000 monthly payments to Trump Restaurants LLC, in which the president has a 100% interest.

Now, the assumption is that this is all legal and above board, as long as the campaign is paying market rates and all, which of course they said it does. However, the article also notes that

Even if a campaign were breaking rules by paying exorbitant rates, there’s not a lot anyone could do about it right now. The FEC, which examines such things, cannot take any official commission action unless at least four of its six commissioners vote to do so. Since Trump took office, three of the FEC’s commissioners have left their posts. Their seats—which demand presidential appointments and senate confirmations—have yet to be filled.

I don't know about you, but I have to wonder a couple of things: first of all, is there NO non-Trump-enriching space available? And second, is there any wondering why the FEC isn't up to full strength?

And one more - do the folks who are spending all of their money on Trump properties (the same as they did back in 2015 an 2016) do this on their own, or because they know if they didn't, they'd be out of a job?

What else is going on?  Let's see...  Virginia failed to pass an assault weapons ban this week, when

Four Democrats on Virginia's Senate Judiciary Committee broke ranks with their party handing the Republican minority a victory in tabling the bill for the remainder of the year. It also sent the measure to the state's Crime Commission for further review. 

The bill would have banned the sale or transfer of certain assault-style weapons in Virginia. It also would have made it illegal to possess silencers and magazine holding more than 12 rounds. 

Lots of people are wondering what happened to everyone's courage, after the Dems took control and turned Virginia into single-party government; this was a shock to many, it seems.

Reports say that Snitty Snitty Bill Barr considered resigning because of Trump's meddling and tweeting and impossible-job-making interference.  I have to say, part of me thinks that's a load of hooey - if he wanted to resign, he could have, and still can. I also wonder if it had anything to do with the couple thousand former DOJ employees calling on him to resign?

And finally, a couple of noteworthy bankruptcy filings making the news: the Boy Scouts of America and the Diocese of Harrisburg, PA have both filed, for the same reason - abuse of young people. There's not a lot left to wonder about in either case, I think for either, I think - other than, have we heard the last of it?

That's where we'll leave it for now. Enjoy the debate, if that's the correct word for it. And don't overdo the drinking game...

Wondering on Wednesday (v193)

Ready... Set... Wonder!

We are free (at last) from wondering when on earth House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was going to free the two articles of impeachment from purgatory and actually send them over to the Senate. And we're free from wondering who'll be the House managers who will present the case against the president.  In addition to the obvious (if tainted) Committee Chairs Adam Schiff, who's 59, and Jerry Nadler (72), we've got five others, who, according to this Politico article, reflect Pelosi's

desire for geographic, racial and gender diversity... and draws from the Democratic Caucus' wide swath of legal and national security-related experience. 

The five:

• Zoe Lofgren, 72. Like Schiff, she represents California and is a lawyer. She was a Judiciary Committee staffer for Nixon's impeachment, and was in the House for Clinton's. She was first elected in 1994. 
• Hakeem Jeffries, 49. He represents folks in New York State (as does Nadler), and is chair of the House Democratic Caucus. He's also a lawyer, Trump critic, and Pelosi supporter. 
• Val Demings, 62. She represents Florida, and was previously the Orlando Police Chief. Demings is on both the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, but is not a lawyer.
• Jason Crow, 40. The first-termer from Colorado doesn't sit on either Intelligence or Judiciary, but on the Armed Service Committee. He's is one of the "national security freshmen" in the Caucus, he's a lawyer, and is a veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. 
• Sylvia Garcia, 69. The Texas freshman is a member of the Judiciary Committee, is a lawyer and a former municipal judge in Houston, a city she served as controller.

There's plenty to wonder about here, including what the Trump nicknames are going to be for these folks. I mean, it won't be possible for him to resist the urge, right?

What else is wonder-worthy tonight?

Well, there was the debate last night, which was generally serious, and the moderators were pretty specific with their questioning. There was less of the 'you get a question and you get the same question, and you get the same question" thing that we've seen in previous debates. Some have even said it was the most 'debate-like' debate we've had yet, which is not saying much, but at least we're making progress, I guess.

I wonder what Iowa voters think about all of this? Did they learn anything new last night, or was it just more of the same, convincing them that they've made the right choice - if they've made up their minds already? And more importantly, what did the majority of them, the ones who haven't made up their minds or can be swayed to change their minds - what did they learn last night?

And finally, with Tom Steyer representing the billionaire class on the debate stage, the billionaire who wasn't on the stage was representing the 'meatball' class on Twitter during the debate.  Seriously.

And that was just one of the goofy tweets Team Bloomberg put out there for entertainment during the debate.  You can read more of them in this NY Post article.

I can't help wondering what folks in the Bloomberg ad states think about all of this? And what the Bloomberg team was really trying to do here?