Friday, a full four days after the candidates expected to know who won the Iowa caucus, the results are still so mired in confusion and incompetence that the Associated Press has declined to announce a winner at all.
"He’d be well suited to make a presentation at the debate painting himself as a unifier, someone who can bring both wings of the party together, to make himself seem a more palatable option for Democrats disappointed in Biden’s performance and perhaps forced to start considering a new frontrunner. "
No he’s not well-suited.
And who is, in your inimitable wisdom?
Less attacking each other and more hitting Trump and Republicans.
Talk about what Americans care about. Health care and climate change. Radical solutions may be needed, but most people are scared off by radical anything.
Drug prices need to be reined in. Especially insulin and other medications people need to live.
Humane solutions to immigration and a common sense path to citizenship are also needed.
Here’s to hoping this is the last debate with more than 3 or four candidates.
Kate, Kate, Kate take a deep breath and come back to reality. The process of the Iowa caucus season went very well from the first candidate visit to the last realignment on caucus night. If those of you outside Iowa would take the time to understand what the caucuses purpose is we would have a lot less hysterics. The caucus is the beginning process for determining who the Democratic Party will select as delegates to the Democratic Party National Convention. That process will not be completed until June 13 2020. So the urgency that you and many others have placed on immediate numbers is just plain unfounded. Instead of demeaning those involved you should be complimenting them on assuring accuracy of the process that determines the final delegate sélection.
Can we forget about Iowa and focus on New Hampshire now?
Bloomberg.
Some truth: there’s good portion of this country that will not vote for a Jewish POTUS. Maybe not a problem with Blue States but that’s about it.
Geeze Louise and to think that the Republicans had both chambers and the Presidency for 2 frickin’ years and all we got were lousy tax cuts for corps and the rich.
" Biden , on the other hand, had a disappointing showing in Iowa. Though the state plays to many of his weaknesses — a progressive Democratic electorate and little diversity — a fourth place finish is not what his campaign hoped for. Buttigieg, thus, is well positioned to play up his viability as the moderate alternative to Sanders and to clobber Biden’s “electability” argument in one-fell swoop."
What a great example of the failure of modern journalism as a result of the formulaic approach applied to writing anything. I could do this with a lot of what’s written on TPM and elsewhere, but this paragraph jumped out at me. Iowa is rather meaningless in the electoral college and will go red. That’s a virtual guarantee. It has a largely homogeneous population that the first sentence admits is a tough climb for Biden. That homogeneity and other factors makes it a poor predictor for most of the rest of the country’s behavior. The caucuses were a complete mess this year, the results somewhat unreliable and that’s not even touching all the antidemocratic and structural problems with the caucus system in the first place that makes it a complete joke. Yes yes, no campaign wants 4th place anyway.
And yet, the need to draw some tea-leaf-reading conclusion from all this in order to frame the narrative for the evening, and the trained-seal stylistic brain damage that has reporters reaching for the extremely short and limited exciting-buzzword-lexicon contained in the Zombie Fourth Estate Thesaurus (slammed, clouds, swoops, blasts, clobber, etc.) turns the last sentence into total nonsense. Buttigieg may indeed try to make those arguments based on Iowa. In fact, he’s guaranteed to try them out, but the preceding sentences, the known facts and just reality itself don’t suggest they will or should be very convincing arguments…and certainly not “clobbering” or “one fell swoop”.
When was it that aspiring journalists started getting taught that word choice trumps substance?
“[Sanders would] be well suited to make a presentation at the debate painting himself as a unifier, someone who can bring both wings of the party together”
Let’s first start with “not the guy whose entire shtick is that everyone moderate or centrist or who doesn’t agree with him is an enemy equal to the GOPers and needs to be taken out of power and subjugated” and maybe go from there, eh?
Bernie guy:
And with that dumpster fire throwing up smoke in the background, seven presidential hopefuls will meet on the debate stage in New Hampshire
.
Wow…straight out of central casting.
Stop encouraging my stereotypes by proving them true haha
Here he is again…pushing divisive conspiracy theories…
And yet we’re treated to the other article suggesting Bernie has some sort of chance of painting himself as a unifier? Fucking laughable. Who wants anything to do with these petty, spiteful, purity-obsessed little shits? The old adage is that you’re judged by the company you keep…which speaks volumes about whether you should be judged by the followers you accumulate.
You look at his tweets and the tweets in his feed and the responses he gets from his followers/social media ecosystem and I am not exaggerating when I say this: the level of refusal to accept anything other than Bernie winning or other aspects of reality is what I experience reading through posts on Faux News’ kkkomment boards. I shit you not…and it should be extremely concerning to everyone.
I swear…the NYT threw Klobuchar a bone in order to convince her to stay in and help make this all look dumber and more incompetent than it needs to look…
Neither she nor Yang belong on the stage tonight. Enough is enough.
Carville is 100% correct. The point of a party is to acquire power. PERIOD. Anyone who can’t accept that, doesn’t understand it or can’t see their way past their own ideology or delusions of grandeur to accept that it means, first and foremost, above all things and at the core keystone of the entire endeavor, forming a coalition…needs to accept right now that they are going to be the reason Trump gets his 2nd term, climate change goes unaddressed, important regulation continues to be dismantled, the SCOTUS goes 7-2 (or worse), public education is diverted to conservative indoctrination centers, minorities’ rights and opportunities are quickly further eroded, and voting rights start disappearing at an alarming rate while our democratic processes become thoroughly rigged…such that approximately 25% of the population forever determines how we and our children and the next generations live our lives.
You are to angry
1,000 suns of fury, my friend.
If Kolb goes a few steps to the right then he’d be a Trumper.
And since Kolb is an Anthropology Professor I’d think he be a wee bit more decaffeinated.
Since 1976 the Dem nominee has (almost) always been the candidate who won Iowa, New Hampshire, or both. The only exception was 1992 when Iowa was uncontested and Bill Clinton finished 2nd in New Hampshire.
So odds are if Sanders and Buttigieg are 1-2 on Tuesday night, one of them will end up as the nominee. If Biden finishes 4th, behind Warren, I think his candidacy will be in serious trouble.