Yeah, playing the reverse victim card is not the way to raise your profile. Between this and Bernie yesterday, we have too many whiners in this race.
I don’t have a major problem with her regarding Franken because he basically took himself out. I do have a problem with her representing Phillip Morris when she was a lawyer, and looking like a weather vane with her changing positions over the years. She comes across as an opportunist, not someone with core values I share. Currently way down the list of candidates I might be interested in supporting.
Al franken
had a lifetime of contribution to the Liberal causes I believe in. he was a comedian when that photo was taken. he was being a prankster. Gillibrand knew that. she took out a really valuable asset to our Party. not very bright of her. I do not want another Jomoke for president
Yeah, that was the weirdest, most disastrously miscalculated pitch I’ve ever seen a Democrat make to other Democrats. Just from the narrowest tactical point of view, that was gross political malpractice - yet another reason to ignore her in a crowded field of more attractive candidates.
Makes sense but why do people donate to boring candidates that look sure to lose? Not just Gillibrand, this applies to other candidates like Swalwell as well.
Did I insult you in some way to provoke that response? You don’t know me except through TPM and you certainly don’t know my wife. You’ve no basis whatever for your conclusion about her.
As New Lawyer, Senator Was Active in Tobacco’s Defense
The Philip Morris Company did not like to talk about what went on inside its lab in Cologne, Germany, where researchers secretly conducted experiments exploring the effects of cigarette smoking.
So when the Justice Department tried to get its hands on that research in 1996 to prove that tobacco industry executives had lied about the dangers of smoking, the company moved to fend off the effort with the help of a highly regarded young lawyer named Kirsten Rutnik (Gillibrand).
(snip)
The industry beat back the federal perjury investigation, a significant legal victory at the time, but not one that Ms. Gillibrand is eager to discuss.
(snip)
During her most recent congressional race, Ms. Gillibrand, who is a former smoker, accepted $18,200 in campaign donations from tobacco companies and their executives — putting her among the top dozen House Democrats for such contributions. Many Congressional Democrats do not accept tobacco money.
I don’t hate her either, but I would like to see a Venn diagram between people who dislike her for the Franken ordeal and those who are “appalled” at Joe Biden’s behavior. I think that would be real telling.
I don’t think she is really falling behind on that scale…its just that a lot of other people are really soaring on that scale right now…Warren is killing it on the policy front, Castro is starting to emerge now, Buttigeig has completely blown apart prior expectations.
Gillibrand got in just a little bit too late to garner some of that early support that Harris gobbled up. I think Booker is in a similar place as Gillibrand, too. I don’t really talk to people who are “coming round” to either of them…supporters of both were supporters of them last year, and detractors of both were detractors last year. The three names I mentioned above (Warren, Castro, Buttigeig) aren’t dealing with that dynamic.
I’ve talked several times about where I think some individual candidates are in good places or bad places with regards to the timeline of the primary states. On another front, the policy front, I think a lot of those people are doing very poorly putting out policies,particularly in a concise platformy type of manner. Castro I believe is the one who is doing the best so far, followed by Warren (though she has more policy positions, she is taking a bit of the HRC “feed them from the firehose” approach which makes it difficult to tie together in a comprehensive manner). Harris, on the other hand, isn’t doing much at all, except a lot of “ditto” remarks and some defensive posturing on attacks coming from other places. Beto likewise, seems to be leaning a bit too heavily upon “charisma” instead of a comprehensive platform, though clearly he is squaring off on what Trump hopes to make his main plank…immigration. I just personally think Castro’s approach opens itself up to a more unifying and comprehensive platform over all.
Others have said it already, but just want to add my voice as well. I will not forget her attack on Al Franken, who I loved and admired. I don’t forgive her for that and don’t want to hear or know anything further about her.
Most Democrats understand the idea of the game is to take out the son-of-a-bitch from the other party and not engage in friendly-fire goat-fucks of your colleagues.
Yep, saw those ads too and thought it was incredibly dumb to try to cash in on her Franken stance, even if someone supported her for that stand. No Franken sense, apparently.
Very knowledgeable. Good counterpuncher. Thinks well on her feet. Solid policy and legislative record (actually better than any of the other candidates if you look at it objectively). If you are a m4a advocate (and I’m for ‘Medi buy in for all’ not m4a) the plan she has outlined is the most credible path to get there. I’m for Harris, but I think Gillibrand is top 5 material. If she can get the franken stuff out of the way, she can get a second look. She should actually be receiving the glowing coverage that Pete is getting right now.
