I'll talk about two problem candidates first. They seemed interesting, but there was something that didn't seem right. And it was so wrong upon further inspection...
Andrew Yang (D) – This guy. Ugh. Another rich guy with ... ideas! Well, an idea. Not so much specific policy knowledge as general ideas and possible leanings. Apparently whipped up the Joe Rogan libertarians and MRAs real good though. This is an interesting pattern we should pay attention to a bit more... Running in martial arts circles, Joe Rogan comes up A LOT and that's troubling as he tends to appeal to a certain segment of the population who is not particularly bothered by white supremacy and sexism or who actively engage in it.
So he got noticed for his mention of UBI, which gets leftists' attention for sure. But there's not much else, nor any real plan the enact it. And there are problems. It was a gut feeling, but the problems are becoming more clear.
His name pops up whenever people are asking so are you more a Kamala Harris type or Bernie Sanders or even Beto. A bunch of dudes always add "how about Andrew Yang? I love this guy!" I didn't know why this felt weird to me, but I saw on Twitter that he'd been on the Joe Rogan Experience. Aha! That explains it. You're neither for solid leftist policy for the workers/people and you also hate the idea of a lady president? We've got the guy for you. Andrew Yang's your guy! Because Joe Rogan told you so. Anyone who gives Alex Jones and Jordan Peterson a platform, you should DEFINITELY hold in high regard. (Really, DON'T.)
Also, related to the sexist vibe, there's a white supremacist bent as well. They go to together, what did you expect?
Alt-Right Fanboys Are Crushing On This Candidate
Andrew Yang, the 2020 long-shot candidate running on a universal basic income, explained
Tulsi Gabbard (D) – A big no. She's another that made me sit up and take notice at first. I liked her for a few hours. She said a few bold things I agreed with, seemed possibly left-ish. But she also has some oddball conservative leanings – and come to find out deep roots with conservatives in both money and family and a weird Hindu nationalist bent that you don't want in a president any more than you'd want, say, a white nationalist one. She also reformed her anti-LGBTQ stance when she served in Iraq and saw how terrible Muslims were basically, so no points there – not so sure I'm convinced that she's really changed her thinking. Trump nearly had her in his cabinet because they shared some foreign policy goals, which is extremely troubling.
In other Islamophopia news, here's her with Rabbi Shmuley and Ms. Adelson.
And because it relates to Gabbard, a Joe Rogan guest - that other time I tried to recommend Joe Rogan fans read something:
In the way of serious candidates, there are a couple.
Bernie Sanders (I) – Probably still the best option. There are a couple of silly things. He's running as a Democrat because that's what he is, though centrists love to say he isn't – look at the I beside his name! - as though this somehow discredits him. The Hillary machine attacking him is utterly ridiculous, but out in force.
He does a great job of breaking down the economic stuff that usually seems complicated - $15 minimum wage is good for business and workers, preK investment keeps people out of prison, family leave and infrastructure are good for citizens and business, worker owned cooperatives close the income gap and increase profit. He does well with immigration and talks about how we rob them - they pay into the system they can't use which is a very different narrative from the border security Democrats.
That part paragraph is from my review of his book. I reviewed it pretty critically overall, so I'm not ignoring his problems. Economic policy can improve a lot of lives and prevent another collapse and he's very good on these.
I'm going to call BS on the “Bernie bro” and “he only appeals to white people” complaints, though I've had my moments in considering these things.
Pretty good piece on this not being about the guy, but about the policy he's trying to encourage. He's caused many a politician to reach a bit farther left in order to be relevant.
Elizabeth Warren (D) – There's a lot going on, but I still think she's good. You can't call Palestinians a demographic threat though...
She does great explainers on taxes, universal healthcare, and breaking up the banks so I feel like if anyone will make progress there, it'll be her. She and Bernie are the absolute best on these issues if we keep pushing them. Unlike, for example, a Pelosi who would say I've been here a long time so I know better, get off my lawn.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f519_LGjhCA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoPghOdmkuU
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/12/03/elizabeth_warren_reveals_handwritten_addition_to_senate_tax_bill.html
Buuut in a nutshell, this.
"The fascination here is that someone who is so outspoken and eloquent on economic inequality, health care, Wall Street, government corruption and the horrors of Vietnam and Iraq turns into a conservative when it comes to a Jewish state administering Jim Crow over millions of second-class citizens."
https://mondoweiss.net/2019/02/elizabeth-demographic-palestinian/
Aaand I wish she'd have handled the Pocahontas/DNA debacle better. But I guess she figured she'd have to do something concrete because even Obama couldn't ignore the racist attack in the end? She shouldn't have taken a genetic test, should have apologized if she put Native American on any forms and should have had listening sessions with Native Americans to see how she could be better or promote their voices somehow.
Pete Buttigieg (boot-uh-judge or boot-edge-edge?) (D) This is the latest new guy I've been hesitantly excited about – well, not so much excited as people I consider progressive/leftist are talking about him. I want to know more. So here we go. He's openly gay – possibly good for his ability to see marginalized people, but not necessarily. I don't know if his enthusiasm for federal action for LGBTQ would extend to supporting the ERA for women or abortion as healthcare...
I just haven't seen in any of his direct or indirect statements or anything that reassures me that he's going to look out for marginalized people across the board. I'm sure he'd toe the line as a progressive or liberal or whatever he is, but in the way people talk you can kind of discern whether or not this is a truly important strongly held belief or just something they have to say. For example, I could see him saying sure he's pro-choice, but kind of ignore abortion rights. But be really good on gay rights in the military, which is good! But very Pete-centric I guess is what I'm saying.
He seems like a no on NAFTA and strong on unions, good there. Salon wrote about his dad admiring a Marxist and he wrote something in high school about Bernie Sanders that keeps being mentioned, neither of which seems to reflect his stances all that much. He wants to run as a "man of the left," but he seems a little lukewarm on Medicare for All and things that would make him truly a man of the left..
So here is a more in depth look. I simply had a bad feeling - these are the supporting facts, basically.
Quote from the article:
"Part of where the left and the center-left have gone wrong is that we’ve been so policy-led that we haven’t been as philosophical."
Kamala Harris (D) - A probable no, she's a cop, but I love her in Congressional hearings. I was kind of excited about her for a bit. As a black woman, she should have the kind of perspective we want in the top job. She's sort of a Hillary 2.0, which is disappointing. You'd think she'd be more likely to consider the marginalized. But she's a prosecutor. She has been on the wrong end of problematic decisions with regard to sex workers and trans people. But she has been leaning left a bot more lately. I hope that shift is real, but I have a hard time believing it. It feels more like she's trying to convince herself that healthcare for all, ending war and legalizing marijuana is a good idea than actually having the ability to lead the party to enact the laws.
This kind of explains it. She says some good things, but doesn't necessarily have the votes or history to back it up...
Said no to AIPAC, then yes...
https://twitter.com/SenKamalaHarris/status/1110301531306409986
Cory Booker (D) – Nope. Love him in confirmation hearings in Congress. Policy wise he's even worse than Kamala Harris though. Very centrist and less likely to consider the marginalized. He used the shooting at a synagogue to disparage the Palestinian struggle for human rights which was odd and showed a severe lack of understanding of foreign policy and the impact of those issues on people in the US (how it ties to the loyalty oath a Palestinian American had to sign to continue employment and the anti free speech measure outlawing of BDS.)
Just one example, though there are many - here.
Oh boy. He and the AIPAC president text back and forth like teenagers??
Amy Klobuchar (D) - I was excited to see her announce because I've been a fan of some of her questions in the confirmation hearings and Congressional speeches, but quickly soured due to the rumors she was terrible to work for. It has been floated that this is a gendered attack against tough women, but it feels like this has more traction than that. Also, she's got the same tough on crime issues as a prosecutor as Kamala Harris.
She said no to AIPAC then yes.
Kirsten Gillibrand (D) - I remember being excited to see her announce too. She's got troubling connections, Wall Street problems, AIPAC/Israel allegiance and a pretty conservative record no matter what she says now, a little like Harris in a way. Bush tax cuts, surveillance, opposing gay marriage. Not impressed.
She said no to AIPAC then yes.
Beto O'Rourke (D) - Big NOPE. I've been loving what he has to say about the border. He should know about this, being from Texas. I think he should try to win a Senate seat and work there. He could do a lot of good. The two big things I think of for him, besides how everyone thinks he's cute, is lanky like Obama and rolls up his shirt sleeves, is his love of AIPAC and the headlines about him not knowing why he's running just that he was born to do it. Oh and that super awkward video announcement where his wife stares at him for five straight minutes and makes a really bad “sometimes he parents his kids” joke.
https://mondoweiss.net/2018/11/orourkes-presidential-progressives/
https://jacobinmag.com/2018/12/beto-orourke-president-2020-senate-race
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-this-progressive-texan-cant-get-excited-about-beto-orourke/2018/12/05/641c7f0e-f8b9-11e8-8c9a-860ce2a8148f_story.html?utm_term=.e24f25ad97f2
John Hickenlooper (D) – It seems like I heard good buzz or excitement about him, but I can neither remember why or find it online. I only found that he'd be against single payer and green new deal, which doesn't seem too promising. He's met Netanyahu, against BDS, spoken at AIPAC – not unusual for even Democrats, but still would like to see some spine and speaking out about human rights instead of blind complicity.
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, a Democrat, likewise urged his constituents on both sides to “tone down the rhetoric” in debates about abortion.
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/12/planned-parenthood-reproductive-justice-abortion-robert-dear/
He wants to claim AOC, but identifies with Biden... Um. Yeah. Go away please.
https://www.salon.com/2019/03/02/john-hickenlooper-makes-his-pitch-to-progressives-i-share-a-majority-of-perspectives-with-aoc/
Maybe the buzz was just the “brewpub owner turned politician” thing?
Julian Castro (D) – He's some DNC guy I think? He made a speech at the DNC one year, but I haven't heard much since. Apparently there was a blunder in the announcement in relation to fellow Texan Beto O'Rourke's, but I don't care enough to look it up.
Has a twin brother in politics.
Marianne Williamson (D) – Who? Lecturer and author... hmm. Oprah's spiritual adviser? Okay. NOPE NOPE NOPE. we're done here.
John Delaney (D) – Maryland Congressman apparently, but generally described as a billionaire. Maybe the most bland centrist, though could compete with Biden for that title if he joins. He doesn't understand the difference between democratic socialism and “socialism in it's pure form” much like the GOP.
Jay Inslee (D) – Washington governor. Cares about climate change. A lot. Some outlets (NYT) are saying he's running solely on that, which would be silly because everything is connected and if you can't explain that in a debate perhaps you shouldn't run. Maybe he has other positions. If you call him a progressive, he's a bit watered down. Maybe better than a centrist though. He supported a maternity/abortion insurance initiative, but his minimum wage and family leave policy are not where they need to be. "Moving toward" universal health care. Blah. Opposes the travel ban and supports DREAMers. Good. No brainer. Pretty moderate, except climate change. That would be great...if he had some strong stances on other issues like universal healthcare or breaking up the banks or anti-war or something. To accomplish climate change, he's going to need to develop strong feelings about the connected issues and he doesn't seem to.
Wayne Messam (D) – Florida mayor, first generation American – could be a good sign.
The link -definitely not everything you need to know about him because it doesn't say anything really. Maybe good on guns safety? Possibly. Played football – irrelevant.
Bill Weld (R) -- this guy's running against Trump? I guess?
And as of this week - the week of March 18, 2019 - this Mike Gravel thing
https://splinternews.com/mike-gravels-viral-2020-campaign-is-the-brainchild-of-a-1833434906
There is still lots of hype about Biden, but hopefully his conservative politics and creepy groping problem will keep him out of this race.
Andrew Yang (D) – This guy. Ugh. Another rich guy with ... ideas! Well, an idea. Not so much specific policy knowledge as general ideas and possible leanings. Apparently whipped up the Joe Rogan libertarians and MRAs real good though. This is an interesting pattern we should pay attention to a bit more... Running in martial arts circles, Joe Rogan comes up A LOT and that's troubling as he tends to appeal to a certain segment of the population who is not particularly bothered by white supremacy and sexism or who actively engage in it.
So he got noticed for his mention of UBI, which gets leftists' attention for sure. But there's not much else, nor any real plan the enact it. And there are problems. It was a gut feeling, but the problems are becoming more clear.
His name pops up whenever people are asking so are you more a Kamala Harris type or Bernie Sanders or even Beto. A bunch of dudes always add "how about Andrew Yang? I love this guy!" I didn't know why this felt weird to me, but I saw on Twitter that he'd been on the Joe Rogan Experience. Aha! That explains it. You're neither for solid leftist policy for the workers/people and you also hate the idea of a lady president? We've got the guy for you. Andrew Yang's your guy! Because Joe Rogan told you so. Anyone who gives Alex Jones and Jordan Peterson a platform, you should DEFINITELY hold in high regard. (Really, DON'T.)
Also, related to the sexist vibe, there's a white supremacist bent as well. They go to together, what did you expect?
Alt-Right Fanboys Are Crushing On This Candidate
Andrew Yang, the 2020 long-shot candidate running on a universal basic income, explained
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Tulsi Gabbard (D) – A big no. She's another that made me sit up and take notice at first. I liked her for a few hours. She said a few bold things I agreed with, seemed possibly left-ish. But she also has some oddball conservative leanings – and come to find out deep roots with conservatives in both money and family and a weird Hindu nationalist bent that you don't want in a president any more than you'd want, say, a white nationalist one. She also reformed her anti-LGBTQ stance when she served in Iraq and saw how terrible Muslims were basically, so no points there – not so sure I'm convinced that she's really changed her thinking. Trump nearly had her in his cabinet because they shared some foreign policy goals, which is extremely troubling.
In other Islamophopia news, here's her with Rabbi Shmuley and Ms. Adelson.
And because it relates to Gabbard, a Joe Rogan guest - that other time I tried to recommend Joe Rogan fans read something:
**************************
Bernie Sanders (I) – Probably still the best option. There are a couple of silly things. He's running as a Democrat because that's what he is, though centrists love to say he isn't – look at the I beside his name! - as though this somehow discredits him. The Hillary machine attacking him is utterly ridiculous, but out in force.
He does a great job of breaking down the economic stuff that usually seems complicated - $15 minimum wage is good for business and workers, preK investment keeps people out of prison, family leave and infrastructure are good for citizens and business, worker owned cooperatives close the income gap and increase profit. He does well with immigration and talks about how we rob them - they pay into the system they can't use which is a very different narrative from the border security Democrats.
That part paragraph is from my review of his book. I reviewed it pretty critically overall, so I'm not ignoring his problems. Economic policy can improve a lot of lives and prevent another collapse and he's very good on these.
I'm going to call BS on the “Bernie bro” and “he only appeals to white people” complaints, though I've had my moments in considering these things.
Pretty good piece on this not being about the guy, but about the policy he's trying to encourage. He's caused many a politician to reach a bit farther left in order to be relevant.
Elizabeth Warren (D) – There's a lot going on, but I still think she's good. You can't call Palestinians a demographic threat though...
She does great explainers on taxes, universal healthcare, and breaking up the banks so I feel like if anyone will make progress there, it'll be her. She and Bernie are the absolute best on these issues if we keep pushing them. Unlike, for example, a Pelosi who would say I've been here a long time so I know better, get off my lawn.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f519_LGjhCA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoPghOdmkuU
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/12/03/elizabeth_warren_reveals_handwritten_addition_to_senate_tax_bill.html
Buuut in a nutshell, this.
"The fascination here is that someone who is so outspoken and eloquent on economic inequality, health care, Wall Street, government corruption and the horrors of Vietnam and Iraq turns into a conservative when it comes to a Jewish state administering Jim Crow over millions of second-class citizens."
https://mondoweiss.net/2019/02/elizabeth-demographic-palestinian/
Aaand I wish she'd have handled the Pocahontas/DNA debacle better. But I guess she figured she'd have to do something concrete because even Obama couldn't ignore the racist attack in the end? She shouldn't have taken a genetic test, should have apologized if she put Native American on any forms and should have had listening sessions with Native Americans to see how she could be better or promote their voices somehow.
Pete Buttigieg (boot-uh-judge or boot-edge-edge?) (D) This is the latest new guy I've been hesitantly excited about – well, not so much excited as people I consider progressive/leftist are talking about him. I want to know more. So here we go. He's openly gay – possibly good for his ability to see marginalized people, but not necessarily. I don't know if his enthusiasm for federal action for LGBTQ would extend to supporting the ERA for women or abortion as healthcare...
I just haven't seen in any of his direct or indirect statements or anything that reassures me that he's going to look out for marginalized people across the board. I'm sure he'd toe the line as a progressive or liberal or whatever he is, but in the way people talk you can kind of discern whether or not this is a truly important strongly held belief or just something they have to say. For example, I could see him saying sure he's pro-choice, but kind of ignore abortion rights. But be really good on gay rights in the military, which is good! But very Pete-centric I guess is what I'm saying.
He seems like a no on NAFTA and strong on unions, good there. Salon wrote about his dad admiring a Marxist and he wrote something in high school about Bernie Sanders that keeps being mentioned, neither of which seems to reflect his stances all that much. He wants to run as a "man of the left," but he seems a little lukewarm on Medicare for All and things that would make him truly a man of the left..
So here is a more in depth look. I simply had a bad feeling - these are the supporting facts, basically.
Quote from the article:
"Part of where the left and the center-left have gone wrong is that we’ve been so policy-led that we haven’t been as philosophical."
Kamala Harris (D) - A probable no, she's a cop, but I love her in Congressional hearings. I was kind of excited about her for a bit. As a black woman, she should have the kind of perspective we want in the top job. She's sort of a Hillary 2.0, which is disappointing. You'd think she'd be more likely to consider the marginalized. But she's a prosecutor. She has been on the wrong end of problematic decisions with regard to sex workers and trans people. But she has been leaning left a bot more lately. I hope that shift is real, but I have a hard time believing it. It feels more like she's trying to convince herself that healthcare for all, ending war and legalizing marijuana is a good idea than actually having the ability to lead the party to enact the laws.
This kind of explains it. She says some good things, but doesn't necessarily have the votes or history to back it up...
Said no to AIPAC, then yes...
https://twitter.com/SenKamalaHarris/status/1110301531306409986
Cory Booker (D) – Nope. Love him in confirmation hearings in Congress. Policy wise he's even worse than Kamala Harris though. Very centrist and less likely to consider the marginalized. He used the shooting at a synagogue to disparage the Palestinian struggle for human rights which was odd and showed a severe lack of understanding of foreign policy and the impact of those issues on people in the US (how it ties to the loyalty oath a Palestinian American had to sign to continue employment and the anti free speech measure outlawing of BDS.)
Just one example, though there are many - here.
Oh boy. He and the AIPAC president text back and forth like teenagers??
Amy Klobuchar (D) - I was excited to see her announce because I've been a fan of some of her questions in the confirmation hearings and Congressional speeches, but quickly soured due to the rumors she was terrible to work for. It has been floated that this is a gendered attack against tough women, but it feels like this has more traction than that. Also, she's got the same tough on crime issues as a prosecutor as Kamala Harris.
She said no to AIPAC then yes.
Kirsten Gillibrand (D) - I remember being excited to see her announce too. She's got troubling connections, Wall Street problems, AIPAC/Israel allegiance and a pretty conservative record no matter what she says now, a little like Harris in a way. Bush tax cuts, surveillance, opposing gay marriage. Not impressed.
She said no to AIPAC then yes.
Beto O'Rourke (D) - Big NOPE. I've been loving what he has to say about the border. He should know about this, being from Texas. I think he should try to win a Senate seat and work there. He could do a lot of good. The two big things I think of for him, besides how everyone thinks he's cute, is lanky like Obama and rolls up his shirt sleeves, is his love of AIPAC and the headlines about him not knowing why he's running just that he was born to do it. Oh and that super awkward video announcement where his wife stares at him for five straight minutes and makes a really bad “sometimes he parents his kids” joke.
https://mondoweiss.net/2018/11/orourkes-presidential-progressives/
https://jacobinmag.com/2018/12/beto-orourke-president-2020-senate-race
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-this-progressive-texan-cant-get-excited-about-beto-orourke/2018/12/05/641c7f0e-f8b9-11e8-8c9a-860ce2a8148f_story.html?utm_term=.e24f25ad97f2
John Hickenlooper (D) – It seems like I heard good buzz or excitement about him, but I can neither remember why or find it online. I only found that he'd be against single payer and green new deal, which doesn't seem too promising. He's met Netanyahu, against BDS, spoken at AIPAC – not unusual for even Democrats, but still would like to see some spine and speaking out about human rights instead of blind complicity.
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, a Democrat, likewise urged his constituents on both sides to “tone down the rhetoric” in debates about abortion.
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/12/planned-parenthood-reproductive-justice-abortion-robert-dear/
He wants to claim AOC, but identifies with Biden... Um. Yeah. Go away please.
https://www.salon.com/2019/03/02/john-hickenlooper-makes-his-pitch-to-progressives-i-share-a-majority-of-perspectives-with-aoc/
Maybe the buzz was just the “brewpub owner turned politician” thing?
Julian Castro (D) – He's some DNC guy I think? He made a speech at the DNC one year, but I haven't heard much since. Apparently there was a blunder in the announcement in relation to fellow Texan Beto O'Rourke's, but I don't care enough to look it up.
Has a twin brother in politics.
Marianne Williamson (D) – Who? Lecturer and author... hmm. Oprah's spiritual adviser? Okay. NOPE NOPE NOPE. we're done here.
John Delaney (D) – Maryland Congressman apparently, but generally described as a billionaire. Maybe the most bland centrist, though could compete with Biden for that title if he joins. He doesn't understand the difference between democratic socialism and “socialism in it's pure form” much like the GOP.
Jay Inslee (D) – Washington governor. Cares about climate change. A lot. Some outlets (NYT) are saying he's running solely on that, which would be silly because everything is connected and if you can't explain that in a debate perhaps you shouldn't run. Maybe he has other positions. If you call him a progressive, he's a bit watered down. Maybe better than a centrist though. He supported a maternity/abortion insurance initiative, but his minimum wage and family leave policy are not where they need to be. "Moving toward" universal health care. Blah. Opposes the travel ban and supports DREAMers. Good. No brainer. Pretty moderate, except climate change. That would be great...if he had some strong stances on other issues like universal healthcare or breaking up the banks or anti-war or something. To accomplish climate change, he's going to need to develop strong feelings about the connected issues and he doesn't seem to.
Wayne Messam (D) – Florida mayor, first generation American – could be a good sign.
The link -definitely not everything you need to know about him because it doesn't say anything really. Maybe good on guns safety? Possibly. Played football – irrelevant.
Bill Weld (R) -- this guy's running against Trump? I guess?
And as of this week - the week of March 18, 2019 - this Mike Gravel thing
https://splinternews.com/mike-gravels-viral-2020-campaign-is-the-brainchild-of-a-1833434906
There is still lots of hype about Biden, but hopefully his conservative politics and creepy groping problem will keep him out of this race.
No comments:
Post a Comment