I am mightily impressed by Elizabeth's ability to not only track but to assess and address such a vast array of issues with clear and effective plans.

For those who say she will never be able to implement them, just look at her record of proving people wrong. She is a closer. When she sets her mind to something she gets it done.

without big donor money and influence

These are purple states at best.

Doesn't matter if it's Biden, Warren, or someone else who gets the nomination, Colorado will be blue. Same with Virginia.

who is similar to Warren.

One example, she called TPP the hold standard in 2013 and 2014 and then was against it in 2016. She also set up the study that would have led to approving the Keystone pipeline. John Kerry pushed for more input then strongly rejected it. In the primary she was against it.

left...of corporatism was also applied...she was treated like dirt during the general. I liked Hillary and supported her..and she did not run left advance policies that would be attacked as 'socialism'. Clinton worked for Obama of course she had to support the TPP and until recently many Democrats supported trade agreements and maybe she actually did and changed her mind...I would also remind you Pres. Obama supported the pipeline at first and the TPP ...Hillary Clinton was the most qualified person ever to run for president...and she attempted to appeal to a big tent which is the only way we ever win.

I have no problem with her supporting TPP -- in fact, I wish she would have supported it, possibly adding she would prefer changes. I far prefer Kerry's position on Keystone as both a Senator and as SoS - he was against it. The Pipeline was on the verge of approval when HRC left, but Kerry opted to extend the process to hear from others and later strongly rejected it.

Hillary was no more qualified than Al Gore or John Kerry ... or Joe Biden.

Arizona and Georgia would be tougher. Biden might have a shot at those two states, especially Arizona.

we are in deep, deep shite.

Rump is at least 15 points underwater (Sept 2019), and every one of the top Dem candidate beats him, and that is from almost 2 months ago, before Warren started her latest surge.

https://morningconsult.com/tracking-trump-2/




Colorado 2020: Sanders, Biden and Warren lead Democratic Field; Democrats look to gain Senate seat


https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/colorado-2020-sanders-biden-and-warren-lead-democratic-field-democrats-look-to-gain-senate-seat






The Colorado Emerson College poll was conducted August 16-19, 2019 under the Supervision of Emerson College Polling Director and Assistant Professor Spencer Kimball. The sample consisted of registered voters, n=1,000, with a Credibility Interval (CI) similar to a poll’s margin of error (MOE) of +/- 3 percentage points.

states. In each state, the democratic nominee must tune his or her camoaign platform to the legitimate needs of people of the state.

is wrong with this picture? If you can't campaign there, you sure aren't going to have coattails during the election there.

But there should be no requirement that the local link to her campaign like one or two other candidates seem to require.

My guess is she is running strong in a purple state, the locals would want to be on stage with her, even when they disagree - I think that is one feature of her and Joe Biden that Bernie Sanders can't seem to grasp, Warren and Biden don't seem to demand that locals share their view of the world to the Nth degree.

Edit: By "anyone" I mean "are any other candidates".

in a state with GOP governor? Kamala did a lot of downticket fundraising.

Will help Dems in the end as we get away from the Wall Street fundraisers - Big Pharma, Big Agri, Big Oil, Big Insurance, etc. - which have compromised our message and left so many people cynical about who the government works for.

And I'm glad to see that she is doing grassroots building and helping out Dems in swing states to truly make this country work for the regular people.

...everyone else is thinking operationally. Big difference.

In other words, Bernie ALREADY HAS DONE much about it.

http://thenation.com/article/our-revolution-candidates-won-big-last-night

Our Revolution's 501(c)(4) designation prevents Sanders from playing any actual role in the organization because he is an elected official.

But he deserves tremendous credit for the initial inspiration.

(for the record, I've still got my 2016 Bernie sign in the window)

You are right that, technically, Senator Sanders cannot coordinate with Our Revolution as a candidate. However, the Our Revolution organization can follow his lead, copying his personal public endorsements.

While we're on the subject of unity, I remind you and all DUers of this rally:

Too bad the candidate endorsement strategy didn't last through 2018.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/progressives-plan-victory-just-took-gut-punch-now-what-do-n933771

I could cite the fact that the only news organization with a more acute Bernie bias than MSDNC is Faux. Fortunately for both of us, I can rely on a simple, undeniable fact:

I cited the fact that Our Revolution endorsed many candidates in 2018, up and down the ballot, 27 of whom won. I didn't claim that others endorsed by Our Revolution who lost actually won. I stated a simple fact: T-W-E-N-T-Y-S-E-V-E-N of the candidates endorsed by the organization founded and inspired by Bernie Sanders won, no more, no less. Deny this if you like. I hear that Enron needs a new team of accountants.

As to the supposed weakness of progressivism in the opinion piece you cited, I don't deny that statewide races, such as the gubernatorial election in Maryland, should have been won. That, too, is a fact but I ask, what did the DGA and DNC do there? Whatever those organizations did, even bolstered by support from Bernie directly, on top of efforts by Our Revolution, fell flat. I can draw a straight line from this loss, among others at the statewide level, to a larger failure by the Democratic establishment.

As to the fact that Our Revolution is a 501(c)(4), it is true that Bernie cannot coordinate with the organization directly. HOWEVER, he can (and most certainly does) raise money for the group. More importantly, there is NOTHING IN THE LAW preventing Our Revolution from endorsing and supporting candidates whom Bernie has endorsed personally, so long as the decision is made independently.

In conclusion, while Progressives' efforts did not yield 100% victory in 2018, Nancy Pelosi would not be Speaker today were it not for the ENORMOUS momentum aimed at U.S. House races by liberal groups, including Our Revolution.

Returning to the original question of the entire thread - Bernie has invested efforts in helping other candidates. To wit, the impact of the Our Revolution founding was such that UNITED STATES SENATOR ELIZABETH WARREN HERSELF co-headlined a big rally with Bernie under the its auspices. Would she do that if the organization were feeble?

Last edited Sat Oct 12, 2019, 05:15 PM - Edit history (4)

It's from 2017.

http://thenation.com/article/our-revolution-candidates-won-big-last-night

Also... what does NBC (the link I posted) have to do with "MSDNC?" Could you clarify? Perhaps a registered Green Party member might think that many things are "DNC controlled" that aren't.

Is "MSDNC" also responsible for these articles?

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-establishment-is-beating-the-progressive-wing-in-democratic-primaries-so-far/

https://www.usnews.com/news/the-run/articles/2018-08-08/the-far-left-is-losing

https://www.forapeoplesparty.org/election-results/

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/six-reasons-bernie-sanders-has-lost-his-2016-mojo.html

https://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/12/vt-insights-what-midterms-say-bernie-sanders-2020-chances/1928385002/

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/bernie-sanders-revolution-isnt-carrying-his-candidates-through-the-midterms

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2018/11/07/trump-endorsed-75-candidates-in-the-midterms-how-did-they-fare-on-election-day/



The PAC "Our Revolution" was spun out of Sanders' 2016 campaign, and hence the naming and cross marketing with his book.

In fact, the founding staff left when they found out how it was to be structured, and that, despite Bernie's promises to them, Jeff Weaver - his 2016 campaign manager - was placed in a senior staff position. Bernie personally pleaded with them to stay, but to no avail.

Bernie Sanders’s New Political Group Is Met by Staff Revolt

I knew that straightforward facts would be indisputable and result in a barrage of misdirection. I won't even both to read your post except to answer one question, because your confusion is understandable.

My reference to MSDNC is inspired by the Twitter handle @MSDNC, a user who does a fine job in pointing out the glaring bias against Progressives within the upper echelons of the DNC.

It is well known within the progressive community that Bernie Sanders is loathed because of everything he represents, including his furious efforts to return the party to its Depression-era victories with FDR.

My post wasn't "misdirection," it was an evidence-based "barrage of facts" contradicting your claims.

You just didn't want to hear it. Shooting the messenger by calling them confused doesn't lend anyone credibility.

Pro tip: describing a post as showing "confusion" AND "deliberate misdirection" is pretty much the definition of contradictory.

Are they just Bernie and his supporters. No other candidate is progressive? I beg to differ. My candidate of choice is progressive and she is not loathed.

The MSDNC twitter feed is a sewer filled with divisive anti-Democratic Party garbage couched as hipster "humor".

The claim that a legitimate, reliable news and opinion source is under the control of a "corrupt" political party is frankly disgusting and has the potential for depressing GE voter turnout in its target audience: young people.

The governor is a Republican.