#also biden is just a bad orator | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

max-fish · 4 years ago

Quote

As far as I am concerned, let the whole time prior to when he embarked on a political career remain unchallenged... Let us pass over his squandering of his father’s money and his vile behavior as a youth.

Cicero IN VERREM 2.1.32-33 (70 BC), retrieved from Professor Kish’s powerpoint (9.28.20.pptx)

I really enjoyed learning about Cicero this week in class, especially his defense of Sextus Roscius and reading Pro Roscio Amerino, and it was easy (especially after just watching the debate) for me to make connections between Cicero’s rhetorical strategies and the rhetorical techniques (or lack thereof) of our modern politicians.

I thought reading about Cicero’s defense of Sextus Roscius was awesome, because Cicero had no experience with public cases and was the only person brave enough to stand up to Chrysogonus. I found an interesting quote from an author named Andrew Dyck from his book Cicero: Pro Sexto Roscio:

“Cicero criticizes the prosecutor, Gaius Erucius, for presenting a weak case ... In fact, Cicero himself did not have much material; the only evidence he adduces is a decree passed by the decurions of Ameria declaring that the elder Roscius was wrongly proscribed and the son should receive his property back. He hold no witnesses in prospect, merely trying to intimidate a prospective prosecution witness ... In fact, Cicero's lengthy speech in defense of his client is mostly the product of his imagination, deployed to derive maximum advantage from scanty materials.” (Dyck, Cicero: pro Sexto Roscio, p. 17)

Cicero didn't have much to work with, but he divided his defense into three parts and very effectively argued that 1) Erucius' accusation of patricide was baseless, 2) in fact, the murder was certainly arranged by the two T. Roscii, Magnus and Capito and 3) that Chrysogonus was actually the mastermind behind the prosecution. I think he broke up his argument very well and his intelligence and skill as an orator is clear. It makes sense this case won him such great fame.

I also thought it was really interesting reading his arguments from IN VERREM (70BC). His effective use of invective topoi and the rhetorical figure occultatio especially stand out:

“I must keep close track of the time which I have been allotted for my speech to you because I intend to present every detail of this case. However, I shall pass over the extremely indecent and scandalous “first act,” as it were, of Verres’ life. He won’t hear from me one word about the scandals of his boyhood years, not one word about his debauched adolescent years (you remember what they were like)... Please make allowances for my sense of decency and permit me to be silent about some aspects of the lewdness of this man.” (IN VERREM 2.1.32)

In using these rhetorical techniques, Cicero pretends not to say what he actually does say, and slanders his opponent, Verres, with ad hominem attacks that are designed to win over the audience and convince them that he is a bad person, which will make it easier for Cicero to convince the audience that his actual argument against Verres is valid.

It’s really easy to relate this to some of Trump’s rhetorical techniques. Just as Cicero speaks about Verres’ relationship with his father and how he squandered his money. In a similar move in the most recent presidential debate, Trump attacked Biden for his son’s drug addiction, trying to undermine Biden by framing him as a bad father and attacking his personal character. Trump has done this on many occasions with many political opponents, coming up with nicknames like “Sleepy Joe” and “Crooked Hillary,” attacking his opponents’ physical and moral character, rather than engaging in debate on political issues. This makes them look bad in the eyes of his supporters, and makes it easier from Trump to win support from the people who watch is slander and fall for it. According to Professor Kish in one of our powerpoint this week, “A clever orator would go to great lengths to characterize the individuals in his speeches.•In some ways it is easier to persuade an audience if the principal characters in the story are unequivocally good or unequivocally bad.” I think Trump’s debate tactics are a great example of this idea. It was really fun learning about Cicero and Ancient Roman court proceedings and oratory practices, and it was very cool to be able to apply these lessons of the ancient world to our modern one and watch them play out on our contemporary political stage, thousands of years after Cicero lived.

#cicero #oratory #rome

2 notes · View notes

relationshipsandpolitics · 5 years ago

Text

I suppose it’s worthwhile to share who I’m supporting in the upcoming Democratic Primary for President. After all, what better way to make people who mostly agree with me to suddenly hate me than to stan for some deeply flawed elected official or deeply flawed Andrew Yang?

But before I get into narrowing down the field, I want to briefly mention something I’m going to talk about in more depth later: electability. It’s not entirely unimportant to use this unquantifiable metric when picking a candidate. I would just caution against it, and I’m not going to use it in mine. Simply put, I think this election is a referendum on Trump, and there will be enough wiggle room in the electorate to support a candidate who objectively would do worse against Trump and win than the best candidate. Candidate A might beat him by 10 points, but Candidate Z will still beat him and carry the down-ticket races, too. You might as well just vote for the candidate you believe in. A crazy concept, I know.

For the record, I’d willingly vote for any Democratic candidate over Donald Trump. I just want to get that out of the way. People feel the need to caveat their choice in this way, as though anyone is really arguing otherwise. There is some truth that in 2016, Bernie voters switched to Trump at rates that helped tip the election to the Republican. But it’s also true that more Hillary Clinton voters in 2008 switched to McCain than Bernie voters switched to Trump in 2016. The fact is it is incredibly common for supporters of a primary candidate to wind up voting for the opposition party’s nominee. These are often called swing voters or independents. They sometimes gravitate to a candidate simply because of that candidate and not because of party or policy. We need to stop with this type of criticism of supporters who don’t support your preferred candidate.

Personally, I’m still voting Democrat no matter who is the nominee. But I’d be very unhappy to vote for a lot of these candidates.

Here is the list of current candidates in an order that means nothing, but one might think has a hidden meaning:

Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Corey Booker, Bernie Sanders, Julian Castro, Beto O’ Rourke, Tulsi Gabbard, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Steve Bullock, Michael Bennet, Joe Sestak, Wayne Messam, John Delaney, Tom Steyer, Andrew Yang, Marianne Williamson, Pete Buttigieg

Let’s begin by just lopping off a bunch of these names who even I have barely heard of and have less than zero chance of being the nominee. Keep in mind that some candidates I’m keeping on, I only do so because I wish to make fun of them. Otherwise they would fully belong in this category of early dismissals. Here’s the new list:

Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Corey Booker, Bernie Sanders, Julian Castro, Beto O’ Rourke, Tulsi Gabbard, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, John Delaney, Tom Steyer, Andrew Yang, Marianne Williamson, Pete Buttigieg

That was fun. Ok, let’s get into it. When judging who my savior will be, I consider a multitude of categories. But the first category I consider is one that won’t personally affect me at all. I want to know if any of the candidates’ position will grossly discriminate against traditionally-disadvantaged groups. As a straight white male, I have the benefit of not being directly impacted by even the worst Republican social policies. All I really need to care about is taxes and getting more vacation. That’s my privilege. But it’s also what’s so fucked up about Americans as a people. We are entirely out for ourselves, and this is most evident in how we vote. We need to look out for everyone, especially groups that regularly see their most basic rights challenged. I think this is the first bar any candidate must overcome.

So any candidate that supports restricting women’s reproductive rights, supports policies that make it easier to be fired for being LGTQ, or supports banning Muslims from entering this country is gone. Now, most of the candidates have said some questionable thins in the past. Bernie Sanders wrote a weird column about sexual assault, Joe Biden pushed a shitty crime bill that disproportionately hurt African-Americans and was down with segregated busing, and I’m pretty sure Marianne Williamson’s only black friend is Oprah (but she’ll definitely mention it all the time). But when it comes to actual policy, I honestly don’t believe any of the candidates running will actively seek to harm minority groups. Except Tulsi Gabbard, who has a history of saying some anti-gay shit. I’m not trying to wade into this whole Hillary Clinton/Russia/Third-Party run controversy involving Gabbard, so I’m going to cut her off now because I don’t think she has the backs of the LGBTQ community, but I really don’t want to write about her.

Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Corey Booker, Bernie Sanders, Julian Castro, Beto O’ Rourke, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, John Delaney, Tom Steyer, Andre Yang, Marianne Williamson, Pete Buttigieg

The next crucial category is competence. Do these candidates have the basic competence and intelligence needed to be president? It doesn’t matter if they have strong policy proposals or are skilled orators. Can they do the job? As we can see with Trump, a complete lack of experience as a legislator, coupled with a complete lack of intelligence and basic human decency make for a bad time. In fact, never holding elected office alone is a disqualifier for me and it should be for everyone. Based on these criteria, the following candidates get the axe:

Andrew Yang - Yang is the type of candidate who randomly makes news for a common-sense plan and gets you thinking that maybe this outsider is what we need. Then you learn he’s a Silicon Valley tech bro supported by other tech bros and pseudo-libertarian types and he never held public office but now thinks he can be president. That is the most damning critique. This man knows literally nothing about government and how to govern/legislate. Instead of running for city council or the school board like a normal person, he decides to run for fucking president like an ego-maniacal psycho. In other words, fuck Andrew Yang and his supporters. Here’s a good article on why he sucks. And here’s another.

Marianne Williamson – Candidate moonbeam had her moment in the sun during one debate where she had a couple decent soundbites. She’s also batshit crazy, believes in anti-vax and anti-science ideas, and is friends with similarly-out of touch rich celebrities and SoCal types. Never trust anyone who self-identifies and makes a living as a spiritual guru. Some of the worst people in the world are rich white women from Los Angeles who are really into spirituality and New Age medicines. They are the type of liberals who post online about how much they support gay people and the environment, but god forbid they want to put affordable housing in their neighborhood. Every positive thing they do for society is clouded in narcissism. It’s an attempt to absolve themselves of their wealth with vacuous good deeds that don’t require any actual sacrifice. People like Williamson protest polluting the oceans because they enjoy their Malibu beaches, and then happily get in their Range Rover to go to the movies down the street. Williamson simply adds a layer of bullshit with her spiritualism. If having a personal shaman is a status symbol; being the personal shaman to Oprah is the ultimate status symbol. Like Yang, Williamson is an egomaniac as only someone from California can be, and she thinks the presidency is her God-given right. Fuck having to actually learn about public service by serving your town first when you can name drop Oprah and Gwyneth and immediately raise enough money to get a national audience to spew your garbage.

Tom Steyer - I could go on about how out of touch his policies are, but no one should be forced to read more than two sentences about this guy. He is a hedge fund billionaire who doesn’t want everyone to have health insurance and thinks being rich makes him qualified to be president.

Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Corey Booker, Bernie Sanders, Julian Castro, Beto O’ Rourke, TKamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, John Delaney, Pete Buttigieg

Alright, let’s pause and congratulate ourselves for easily dismissing half the field. Yay for us! This will mark the end of part 1, aka Super Fun Party Time #1. Part 2 will be up shortly, I hope, as we start discussing the serious contenders. Remember, my opinion matters more than anyone else’s so it’s extremely important you read this and ultimately vote the way I want you to vote.

#politics #2020 election #everyone sucks #bernie sanders #joe biden #elizabeth warren #kamala harris #pete buttgieg #3corey boor #corey booker #marianne williamson #andrew yang #beto o'rourke #amy klobuchar #tulsi gabbard #some other schmucks

3 notes · View notes

theliberaltony · 6 years ago

Link

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

Welcome to FiveThirtyEight’s weekly politics chat. The transcript below has been lightly edited.

sarahf (Sarah Frostenson, politics editor): We’re back with our third snake draft of 2020 Democratic presidential contenders, god help us all. Previous drafts can be found here and here. And remember, we’re trying to pick who’d win the nomination, although our picks tend to get less selective and more inventive(?) as the rounds wear on.

The rules are as follows: Six rounds, so between the four of us, 24 potential 2020 Democratic nominees. Let’s determine the order. (And yes, we really do write our names on slips of paper and pick randomly!) We’re going to have Geoffrey Skelley, our new elections analyst, announce today’s order. Welcome, Geoff!!

geoffrey.skelley (Geoffrey Skelley, elections analyst): The office is currently doing the draw.

Clare has first pick.

Geoff is second.

Sarah is third.

Nate is fourth.

natesilver (Nate Silver, editor in chief): OMG what bullshit.

clare.malone: heh heh

geoffrey.skelley: There are many witnesses.

sarahf: OK, Clare, you’re up first! Take it away.

clare.malone (Clare Malone, senior political writer): Elizabeth Warren.

natesilver: Dammit.

geoffrey.skelley: Wow, that was my pick.

Stunning, I know.

clare.malone: My picks are gonna haunt your dreams, Nate.

sarahf: So she’s been popular in previous drafts, why is she your No. 1 now, Clare?

micah (Micah Cohen, managing editor): I’m really pissed I’m not participating in this draft.

clare.malone: Warren has captured the mood of the party for a long time as far as economic angst goes, she’s been a consistent and eager Trump antagonizer, and she’s gonna be raising mucho $$$$$$$$$$$

natesilver: She’s also seemed more candidate-y recently — like her weekend speech about Kavanaugh, which was nominally a speech for her Senate race, felt very much like something she could deliver in Iowa or New Hampshire.

clare.malone: Right, that speech is basically the reason we’re having this chat.

sarahf: For any readers that missed it, Warren said in a town hall this weekend in Holyoke, Massachusetts, that “after Nov. 6, I will take a hard look at running for president.” So yeah, definitely she seems like she’s considering running.

OK, Geoff, who’s your pick?

geoffrey.skelley: I’m going to go with Kamala Harris.

Tough call, was debating leading with a certain former vice president. But when I think about candidates who can put together winning coalitions, I think of candidates who could have a strong appeal to the Democratic Party’s African-American base.

sarahf: Betting markets seem to agree with you, Geoff.

geoffrey.skelley: Harris is also fresh and Democrats may be poised to go for a woman nominee again. Plus, Harris will have access to that California $$$$.

sarahf: And I’m going to continue the #2018yearofthewoman with my pick … Kirsten Gillibrand.

clare.malone: So, Sarah, a question for you on that one: Worried at all about the way that she has been screwed by some in the donor class?

sarahf: For sure. I also think her ties to Clinton are problematic for a 2020 run.

But I think she has a lot of experience going for her. She’s been in the Senate since 2009 and was in the House before that. Plus, she has some bipartisan appeal as well. Part of what we saw in 2016 I think had to do with the fact that both Trump and Clinton were deeply unpopular, which means I don’t think Clinton’s loss necessarily means that a woman like Warren, Harris or Gillibrand can’t win.

geoffrey.skelley: Gillibrand is probably the leading NY candidate, which ain’t nothing in a Democratic field.

sarahf: Nate, you’re up.

clare.malone: Nate’s gonna go with noted populist Democrat Jamie Dimon, I can feel it.

natesilver: OK, we’re going snake so I get two picks, right?

geoffrey.skelley: Yeah.

sarahf:

natesilver: I’m going with (4) Joe Biden, (5) Bernie Sanders.

OLD WHITE DUDES FTW

clare.malone: Bad pick.

natesilver: Which one?

clare.malone: Both.

All bad picks.

(For old times’ sake.)

natesilver: Joe Biden is LEADING in polls of Iowa.

And Bernie Sanders was the runner-up last time.

sarahf: I agree with Clare. How old is Biden?

clare.malone: I do actually think Biden’s a bad pick ultimately.

Biden is someone who’s going to probably look good to a general electorate, but I still wonder how his history with Anita Hill would play with a Democratic base in a primary.

geoffrey.skelley: I’m very down on Sanders — the moment’s passed, in my opinion. With someone like Warren running, I just don’t see it.

natesilver: Yeah, Warren running is a big negative for him. And his polls haven’t been great. It’s possible he benefited from being “not Hillary” in 2016, but now there are a lot of “not Hillaries.” But pretty good value at the No. 5 pick, IMO?

geoffrey.skelley: Yes.

clare.malone: He’s also someone who could be spun as too old, like Sarah said, or even not progressive enough for the moment. Again, this is for a Democratic primary.

natesilver: I just think … candidates’ fortunes will wax and wane, but Bernie is always going to have a built-in constituency.

geoffrey.skelley: No question that Sanders ran a good campaign — that “America” ad will live on forever.

geoffrey.skelley: Thinking about black voters, it’s possible that Biden can make an appeal among such voters if he’s facing white liberals like Warren and Sanders, which would help in South Carolina, for instance.

clare.malone: He’s an Upper Midwest/Pennsylvania candidate, and that’s what he’s billing himself as, I’d say.

But if Booker or Harris run, they would potentially neutralize a Biden advantage with black voters.

geoffrey.skelley: Exactly, Clare. If Harris or Booker are in, that weakens Biden’s case.

sarahf: OK, I think it’s time to move on to our No. 6 pick … Cory Booker.

clare.malone: He did some great grandstanding last week at the Ford/Kavanaugh hearings.

geoffrey.skelley: Every potential candidate has weaknesses, so Booker’s may be ties to Wall Street. But he’s good on the stump, safe to say.

sarahf: That said, I do think Booker is a very talented politician. He’s a great orator. And he’s really built a profile for himself as a #HellNo Democrat.

clare.malone: I think I’ve said this in previous drafts, but I find Booker to come off a bit gooberish in a way that could maybe grate during a campaign. He’s such the eager beaver. Of course, that might play very differently with an electorate that sees a candidate mostly through Facebook video feeds and so on.

Like, this dude has been running for president since he was mayor of Newark. It’s been a long time.

geoffrey.skelley: Hahaha, it’s so true.

Booker has been pegged as a potential presidential candidate since Day 1.

sarahf: OK, you’re up, Geoff.

geoffrey.skelley: Well, I think it’s time to shake things up.

BETO

sarahf: Oh my.

Clare, what do you think?

clare.malone: I think this.

But in all seriousness, I do think that if O’Rourke loses his Senate race, people will be trying to get him to run for president.

natesilver: That’s a predictable shake-up. I’m surprised he lasted this long.

geoffrey.skelley: I was just worried one of you would take him before it got back to me.

sarahf: We’re saving Jon Ossoff for later, Nate.

geoffrey.skelley: Funny thing is, if he were to upset Ted Cruz, that might reduce the chances he runs. Or at least, I’d be less likely to run for president if I’d just become a senator.

But if he comes close and generates all this coverage and Democratic enthusiasm as RFK 2.0 or something, I can see the attraction.

clare.malone: I think if he wins, he serves the Senate term.

All bets are off if he loses, because the next big Texas office doesn’t open up for a while.

natesilver: I guess his optimal scenario is that he loses like in a recount.

geoffrey.skelley: But President Trump might win re-election, so why not wait until 2024 if you’re O’Rourke in that case?

clare.malone: Ah, we’re getting to the dregs.

OK, I’m picking two, and one is Eric Holder. Pretty obvious reasons why: He’s a respected former attorney general who’s made voting rights a project, an African-American, and a close friend and ally of Obama, which would help in a campaign season. And God help me, but my other pick is Michael Avenatti, for no other reason than the world has gone mad and he’s on TV a lot.

sarahf: I was hoping someone would mention Avenatti!

clare.malone: Your wish is my command.

We needed to stir shit up here.

geoffrey.skelley: You just know the cable news channels won’t be able to resist covering him.

sarahf: I know mentioning him as a contender is very

, but i don’t think it’s unrealistic!

clare.malone: Me neither, that’s why I picked him

natesilver: On the one hand, Avenatti is very Trumpian, which doesn’t seem like it would be a very good sell in a party that hates Trump.

On the other hand, politics is becoming exponentially more annoying every day, and so that would be the best way to stick to the trend.

micah: OK, I’m butting in here on that Avenatti selection …

Clare …

Bad pick.

clare.malone: Which one, person-who’s-not-participating?

I THINK THEY’RE BOTH AMAZING PICKS

micah: Avenatti.

clare.malone: “A street fighter for Democracy,” etc. etc. The ads write themselves.

micah: Let’s not overlearn the lessons of 2016. After all, Democrats chose Hillary Clinton in 2016!!!

OK, I’m out.

Sorry, Sarah.

sarahf: What a note to leave on, Micah.

clare.malone: This is a low round pick. I doubt he will win, but I don’t doubt Avenatti will run.

sarahf: I think that’s solid. OK, Geoff, you’re up with the No. 10 pick.

geoffrey.skelley: Yeah, this is harder.

Let’s go with Amy Klobuchar.

Midwestern nice certainly would provide a contrast to the incumbent president.

clare.malone: Good pick.

geoffrey.skelley: And she got some very positive headlines out of the Kavanaugh hearing.

clare.malone: I debated picking her. I think the one thing about her is that her “brand” (ugh) won’t stick out as much in this year.

There are already a number of better-known women who will run.

And I think Biden’s probably taking up a lot of the Upper Midwestern voter appeal space.

But I think last week she was really impressive.

natesilver: Klobuchar is like as far as you can be from Trump, personality-wise. She’s the anti-Avenatti.

sarahf: OK, i’m going to piggyback off the Kavanaugh hearing publicity for Democrats and throw out Sen. Jeff Merkley, even if his lawsuit to stop the Kavanaugh vote was ill-advised.

He’s been considering running for a while and I think is another boring (but solid) possibility for Democrats come 2020 if it turns out the 2018 midterms aren’t as much of a progressive victory as expected.

We’ll be having a very different discussion if Andrew Gillum loses the governor’s in Florida or Kyrsten Sinema loses the Senate race in Arizona (even though they are very different candidates running for very different offices).

natesilver: Hmm … I think we’re rapidly running out of good candidates.

Or at least obvious ones.

sarahf: This is true, too.

clare.malone: JOHN KASICH

natesilver: Not your turn.

clare.malone: I know. Also, not a Democrat.

Which I think is at least a nominal requirement to get into this draft.

geoffrey.skelley: Michael Bloomberg would also like a word on that party ID question, maybe?

sarahf: But it is Nate’s turn! And he gets to pick two!

natesilver: I can’t believe I have to make two picks, I want to forfeit.

But let’s go with …

Uhhhhhh

clare.malone: Bad pick.

natesilver: Sherrod Brown and Oprah Winfrey.

Bad picks.

geoffrey.skelley: This is my first chat, but I recall Oprah made an appearance in the last one.

natesilver: I do think she’d be very formidable if she ran.

geoffrey.skelley: Resources, name recognition, appeals to an interesting cross-section of the country …

clare.malone: Oprah and The Rock make an appearance in every draft we do.

sarahf: What a ticket!

clare.malone: Yeah, Oprah would probably win.

geoffrey.skelley: I’ll be sure to take Dwayne later on.

sarahf: Ugh, so it’s back to me. Can we just do four rounds? (Apparently, we can’t. Nate says a snake draft has to be six rounds.)

OK, rapid fire!

She’s not going to run, but I’d like to see a Mazie Hirono ticket.

geoffrey.skelley: Why not two Hawaiian presidents?

sarahf: Indeed!

OK, Geoff. You’re up.

geoffrey.skelley: Hmm, one white male governor … but which one?

sarahf: I’m going to say Hickenlooper if you don’t.

geoffrey.skelley: I think I’ll go with — oh, there you go.

Yes, John Hickenlooper is my pick.

A little too think-tank-y, maybe.

But who knows, swing-state governor with a background as a brewery owner?

sarahf: Gotta get the craft beer vote and the yoga vote.

OK, Clare you’re bestowed the honor of two picks.

clare.malone: Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, just to fulfill the prophecy, and … even though I don’t think she’s ever going to actually run, Michelle Obama because she, like Oprah, would also probably win.

sarahf: Obama/Oprah another interesting (although unlikely) ticket.

geoffrey.skelley: Because he’s seemingly interested, I’ll take Deval Patrick for Round 5, Pick 2.

Though if he does run, the New Hampshire primary is going to be a New England homer event with Warren and Sanders potentially in the running as well. But this could weaken New Hampshire’s importance.

sarahf: I think this is the point in the conversation is where we talk about John Delaney. So I’ll submit him as my option for this round, and unlike my previous pick, at least he’s running!

natesilver: OMG

sarahf: Who knows! He could have a better stump speech than Lincoln Chafee.

geoffrey.skelley: I haven’t heard Delaney talk about the metric system, so that’s a start.

natesilver: Why not just pick Martin O’Malley while you’re at it, at least he was governor of something.

clare.malone: And was in a band.

Is in a band.

natesilver: O’Rourke/O’Malley 2020.

geoffrey.skelley: But is “I’m bipartisan” the appeal that will work in the 2020 Democratic primary?

Count me a skeptic.

sarahf: OK, Nate. You get to pick two.

natesilver: My god, how much more of this.

I’ll take uhhhhhhhhhhhhh …

clare.malone: Will no one rid me of this troublesome snake draft?

natesilver: Eric Garcetti.

And the guy I always take, Doug Jones.

geoffrey.skelley: The Doug Jones Memorial Pick

natesilver: I think he’s more likely a VP than a top-of-the-ticket guy, but still …

clare.malone: He is facing a tough 2020 re-election fight as a Democrat in Alabama.

natesilver: Which might be a reason why he quits the Senate and runs for POTUS instead?

He was pretty outspoken against Kavanaugh.

Which doesn’t seem like a move you’d make if you’re focused on Alabama.

sarahf: OK, this is thankfully the LAST ROUND. And good news, Clare, you only have to pick one this time!

But I have to go first.

And I’m going to go out with Jay Inslee! I know, yet another exciting 2020 former-governor pick.

Plus, he’s recently said he’s not ruling out a 2020 run.

geoffrey.skelley: Western governors are actually a plentiful Democratic candidate grouping.

sarahf: OK, what’s your last pick, Geoff?

geoffrey.skelley: Well, the late rounds of drafts are where you pick sleepers.

So I’m going with someone who isn’t even elected yet but is currently running.

Andrew Gillum.

sarahf:

clare.malone: OK, me next?

sarahf: Yep, Clare. Take us home.

clare.malone: I’m going with Mitch Landrieu, who, correct me if I’m wrong, none of us picked earlier?

geoffrey.skelley: He’s all yours

clare.malone: White, Southern, progressive … yada, yada, yada.

geoffrey.skelley: I’d say the one name I expected but didn’t see was Steve Bullock.

natesilver: Some of these picks feel very 2024ish to me.

geoffrey.skelley: Gillum certainly could be if things go his way.

sarahf: So now we have to vote on this madness? Is that how this shakes out?

natesilver: I don’t even like my team this time, so I’m going to vote myself last to preserve my credibility.

sarahf: Here are our teams. Who wants to vote first?

2020 Democratic Primary Draft, October 2018

Round Clare Geoff Sarah Nate 1 Elizabeth Warren Kamala Harris Kirsten Gillibrand Joe Biden 2 Eric Holder Beto O’Rourke Cory Booker Bernie Sanders 3 Michael Avenatti Amy Klobuchar Jeff Merkley Sherrod Brown 4 Dwayne Johnson John Hickenlooper Mazie Hirono Oprah Winfrey 5 Michelle Obama Deval Patrick John Delaney Eric Garcetti 6 Mitch Landrieu Andrew Gillum Jay Inslee Doug Jones

natesilver: I like Geoff’s team.

clare.malone: I’ll rank ’em: Clare, Geoff, Sarah, Nate.

sarahf: I’d vote Clare, Geoff, myself and then Nate, I guess.

geoffrey.skelley: I’ll be that guy and vote for myself

clare.malone: Even more the #1 team, then.

sarahf: I think this means we have a tie between Clare’s team and Geoff’s team.

Quite the slate, y’all.

geoffrey.skelley: I think a late-primary debate between Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren would certainly be something to behold if the field were to ever shrink to two (who knows).

#IFTTT #Politics – FiveThirtyEight #politics #538 #A FiveThirtyEight Chat

1 note · View note

epistolizer · 4 years ago

Text

Have Yourself A Coronavirus Christmas

In “The Lion, The Witch, & The Wardrobe” by C.S. Lewis, one of the hardships Narnia suffers under is that it is always winter but never Christmas. Imposed upon the realm by the White Witch, the plot point serves as a powerful symbol of the extent to which despots are willing to suppress the basic joys of existence for the purposes of advancing their own agendas at the expense of those that they conspire to rule over.

For decades now, secularists along with those thinking they know how to organize the details of your life better than you do have conspired to impose any number of policies intended to disabuse the American people of their Christmas habits and more importantly the religious source from which such traditions stem. Fortunately, the nation has yet to fully yield to this particular assault against their liberties and most have at least been alerted regarding this threat arrayed against our own underlying Western culture.

Unfortunately, the agents of tyranny are seldom discouraged. Such operatives are always eager to try new strategies in the attempt to achieve their nefarious objectives.

Often the issue and policies are formulated in the following manner. A government authority forbids the erection of Christmas decorations or the holding of a holiday celebration on public property. But take heart, the discouraged yuletide reveler is admonished, you are perfectly free to commemorate these holidays in any way that you desire in the confines of your own home with whomever it is that you please.

However, now with the Conornavirus Plague, there exists a pretext by which thoroughgoing statists are unabashed regarding the extent to which assorted government bureaucrats and agencies intend to intrude into the lives of average Americans to an even more unprecedented level.

For example, a number of jurisdictions have decreed the number of visitors that that will be allowed into your home, often limiting the number to ten guests. And what if you allow eleven to fourteen; does it somehow though off the occultc numerology or Masonic geometry?

If that means cutting off family members from the family during Thanksgiving or Christmas, then so be it. In the opening days of the New World Order or what is being called “The Great Reset”, the primary disease to be eradicated is not so much a virulent microorganism but rather the notion that you as a free individual should be able to decide for yourself the risks one is willing to take in a world fraught with any number of dangers.

Like the giddy urchins depicted in propaganda posters erected by dictatorships spanning the ideological spectrum, your joy is no longer to be derived from traditional notions of family or even personal relationships. Rather that satisfaction is to be derived from knowledge of your dutiful obedience to the regime even if that means those small pleasures that gave life much of its meaning are obliterated in pursuit of collectivist goals and agendas. After all, to paraphrase the motto of the Psi Corps from the drama “Babylon 5”, “The State is Mother. The State is Father.”

Just as bad and perhaps even worse than the state telling you how many may enter into your domicile is its functionaries telling you which otherwise perfectly legal activities you may or may not engage in while ensconced within the four walls for which you will no doubt be required to pay increasingly crippling taxes on in the years to come in order to finance economic amelioration efforts to address conditions imposed by the state to not only address the virus but also manipulate the masses into embracing extensive authoritarian intrusion into their lives.

For example, the state of California views itself as so all-pervasive that, in an act of beneficence, permission has been granted for the occupants of structures (for at this point of existential regulation can one really be considered a “home owner” any longer) and their permitted guests to engage in the basic excretory functions in the confines of the domicile's designated facilities.

In a number of microtyrannies (a phenomena I foretold the pending of over a decade ago), the assembled are forbidden from singing or chanting. But it must be asked if the phrases articulated include “Black Lives Matter” or “This is what democracy looks like” (which apparently consists now of riotous mobs looting in the streets or assorted state functionaries imposing an increasing array of arbitrary restrictions in no way authorized by legislative law) does the edict still apply? After all, one of the main lesson learned in 2020 is that the rules promulgated by the technocratic elites do not have to be obeyed when countermanding them in violent protest advances the revolutionary conception of social justice advocated by the aspiring planetary administrators.

In the attempt to make these deprivations and impositions supposedly easier to bear, propaganda disseminated through various venues assures that “We are all in this together.” Nothing could be farther from the truth.

For example, throughout the 2020 presidential campaign, the rallies at which Trump devotees gathered to bask in their candidates stream of consciousness orations were condemned as “super spreader events” by the most thoroughgoing adherents of Harris/Bidenism. Yet as soon as the establishment media declared victory for the Democratic ticket, these partisans and their affiliated masses swarmed into the streets ignoring most CDC decrees that have been invoked for months to keep you away from cherished loved ones, recreational pursuits, and houses of worship and are still in place to prevent you from enjoying the simple pleasures of life most fully. Perennial media whore Charles Schummer was caught with his mask down until he realized a video camera was focused on his shenanigans.

In Washington DC, residents are discouraged from traveling outside the boundaries of the federal city and those coming into the district from jurisdictions characterized by high rates of Plague are threatened with demands to quarantine. Yet Mayor Muriel Bowser traveled to Biden's victory announcement in Wilmington, Delaware. This mere municipal functionary insisted such a pilgrimage was essential even though the office she holds is so insignificant that government there would probably operate more efficiently if it didn't even exist in the first place.

Relatedly, Mayor Lori Lightfoot of Chicago invoked what listeners of “The Sean Hannity Program” might recall as the Ariana Huffington Doctrine when that perennial airhead responded as to why she was riding around in private jets when the average American was obligated to flagellate themselves over their own use of automobiles and fossil fuels in that these aircraft were going there anyway. In a voice significantly less sultry than that of the flip-flopping Grecian pundit, Lightfoot excused her own frolicking amongst the Biden throng conspicuously failing to socially distance in that these celebrations would have taken place whether or not she participated. Mind you, Lightfoot's contempt for the Almighty runs so deep that in the name of the Coronavirus dictatorship that she blocked access to church buildings and threatened to tow the vehicles of assembled parishoners.

Throughout nearly every level of government across America, pronouncements have been issued threatening punishment ranging from punitive fines to outright jail time for citizens daring to decide for themselves what otherwise perfectly legal and inherently moral activities can take place in their own homes. Yet when the elected officials that ironically rank among the most strident in insisting upon unwavering obedience within their respective police state fiefdoms are caught violating their own restrictions, the errant such as California Governor Gavin Newson seem to think a rendition of Brenda Lee's “I'm Sorry” with Covid-specific lyrics ought to be enough.

See if the articulation of such formulations of contriteness prove sufficient when law enforcement operatives are beating down your door to enforce edicts that technically don't even arise to the procedural specifics of law. These statements on the part of governors such as Gavin Newsom insinuate that the vanguards of the proletariat such as himself should be showered with celebratory gratitude for providing an incarnate example of exactly how we ought not to do in furtherance of the grand experiment of transformative revolution we now find ourselves thrust into.

This holiday season your once-vibrant elderly loved ones will slip deeper into cognitive twilight locked away in their once mentally stimulating assisted living communities now likely not much different than a cross between a prison and a loony bin. Remember that as the governors yuck it up Etruscan vomitorium style ironically maskless and shoulder to shoulder in violation of social distancing decrees with the very hierarchs of the medical establishment bent on turning the nation into a pharmaceutical police state.

By Frederick Meekins

0 notes

bangcute · 4 years ago

Text

Synonym Rolls Just Like Grammar Used To Make Vintage Shirt

all the bad things. We test more. We’re best a testing. Biden is gonna take your stuff. OAN asks a softball question that lets him rant about China. Or Antifa. He reads from a piece of paper like that Fucking kid in class that reads Synonym Rolls Just Like Grammar Used To Make Vintage Shirt in a monotone boring voice. They weren’t reading it just saying words on the page to get through their paragraph. Also, I watched Joe Biden speak. He’s not the most exciting or inspirational speaker but after watching trump it’s amazing hearing a competent human speak. After what passes as a “speech” from the current POTUS, a dead cat would be a better orator. Standards are so low that Donald gets props if he manages to even stay on a subject for more than five seconds or doesn’t shit himself live

Buy it : Synonym Rolls Just Like Grammar Used To Make Vintage Shirt

Premium Trending Shirt This Is Season:

Soyatees - Custom - Shirt

0 notes

sinrau · 4 years ago

Link

(CNN) That’s a wrap on Night 3 of the 2020 Democratic National Convention.

It was a star-studded nigh t, with the last Democratic president ( Barack Obama ), the last Democratic presidential nominee (Hillary Clinton) and, perhaps, the next presidential nominee (Kamala Harris) all speaking.

Below the best — and worst — of the night that was.

HITS

* Barack Obama: Yes, the former president is an incredibly talented orator. But we’ve long known that. What mattered most about Obama’s speech on Wednesday was that he did what lots of Democrats have been begging him to do for the last three-ish years: He delivered a stunning takedown of the man who followed him into the White House. Obama said that Trump simply does not take the job “seriously.” He said that Trump uses the government’s vast powers in a purely “transactional way.” And most powerfully, he said this: “Donald Trump hasn’t grown into the job because he can’t, and the consequences of that failure are severe.” Consider what Obama is saying there: As someone who did the job — for eight years — he not only believes Trump cannot rise to the demands of the presidency, but also that there are very real effects of Trump’s deficiency. “This isn’t just the sharpest criticism Obama has made of Trump,” tweeted Politico’s Tim Alberta. “This is the sharpest criticism a former president has ever made of a sitting president.”

* Kamala Harris: The vice presidential nominee started slowly — almost certainly the result of nerves — as she delivered the single most important speech of her political life. Even as she recounted her personal story, you could tell that she was still struggling somewhat to find her sea legs. And then she hit this line, when talking about her background as a prosecutor: “I know a predator when I see one.” Harris paused, purposely, after dropping that hammer of a line — and everyone watching knew who she was talking about. From that moment on, Harris was like a different person — confident, powerful and fully aware of the history she was making as the first Black and South Asian woman to be on a national ticket for a major party. Her best line? “There is no vaccine for racism. We have got to put in the work.” If Harris’ speech was a tryout for 2024 (or 2028), she passed it.

*Gabrielle Giffords: I still remember the day Giffords, at the time a Democratic congresswoman from Arizona, was shot in the head at an event in her district in 2011. Her struggles — and triumphs — over the last decade have put a very human face to the fight over gun control. Giffords’ speech on Wednesday night, which capped a piece of the programming dedicated to the toll taken by gun violence, was incredibly moving, not least because they showed how hard she had worked to be able to deliver it seamlessly. It was the longest speech she has delivered, in fact, since that 2011 shooting. “Convention organizers say @GabbyGiffords worked intensely to be able to deliver these remarks,” t weeted NBC’s Mike Memoli.“It’s quite something to see.” Yes, it was.

* “A woulda coulda shoulda election:” Hillary Clinton’s speech wasn’t, to my mind, terribly memorable. But this line about 2020 — “this can’t be another woulda coulda shoulda election” — was a very good one. And it was even more stirring when delivered by a woman who received almost 3 million more votes than Trump in 2016 — and still lost.

***** Presidential Medal of Freedom video: I remember watching Obama present former Vice President Joe Biden with the Presidential Medal of Freedom on their last days in the White House in January 2017. What struck me then — and what I was reminded of while watching the video played during Wednesday night’s convention program — was that Biden was 1) genuinely surprised and 2) deeply aware of what the honor meant. His emotion, which he was unable to contain, was real and unforced. In re-showing that video, it was a stirring reminder of Biden’s single strongest quality (and, conversely one of Trump’s weakest): Empathy.

* Sam Cooke: “A Change is Gonna Come” — which Jennifer Hudson performed at the end of the night — is just an amazing song. You should listen to Sam Cooke singing the original. He slays it (as did she)!

MISSES

* Donald Trump: What’s the easiest way to let your opponents know their critiques are getting to you? By responding- – in real time — to them! “HE SPIED ON MY CAMPAIGN, AND GOT CAUGHT!,” tweeted Trump in the middle of Obama’s speech. But Trump wasn’t done! “WHY DID HE REFUSE TO ENDORSE SLOW JOE UNTIL IT WAS ALL OVER, AND EVEN THEN WAS VERY LATE?,” Trump asked of Obama as the former president was wrapping up his speech. “WHY DID HE TRY TO GET HIM NOT TO RUN?” Like, maybe lay off the caps lock for a while, Mr. President?

* Mike Pompeo: Being secretary of state is a very big job. You are, with the lone exception of the president, the face America shows to the world. Which is why Mike Pompeo’s tweet in the middle of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s speech — a GIF of Lisa Simpson crying and tearing up a written speech — was so, so tone-deaf. (To be clear: I was not a big fan of Pelosi ripping up her copy of Trump’s State of the Union speech either. ) Pompeo should leave the trolling to the Internet. It’s what it’s there for.

* Tony Evers: When you are the Democratic governor of the state where the Democratic convention is (sort of) being staged, you get a speaking slot at some point during the proceedings. So, we got Tony Evers. And he was, uh, shaky. At least it was short. And he used the phrase “Holy mackerel, folks” — so it wasn’t all bad.

Hits and misses from Night 3 of the Democratic National Convention #web #website #copied #toread #highlight #link #news #read #blog #wordpresspost #posts #breaking news# #Sinrau #Nothiah #Sinrau29 #read #wordpress

#IFTTT #WordPress

0 notes

ladystylestores · 4 years ago

Text

A New Surge in Virus Deaths

Want to get The Morning by email? Here’s the sign-up.

Good morning. The mayor of Seoul has been found dead. Joe Biden lays out his economic recovery plan. And virus deaths have been rising again.

The number of Americans dying from the coronavirus has started rising again.

More than 800 have died in each of the last three days — a three-day total that’s about 60 percent higher than during the same three days last week.

(The chart above doesn’t yet include yesterday’s number, which would add a third large gray bar on the right side.)

The spike reverses what had been the one positive virus trend in the U.S.: Deaths had been declining since mid-April, even as the number of confirmed new cases held fairly steady in the late spring and then surged over the past several weeks.

How? Older Americans have been especially cautious, which has led to declines in the average age of new patients; younger patients die from it less often. And doctors and nurses have become better at diagnosing the virus earlier and treating it effectively.

President Trump and his aides have repeatedly highlighted the decline in deaths and said it showed that the virus was in retreat. But many epidemiologists have disagreed, saying that the surge of new cases since mid-June was so large that it would eventually lead to more deaths. (In a typical fatal case, a patient dies three to five weeks after getting infected.)

It’s too soon to say for sure, but the last few days suggest that the experts’ prediction is starting to come true.

Deaths have begun to rise across many of the same Sun Belt states where the numbers of cases are increasing. California and Texas reported a daily high in deaths earlier this week. Florida and Tennessee did so yesterday.

“Several months ago, I warned of a potential tsunami if we did not take this more seriously,” Richard Cortez, an official in Hidalgo County, in southern Texas, said. “The tsunami is here.” Nationally, the number of new cases hit another record yesterday. (The Times is tracking the latest virus news here.)

Among the victims: Richard di Liberto, the son of an immigrant bricklayer and the chief of photography at the Frick Collection in New York. The Times has a running series on people who have died from the virus, “Those We’ve Lost.”

FOUR MORE BIG STORIES

1. Court backs subpoena on Trump’s finances

The Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors in New York will be able to inspect Trump’s financial records, with both justices named by Trump — Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh — joining the seven-member majority. In a separate decision, the court ruled that Congress cannot see the records, at least for now.

What are prosecutors looking for? Susanne Craig, who has reported on Trump’s taxes for years, says investigators are trying to figure out whether Trump violated campaign finance laws when paying hush money to two women, Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels. “This could go on for months,” Susanne told us. It is “unlikely that we will see the president’s taxes as a result.”

Thursday’s other decision: The court also ruled that much of eastern Oklahoma falls within an Indian reservation, which weakens the state’s jurisdiction over Native Americans in criminal matters. Gorsuch, a Westerner who has sided with tribes in previous cases, joined the four liberal justices in the 5-to-4 decision.

2. Deadly rains in Japan

Record-breaking rains this week in the south of Japan have killed 62 people in floods and landslides. The extreme weather is highlighting the vulnerability of nursing homes: Floodwaters killed 14 seniors in one nursing home.

The disaster represents a “collision of two powerful forces shaping the country’s present and future: demographic change and global warming,” The Times’s correspondents in Tokyo write. Torrential rains in Japan have intensified in recent years because of climate change, and the country has the world’s highest proportion of elderly people.

3. Seoul mayor is found dead

The mayor of Seoul, Park Won-soon, has been found dead. He had disappeared a day after a secretary in his office told the police that he had sexually harassed her since 2017. The story has been shocking to Koreans because he had been a rare champion of women’s rights among the country’s politicians.

4. Biden rolls out economic plan

For decades, advocates of freer trade have been saying that the middle class would benefit from an open global economy. But as the U.S. has liberalized trade and welcomed China into the international marketplace, the incomes and wealth of most Americans have grown painfully slowly. (This chart offers a glimpse.)

We’re now experiencing the political backlash, as Joe Biden’s first detailed economic proposal makes clear. In a speech at a Pennsylvania factory, Biden moved away from the Democratic Party’s recent emphasis on open trade and called for the federal government to spend $700 billion on American-made goods in technology, clean energy and other sectors. He called it an investment “not seen since the Great Depression and World War II.”

The political angle: “They are essentially trying to steal the Trump program of 2016 and steal that playbook,” Steve Bannon, the former Trump adviser, lamented, as The Washington Post reported. “For some reason, the White House and the campaign have been caught flat-footed.” And The Times reports on Trump’s struggle to define Biden politically.

The Biden economy: In a column for this weekend’s Sunday Review, I imagine what a post-coronavirus economy will look like — under both a Trump second term and a Biden presidency.

Here’s what else is happening

An explosion rocked western Tehran early today, state media reported, the third major recent nighttime explosion in Iran. The location this time wasn’t clear; the first two occurred at key military and nuclear bases.

About one million international students are in limbo after a recent directive by the Trump administration that would strip students of their visas if their classes moved online-only. Here’s what they have to say about it.

Lives Lived: She nurtured a generation of fashion designers as the publicity director of Saks Fifth Avenue, and she was the best friend of the actress Claudette Colbert. But she never lost her Southern accent or manners. Helen O’Hagan has died at 89.

IDEAS OF THE DAY: V.P. edition

In previous newsletters, we’ve written about Kamala Harris, Tammy Duckworth and Elizabeth Warren as vice-presidential possibilities for Biden. Today, I want to tell you about a few other candidates — and who’s making the case for them:

Molly Jong-Fast, writing in Vogue, advocates for Val Demings, a Florida congresswoman and former Orlando police chief: “Demings may be one of those once-in-a-lifetime politicians, a gifted orator, a woman who is completely self-made, a racial pioneer.”

Two different Georges — Will, of The Washington Post, and Skelton, of The Los Angeles Times — have made the case for Karen Bass, a Los Angeles congresswoman. In 1990, Will points out, Bass started a community group “to devise nonpolice measures for addressing crime.” Skelton writes: “Everyone likes her. She’s comfortable to be around and is able to deal with Republicans.”

Steve Chapman, a columnist at The Chicago Tribune, argues for Susan Rice, who was national security adviser and U.N. ambassador in the Obama administration. “She’s not only better equipped in foreign and defense affairs than the other vice presidential prospects,” he writes, “she’s better equipped than any president since Richard Nixon.”

More on the veepstakes: Duckworth has written an Op-Ed for The Times, responding to the attacks on her by Tucker Carlson, the Fox News host. She calls them an effort to distract the country from Trump’s performance as president.

PLAY, WATCH, EAT, GUMBO

Bringing gumbo to rural Minnesota

Krewe is a restaurant in the small Central Minnesota city of St. Joseph. It’s the brainchild of Mateo Mackbee and Erin Lucas, a couple who moved from Minneapolis two years ago to overcome career obstacles in bigger cities and to spread awareness of racial inequities.

St. Joseph is more than 90 percent white, and locals say the restaurant is the city’s first Black-owned business. Read the story of how the two chefs are using their food to promote diversity.

(And while it’s a departure from the traditional New Orleans gumbo served at Krewe, this recipe for black-eyed pea and pork gumbo is also delicious.)

Watch something … kid-friendly

Our weekly suggestion from Gilbert Cruz, The Times’s Culture editor:

Since I am home with my child all day every day for the foreseeable future, I need a few things that the whole family can watch together and enjoy without fear of bad language or violence or anything approaching “serious.”

The Netflix series “Nailed It!” is one of those shows. A reality competition series in which amateur bakers make and decorate devilishly intricate desserts, “Nailed It!” is named after the exclamation said bakers have to make when they unveil their inevitably cursed looking creations.

It’s that moment that elicits the most laughter from my family. These cakes often seem like they are genuinely in pain, and the faces made by the comedian Nicole Byer (who co-hosts alongside the pastry chef Jacques Torres) are eminently GIF-able. It’s a cooking show you can binge without ever feeling hungry afterward.

Carl Reiner, by Steve Martin

The actor Steve Martin has written a tribute to his late friend Carl Reiner, the comedy director whom he met while making “The Jerk” in 1979. The pair would go on to have near daily lunches for a period of five or six years.

Among Reiner’s life-lessons? “He taught me about modesty,” writes Martin. “I called him late one evening to discuss the next day’s shooting. I asked, ‘Am I interrupting you?’ He said, ‘No, I’m just lying here going through a litany of my failures.’”

Diversions

In this week’s Modern Love, a professor discusses the lessons she’s learned from her son and his passion for bags of all kinds.

Games

Here’s today’s Mini Crossword, and a clue: Prince married to Meghan Markle (five letters).

Or try this week’s news quiz.

You can find all of our puzzles here.

Source link

قالب وردپرس

from World Wide News https://ift.tt/3iNgLMs

#World Wide News

0 notes

recentnews18-blog · 6 years ago

Photo

New Post has been published on https://shovelnews.com/our-third-ish-2020-democratic-primary-draft-got-weird/

Our Third-ish 2020 Democratic Primary Draft Got Weird

Welcome to FiveThirtyEight’s weekly politics chat. The transcript below has been lightly edited.

geoffrey.skelley (Geoffrey Skelley, elections analyst): The office is currently doing the draw.

Clare has first pick.

Geoff is second.

Sarah is third.

Nate is fourth.

natesilver (Nate Silver, editor in chief): OMG what bullshit.

clare.malone: heh heh

geoffrey.skelley: There are many witnesses.

sarahf: OK, Clare, you’re up first! Take it away.

clare.malone (Clare Malone, senior political writer): Elizabeth Warren.

natesilver: Dammit.

geoffrey.skelley: Wow, that was my pick.

Stunning, I know.

clare.malone: My picks are gonna haunt your dreams, Nate.

sarahf: So she’s been popular in previous drafts, why is she your No. 1 now, Clare?

micah (Micah Cohen, managing editor): I’m really pissed I’m not participating in this draft.

clare.malone: Right, that speech is basically the reason we’re having this chat.

OK, Geoff, who’s your pick?

geoffrey.skelley: I’m going to go with Kamala Harris.

sarahf: Betting markets seem to agree with you, Geoff.

geoffrey.skelley: Harris is also fresh and Democrats may be poised to go for a woman nominee again. Plus, Harris will have access to that California $$$$.

sarahf: And I’m going to continue the #2018yearofthewoman with my pick … Kirsten Gillibrand.

clare.malone: So, Sarah, a question for you on that one: Worried at all about the way that she has been screwed by some in the donor class?

sarahf: For sure. I also think her ties to the Clintons are problematic for a 2020 run.

geoffrey.skelley: Gillibrand is probably the leading NY candidate, which ain’t nothing in a Democratic field.

sarahf: Nate, you’re up.

clare.malone: Nate’s gonna go with noted populist Democrat Jamie Dimon, I can feel it.

natesilver: OK, we’re going snake so I get two picks, right?

geoffrey.skelley: Yeah.

sarahf: 🐍

natesilver: I’m going with (4) Joe Biden, (5) Bernie Sanders.

OLD WHITE DUDES FTW

clare.malone: Bad pick.

natesilver: Which one?

clare.malone: Both.

All bad picks.

(For old times’ sake.)

natesilver: Joe Biden is LEADING in polls of Iowa.

And Bernie Sanders was the runner-up last time.

sarahf: I agree with Clare. How old is Biden?

clare.malone: I do actually think Biden’s a bad pick ultimately.

Biden is someone who’s going to probably look good to a general electorate, but I still wonder how his history with Anita Hill would play with a Democratic base in a primary.

geoffrey.skelley: I’m very down on Sanders — the moment’s passed, in my opinion. With someone like Warren running, I just don’t see it.

geoffrey.skelley: Yes.

clare.malone: He’s also someone who could be spun as too old, like Sarah said, or even not progressive enough for the moment. Again, this is for a Democratic primary.

natesilver: I just think … candidates’ fortunes will wax and wane, but Bernie is always going to have a built-in constituency.

geoffrey.skelley: No question that Sanders ran a good campaign — that “America” ad will live on forever.

youtube