 |
| Give us two other Senators, please. |
If you are interested in The News most fit to print, you can even find it online, Strib carrying a WaPo feed:
MANCHESTER, N.H. - Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a rising star in the Democratic Party's liberal wing and one of the most prominent women of color in Congress, is endorsing Sen. Bernie Sanders for president, choosing him over Sen. Elizabeth Warren on the heels of an explosive confrontation over the question of whether a woman can defeat President Donald Trump.
In a telephone interview with The Washington Post on Sunday, Jayapal, D-Wash., said she decided to endorse Sanders because "he has a clarity on policy prescriptions that goes right to the heart of what working people need." She will unveil her endorsement Monday in Iowa.
Jayapal also told The Post she will be named national health policy chair for the Sanders campaign, as well as a Washington State chair.
The endorsement is a significant get for Sanders, I-Vt., and a blow to Warren, D-Mass., who has forged a friendship with Jayapal in recent years and is seeking to rally support from women as she makes her closing argument to voters before the first nominating contest in Iowa on Feb. 3.
The backing of Jayapal, who is Indian American and co-chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus, reflects Sanders' growing strength on the left and his diversifying coalition. After building a following in 2016 that some saw as too male and too white, Sanders has secured endorsements this time around from barrier-breaking Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.; Ilhan Omar, D-Minn.; and Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.
Sanders campaign officials are hoping to deploy Ocasio-Cortez in Iowa in the final stretch of the race there. They have built a busy schedule of events in the early states with a roster of surrogates as Sanders tends to his duties in the Senate as a juror in the Trump impeachment trial.
Jayapal's support comes days after Sanders secured an endorsement from Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., the other co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.The Progressive Caucus is the largest coalition of left-leaning members of Congress. It includes dozens of House members and one senator: Sanders.
[emphasis added] Nancy timing impeachment hearings for now seems to disadvantage three Senators by keeping them in DC away from the hustings, while helping Joe Biden. And Buttigieg. The three being disadvantaged, the two most liked by NYT elitists, Warren and Klobuchar, and Bernie.
Also of interest, DownWithTyranny, here, in closing a post with good sense:
If Warren and Sanders both enter the convention with healthy delegate totals — as long as both are gaining supporters and not at the other's expense — the contest can and should continue, for now at least, as it has. And if they enter the convention with, say, 60% of the pledged delegates between them, the case for nominating a candidate who appeals to progressive voters is strong.
But if Warren's candidacy becomes unviable, as it seems it might — and if the goal of both camps is truly to defeat Joe Biden — it's incumbent on Warren to drop out and endorse her "friend and ally" Bernie Sanders as soon as it's clear she can no longer win. (The same is true if Sanders becomes unviable, though that seems much less likely.)
Ms. Warren can do whatever she wants, certainly. But if she does anything less than help elect the last and only progressive with a chance, she damages them both to Biden's benefit, and frankly, helps nominate Biden. She has the right to do that, but not to claim at the same time that she's working to further the progressive movement.
We'll know about the consequences of this conflict soon enough. Perhaps she'll rise again, or at least triage her decline.
But if she doesn't, if she falls to the bottom of the top tier or into the second and stays there, her endorsement — or non-endorsement — of Sanders will be watched and noticed, closely and widely, and she will be defined, probably permanently, by her response.
Finally, there are two things to say about the collective [majority?] opinion of that bunch in the photo. FIRST: If you are going to want one of the Republican wing of the Democratic party to run against Trump, make it Amy. She is honest. She does not come across as hiding something. What you see is what you get; Warren being more the candidate who would rock the boat - more than Amy, but less than Bernie. That recognition of Klobuchar, as opposed to Biden or the mayor, goes a long way toward distinguishing among those running from the Republican wing. Not that Amy is great, just that she is not Joe Biden.
SECOND: If the Democratic Party's candidate ends up to be Elizabeth Warren, not Bernie, there should be no hesitation being soundly in favor of such a choice beating Trump, much as Bernie would. The situation between Bernie and Liz, being well described in the second above quote, needs to sort out much as the DWT post opines.
____________BOTTOM LINE UPDATE_____________
Which way the dice roll, we clearly do need a president who will publicly confront a
Ditto, this instance, this current candidate. A different plutocrat, same nationwide problem. Aside from those two, it will be business as usual over the next four years. If you can envision Klobuchar being equally forceful (with an equal intent) in wanting a better world, bless you, but I disagree. Klobuchar would never nominate a DeVos, she is not hateful nor attracted to those who are, but bankers? An entrenched banker perhaps as Treasury Secretary, as Obama did with Geithner? Would she cut more - too much - slack for bankers and Wall Street, even while expected to be better that way than, say, the young mayor?
It is just wrong that these three - arguably the best three of what's left - are being denied an opportunity to fully campaign because of Nancy's timing of moving impeachment to "throw it out" Mitch, where it will consume time without any reform.
(Because Senator Cory Booker has suspended his campaign, his being tied up in futile impeachment matters is less of a disgrace.)
__________ANCILLARY UPDATE__________
A YouTube video.
***
___________NECESSARY UPDATE___________
After some reflection, and while dismissive of the likelihood, my expectation of a Klobuchar presidency would be harder on white collar crime than Obama was, more pro-Isreal than Obama, not a war monger, and harder on Big Pharma than Obama. Not owned by fossil fuel. Less aggressive in any clean-up of business and finance and the Trump mess, than Warren. By a mile. Klobuchar having an approach more like Maria Cantwell, than like Warren. Less likely to feel urgency in addressing and constraining and undoing Citizens United. She'd likely view the first bill out of the current House - one McConnell side-tracked - as a road map of sorts. She'd possibly like it as a party platform. More Cargill than McKinsey & Company. Neither a Rhodes Scholar, nor a Biden. Her campaign website is detailed. I have not read it.
https://amyklobuchar.com/