Tuesday Open Thread [6.21.16]

Tuesday Open Thread [6.21.16]

There is this story in Politico that just has to be a set up. Apparently, anonymous Wall Street donors have told Hillary Clinton that she can either have their cash or she can have Elizabeth Warren, but not both. LOL. Ed Kilgore sniffs out what is going on:
If the Clinton campaign decided to plant a story to amplify the credibility-enhancing potential of a Warren pick to grieving Sandernistas, this is pretty much how it would read: The dozens of big-money donors all insisted on anonymity because “they feared Warren’s wrath”; they warn that a Vice-President Warren could jeopardize a deal on their preferred version of corporate tax “reform”; they suggest Warren doesn’t feel “comfortable spending time with the rich people you need to raise money from"; and they say there is a “chance for much better relations between business and the White House than during President Barack Obama’s tenure” — a tenure that was so unfriendly to business, it featured the bailout of the financial sector, a “free trade” agreement that actually offers trade protection to well-connected American industries, and a cabinet staffed with no small number of former Wall Street executives — but not if Warren is in the White House serving as the wet-blanket-in-chief.
The set up is that Wall Street says don't pick Warren and then Hillary says Screw You, I'm Picking Warren. There is no better way to prove her independence from Wall Street to Sanders supporters. In my mind, there is no way this story from Politico is not directly from the Clinton campaign. And to me it signals that Warren is definitely the VP pick.

Tuesday Daily Delawho [6.21.16]

So I am going to try out something different. Instead of Delawarean landscapes and landmarks, from now until the election, we will feature photos from the social media pages of Delaware's politicians. Hopefully these photos will be of them out and about at the various festivals and events this summer. Yes, I will even feature Republicans, because it is good to know what your opponent looks like at least.

Monday Open Thread, June 20, 2016

Peter Bloom at Common Dreams says that What Progressives and Democrats Need is Coalition Not Unity:
While the media has called the Democratic race all but over, the supporters of Sanders are faced with a difficult decision. The mainstream opinion is for them to simply surrender to the “inevitability” of Clinton’s victory and embrace her as a candidate to unify the Democratic Party. However, for many progressives this option is both ethically and tactically problematic—forcing them into a familiar territory of voting for the “lesser of two evils.” Instead they have sought to send a distinct message to the status quo by proclaiming themselves “Bernie or Bust.” Sanders, for his part, is far from willing to go away quietly. While he admits that defeating Trump must be priority number one, he has vowed to continue his revolution to transform the Democratic Party and the country. The immediate goal is to amass enough delegates and momentum to progressively influence the Party’s present platform and future direction. However, is there an alternative option beyond the opposing poles of unity or bust? Is there a way for progressives to find a compromise with the Democratic Party without becoming compromised? The answer may be to fight for a coalition between progressives and the Democratic Party.
Well, in any realistic rather than fantastical view of our system of government and elections, the choice is binary. You either vote for Clinton, or you, whether directly or indirectly, vote for Trump. So I am not sure what Peter Bloom is talking about here. Further, the Democratic Party has always been a coalition of multiple groups that agree to come together to vote for a single Presidential candidate. There are trade unions, environmentalists, teachers, African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, liberals, moderates, progressives, etc., etc. The compromising he speaks of happens all the time: trading votes for President for policies. It will happen again in the crafting of the platform. The Democratic Platform will be the most progressive major party platform in all history.

Saturday Open Thread, June 18, 2016

Politico: “By reserving time in key swing states — at least Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia — the Clinton camp is sending an unmistakable message to the presumptive GOP nominee that it intends to press into traditionally Republican territory without spending too much time worrying about defending traditionally Democratic destinations where Trump insists he will compete, said a handful of high-level Democrats close to the Clinton effort.”

The Weekly Addresses

In this week's address, President Obama reflected on his visit with the families of the victims of the Orlando terrorist attack. In his weekly message, Governor Markell remembers the victims of the shooting in Orlando and recognizes we have more work to do to ensure the freedom, dignity and safety of all people.
Delaware Political Weekly: June 10-16, 2016

Delaware Political Weekly: June 10-16, 2016

aren Peterson Retires.  Who Will Succeed Her? You can't replace her.  She really has been Delaware's Best Legislator for perhaps as long as she's been a legislator.  And let's talk about the term 'legislator'.  To me, she was such an effective legislator because she took on the big issues, and was successful in enacting some of the most progressive legislation in recent memory.  No one has meant more to equal rights for all Delawareans than Karen.  She is truly an historic figure, and deserves to be recognized as such.  Her combination of idealism and legislative smarts simply can't be replaced. Someone, however, will succeed her.  If I had to bet, I'd bet on Tim Sheldon.  Sheldon, you may recall was Tom Sharp's hand-picked choice to replace Sharp, who basically was living at the beach when he left office. You may recall that Peterson had her car tires slashed during that campaign.  It's not fair to place the blame on Sheldon.  But it's pretty clear that the construction trade goons who backed him had no problem employing such intimidating tactics. Having said that, I wouldn't be surprised if he had pretty much a clear field going into the general election.  The only other name that I've heard who might actually run is Val McCartan, who is Patti Blevins' Chief Staffer.  I like Val, but I don't see her as a glad-handler who is going to go door-to-door in a tough campaign.  She is a highly professional and skilled Senate staffer, but I don't think she has the candidate gene. I mean that as a compliment.
Thursday Open Thread, June 16, 2016

Thursday Open Thread, June 16, 2016

Josh Marshall:
There's no magic to Trump's political showmanship. The magic we saw through the Spring was a unique bond, a sort of mindmeld of white backlash and derp Trump built on an inspired intuition into the mind of the base of the Republican party. Provocation and offense didn't hurt Trump because ... he was preaching to an audience that yearned for both as positive goods. Campaigning in front of a general election audience today it's all working quite differently. Over the last two days I heard report after report from our team on Capitol Hill about Senators who were refusing to answer questions about Trump, simply walking away when asked about him, or in a growing number of cases, after his harrowing and unhinged speech on Monday, openly attacking him. [...] A month ago Republican elected officials were unenthusiastically but resolutely rallying around Trump. Since then they've slowly been reduced to a public and political version of a family dealing with a hopeless addict or a degenerate gambler. They keep saying, insisting he'll change, only to have him provide more evidence he can't, won't and has no intention to. Their very indulgence seems to prompt more unbridled behavior. The disgraceful way Trump handled the hours after the Orlando atrocity seems to have confirmed for many Republicans that Trump will never change or pivot or whatever other phrase we're now using. It's not an act. It's him. How this couldn't have been clear months ago is a topic for the psychology of denial and wishful thinking. But now it seems clear. [...] The question is how long this can last. Pretty much daily, major Republican leaders don't just disagree with Trump but denounce him in pretty round terms, even as they remain at least nominal endorsers of his candidacy and accept him as the leader of their party. That is entirely unprecedented in modern American political history. It doesn't seem sustainable.
“Dem to win White House” hits $0.75, a new high close on IEM

“Dem to win White House” hits $0.75, a new high close on IEM

I track the futures trading markets rather than polls because people are betting on outcomes with real money, and therefor stand to make (or lose) real money. That clears out the fanboys and pretenders. Of the predicting markets, I tend to look at IEM (Iowa Electronic Markets) because they have the history and larger volume of trades. So when I see "Dem to win White House" closing at $0.75, I'm impressed. [$0.75 means that people are buying and trading "Futures Contracts" called "Dem to win White House" for $0.75. If they hold onto them, those contracts will pay off $1.00 if/when that outcome happens. The more likely that outcome becomes, the close the trading price gets to $1.00] As a point of comparison, at on this day in 2008, "Dem to win White House" closed at $0.60.