DL Open Thread: Mon., Aug. 19, 2019
Biden To Cali: “Drop Dead”. For the second time, he skips a meeting with D political leaders in the most delegate-rich state in the union. Campaigning in NH instead. In August. Dead man walking.
Admitted Sexual Predator Mark Halperin Has New Book Deal…And Pretty Much Every D Strategist Is Interviewed For It. I can’t even…
How Scam Artist Ran Rural Hospitals Into The Ground. Hey, why not believe a con artist making impossible promises?
Strong Progressive Seeks Nod For US Senate Seat in New Mexico. She will, of course, have to overcome the institutional D party and the corporate donor class, which are essentially one and the same.
Release Of Asbestos At GM Site Earns Puny Fine From DNREC. The term ‘puny fine’ is redundant when it comes to DNREC.
What do you want to talk about?
Bob Mulholland, a committee member from California and a longtime political adviser in the party said that Biden’s absence might ruffle some feathers, but that “if someone feels left out, that’s all forgotten come post-February.”
“Whoever is coming out of (the early primaries)* with the most delegates is their best friend,’’ he said. And by the time California’s primary rolls around, “people forget about the weekend they were stiffed.”
* [you know, like New Hampshire]
Longtime political advisers are unaware that New Hampshire and Iowa mean substantially less than they used to.
Here are some bio highlights from Wikipedia:
“In February 2017, Mulholland was a vocal opponent of a resolution at the DNC which would have banned donations from Corporate Political action committees to the DNC. …Mulholland has been a vocal critic of the proposal to significantly decrease the influence of superdelegates in the democratic presidential candidate nomination process.”
In other words, you’re going to have to search long and hard to find someone riding an older dinosaur than Bob Mulholland.
“Longtime political advisers are unaware that New Hampshire and Iowa mean substantially less than they used to. ”
That could be true. However, I’ve seen no evidence that it is. Even so, what was true and remains so is that people jump on bandwagons, built by the media, who love contests with winners and losers (who won the debate, battleground states). The simple fact is, whoever wins early will be percevied as a winner, with the rest trying to catch up in their favored states.
By the time Super Tuesday rolls around, them that has votes gets the money and the rest drop out. I’ll commiserate with you that it shouldn’t be that way, but just because I do doesn’t mean I’m going to ignore the fundementals. People like to be on the winning team (shared glory, acceptance and belonging). While it is true there is a significant element that initially roots for the underdog, as the gap widens, we are predisposed to want to have membership in the winners circle.
In spite of the fact that we think we are complex creatures, there is much about us that very simply explained.
Don’t have the time at the moment to round up the evidence you haven’t seen for you, but it boils down to social media playing the role for under-50s that Iowa and New Hampshire used to. Remember, Iowa and New Hampshire are the creations of mainstream media. Younger people don’t use mainstream media.
There are four candidates. Losing two white states with tiny percentages of the delegates needed isn’t going to push any of the four out. The mainstream media will continue with the narrative you know and love (judging by your repetition of it above), but it really won’t matter. The real battle begins after California.
I understand human psychology well enough to know that the Democratic primary voter does not substitute well for the entire population, and I do not expect the media narrative of “we need to nominate Biden” to play well with that electorate.
You are applying an old paradigm, and it will apply to the boomers, but not so much to young Democrats.
“the narrative you know and love”
I don’t love it, but I don’t deny it’s existence either. So yeah I mention it and if you don’t think I include social media as part of the media, I may need to be more obvious when I use the word “media.”
Still as far as social media goes, the herd paradigm is just as prevalent there as it is/was for the “MSM,” which by the way, these days, is predominately social media. Finally, the under 50 crowd are no more immune to the frailties of human behavior than you or I. In fact, I would bet that you and I are less prone than they because we have gained a good measure of cynicism.
Regardless you make a fair point about old paradigms, but I will note that the boomers are very prominent in the “Likely Voters” category. If the young want to make a difference they need to turn out. It remains to be seen whether they will.
We shall see. Though frankly, I’m starting to lean towards the Democrats not learning their lesson, nominating Biden and losing. At that point they might finally grow the balls to impeach him.
Suspect we’ll see a drop out or two in coming weeks, the bottom half of the field is rather pathetic. As ever a big part of the race is pure ego and self righteousness on a grand scale.
“Release of Asbestos at GM site”–
Insufficient and insulting responses by violators and State agency (DNREC)
More than four months after I joined residents, workers and local union officials in calling for an investigation into the asbestos removal project at the former Boxwood GM site, DNREC has chosen to levy a miniscule fine against EcoServices Inc. for it asbestos removal malpractices.
As an asbestosis victim who suffers from the condition of asbestos exposure I felt a significant personal stake in protecting the workers, their families and the residents in the area from the consequences of improper asbestos removal.
At that time I met personally and privately with DNREC Secretary Shawn Garvin to urge him to take immediate action and halt further removal operations at the site. I am still waiting for any semblance of a personal or public response from Secretary Garvin which I requested and expected.
The work in question posed a serious and ongoing threat to the health and welfare of the exposed workers and to the families of nearby densely populated neighborhoods. Harvey Hannah and Associates were informed four months ago and refused to intervene or investigate. When I saw the following quote in Karl Baker’s News Journal article to wit: “In a statement, Newport developer Harvey Hanna and Associates – which owns the plant and hired EcoServices – said, “We have only recently learned of the issue between DNREC and EcoServices, and out of respect for the regulatory process, it would be inappropriate for us to comment further at this time.” I was stunned by the utter disregard for the truth and the blatant disregard for the workers and families exposed to this serious health threat expressed by the Harvey Hanna group.
Further compounding my feelings of frustration and any sense of fairness was the relatively paltry fine levied by DNREC against EcoServices for its harmful actions. “The findings (of DNREC’s investigation) prompted DNREC to fine the asbestos company, EcoServices LLC and its foreman $20,000 each for violating emission standards for hazardous air pollutants. They were fined an additional $13,000 for the cost of the DNREC investigation”. A small price to pay for what could be a very expensive public health consequence.
EcoServices should be censured and barred from any future asbestos removal projects in Delaware and not permitted to bid on them in the future. Harvey Hanna and Associates should publicly apologize to the workers and neighboring families and publicly promise that they will refine their oversight of subcontractors and react more expeditiously in the future when such threats to the public health are exposed.
Representative John Kowalko
I halfway think that Carney runs these proposed fines by the Chamber to see what paltry sum they will accept.