Delaware Dem

Wednesday Open Thread [4.13.16]

Last week a lot of the news about the Democratic presidential primary focused on Bernie Sanders’ interview with the New York Daily News. It is worth noting that Hillary Clinton sat down for an interview with the same publication on Saturday. It seems she was much more persuasive and knowledgeable, as the The Daily News’ primary endorsement isn’t just an endorsement of Hillary Clinton, it’s a non-endorsement of Bernie Sanders.

Continue Reading »

Congressional Debate Tonight

No disrespect to Michael Miller, a perennial also-ran from Congressional races in the dark years of Mike Castle’s reign in the 90’s and 2000’s who is also running again this year for reasons passing understanding, tonight’s congressional debate hosted by the University of Delaware College Democrats will essentially be a two-man show down between Bryan Townsend and Sean Barney. Yes, we know that there is a third credible candidate in the race by the name of Lisa Blunt Rochester. But she backed out of tonight’s debate for scheduling conflict reasons, which seems … interesting.

Anyone, come inside for the details….

Continue Reading »

Monday Open Thread [4.11.16]

Martin Longman on Bernie Sander’s frustrating wins:

It’s tough to see Sanders win strong victories in Wisconsin and Wyoming and discover that he’s getting further away rather than closer to winning the nomination. You can argue about whether this is fair or not, but the rules haven’t been changed in the middle of the game. Candidates don’t set out to win some abstract and idealized version of the process. They set out to win a contest with defined challenges and obstacles, and their strategies should match those requirements. If there are no delegates to be netted out of Wyoming, it’s probably not worth spending any time, money or effort on it, especially if the polls show you’re going to win it easily without any effort.

This contest was won or lost (depending on your perspective) in the South. Beyond that, it was won far earlier when Clinton won enough party support to dissuade others from challenging her and to get most of the party officials in her corner. The reason this was so easy to accomplish is that Clinton maintained sky-high approval ratings throughout Obama’s second term, including better than 80% support from self-described progressive Democrats. That support among progressives is what made me realize as far back as 2014 that it would be fruitless to try to take her on from the left. And that’s when I knew that she’d be the nominee.

Of course, I wouldn’t call Sanders’ challenge fruitless at all if we’re talking broadly about positive influences and outcomes. But he won’t win, and I don’t think he could have won in an environment where most progressives, particularly in the South, have a very positive view of Hillary.

White progressives struggle to accept these facts because Clinton is not popular in white liberal circles. But that doesn’t get you very far, as white progressive champions always fall short unless they can unite the entire progressive community and still appeal to the middle.

Obama could do that. But there aren’t many Obamas out there.

Continue Reading »

Sunday Open Thread [4.10.16]

In a Boston Globe op-ed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) tore into her Republican colleagues, arguing that since President Obama was elected, they have “refused to try to make government better — opting instead to try to shut down government altogether rather than to accept a functioning government led by someone they didn’t like.”

Wrote Warren: “For seven years, through artificial debt ceiling crises, deliberate government shutdowns, and intentional confirmation blockades, Senate Republicans have acted as though the election and reelection of Obama relieved them of any responsibility to do their jobs. Senate Republicans embraced the idea that government shouldn’t work at all unless it works only for themselves and their friends. The campaigns of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz are the next logical outgrowth of the same attitude — if you can’t get what you want, just ignore the obligations of governing, then divert attention and responsibility by wallowing in a toxic stew of attacks on Muslims, women, Latinos, and each other.”

“If Senate Republicans don’t like being forced to pick between a bullet and poison, then here’s some advice: Stand up to extremists in the Senate bent on sabotaging our government whenever things don’t go their way. Respect the oath you took to uphold and defend the Constitution. Show some courage and put that oath ahead of party politics. Do your job — and start by considering the president’s nomination to the Supreme Court.”

Continue Reading »

Saturday Open Thread [4.9.16]

Nate Silver says Ted Cruz would win a contested convention, not Paul Ryan.

It’s not that hard to imagine a contested convention. In fact, with Donald Trump’s path to 1,237 delegates looking tenuous, especially after his loss in Wisconsin on Tuesday night, it’s a real possibility. And it’s not hard to see how Republicans might think of Kasich or Ryan as good nominees. If Republicans were starting from scratch, both might be pretty good picks, especially from the perspective of the party “establishment” in Washington.

But Republicans won’t be starting from scratch, and the “establishment” won’t pick the party’s nominee. The 2,472 delegates in Cleveland will. And most of them will be chosen at state or local party conventions a long way from Washington. Few will be household names, having quietly attended party gatherings in Fargo, North Dakota, or Cheyenne, Wyoming, for years with little remuneration or recognition. Although the proverbial Acela-riding insiders might dream of Ryan or Kasich, there are indications that the rank-and-file delegates are into Ted Cruz — and they’re the ones who will have votes in Cleveland.

Repeat after Jason and me: Ted Cruz will be the Republican nominee.

Continue Reading »