Posts by Delaware Dem

Bernie Sanders took on the role of front runner tonight, fielding attacks from Hillary Clinton all night. It is the role that she is most comfortable in. Clinton destroyed Sanders on gun control and finally found an argument to counter Sanders on single payer healthcare: the embrace of the most popular Democrat alive, President Obama, and his signature policy achievement, Obamacare. Clinton spent the entire night trying to convince Democrats she was the heir to President Obama’s legacy. She made clear she is running for Obama’s third term. It’s a smart strategy because it serves the double-purpose of implying that Sanders is less friendly to Obama. Clinton was effective, presidential and the clear winner of the debate. Sanders had his moments, especially railing against Wall Street and he did ding Hillary on speaking fees she had received from Goldman Sachs. But in order to help himself in the primary, he needs to take his trademark anger and shouting and direct it towards Republicans rather than Hillary. Aside from some Progressives who hate Hillary more than they hate Republicans (and thus already support Sanders), Democrats are not angry with Hillary. They like her a lot, actually. No, they, we, are angry with Republicans, for a whole host of reasons. To win the primary, Bernie needs to win the votes of Democrats who like Hillary. So he cannot really attack her and should not direct his anger towards her. Which is why he was smart to back away from his comments on Bill Clinton. No, what Bernie needs to do is convince Democrats that he is the one to take on Republicans.

First Read: “Turning to the Democratic race, Sunday night brings us the final Dem debate before the Iowa caucuses… and it promises to be a doozy. Not only do we have a neck-and-neck race in Iowa, but we have a true fight over the heart and soul of the Democratic Party.” “Do Democrats go with the candidate essentially running on continuity with President Obama (Hillary Clinton), or do they back the candidate promising revolution (Bernie Sanders)? Should their nominee be another Clinton? Or should it be a self-avowed democratic socialist who hasn’t been a member of the party until now? We’ve spent so much time looking at the establishment-vs.-insurgent divide inside the Republican Party, but don’t dismiss the equally compelling fight within the Democratic Party over where it should be entering Year 8 of the Obama presidency.”

Steven Stromberg writes about how negative the tone of last night's debate was:

With only a few weeks left before the first primary contests, the GOP race has devolved into a competition for who can squeeze the most political advantage out of voter fear, no matter how over-the-top they sound and no matter how much damage they do by darkening the national mood. Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.) “won” the latest round of this increasingly disgusting show, with Donald Trump and Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.) coming in second. But being the most effective at exaggerating the dangers the country faces and preying on voter anger is not an achievement; it is a moral failure. [...] Here is a dose of reality: It is possible to disagree with the GOP base and be a patriot. The nation faces many challenges, but it is stronger economically and more secure from various foreign threats than nearly everywhere else in the world. In many ways, Americans are better off now than they ever have been. The continuing desire of non-Americans to move, work and do business here is a sign of strength, showing the appeal of the United States rather than demonstrating weakness.

It don't think it is possible to be a member of the GOP base and be a patriot. To be a member of the GOP base requires you to be a bigoted fascist. America goes to war against bigoted fascists. It does not call them patriots.

Greg Sargent:

However, Obama’s own words indicated that he has come to understand that a large chunk of the country fundamentally disagrees with his definition of progress and with his vision of government’s role in promoting it — and that his efforts at persuasion have not been enough to overcome these differences. A big chunk of the country does not envision as robust a governmental role in promoting economic security and maintaining a minimum standard of health care; in acting to combat climate change; and in creating a path to legalization for undocumented immigrants to get right with the law. That’s the America that Trump and Cruz are speaking to most effectively right now — the chunk of the country that remains hostile, or at least deeply skeptical, towards Obama’s vision of cultural inclusion, of what counts as progress, and of government’s proper role in promoting it. In pleading for all of these things — and in admitting that he’s failed to unite the country behind a shared vision — Obama implicitly conceded that when it comes to our biggest arguments, there still may be two Americas, after all. The unspoken truth that Obama could not openly acknowledge last night is that Democrats are betting their hopes for preserving this vision on the demographic gamble that their America is inexorably evolving into the larger one.

Well, it is. That is a safe bet. Racists are dying off, and whites will no longer by the majority of this country in 10 years time. So the party that stands for inclusion and diversity and tolerance of all cultures and faiths will be the dominant party. The GOP has two choices: 1) change, or 2) somehow win one final election and engage in mass genocide and/or deportation. Right now, with Trump, they are going with option 2

Steve Benen says the public liked what they heard last night.

For all the mindless chatter about “making America great again,” last night was an opportunity to hear a leader make a powerful case that such talk is unnecessary – because America is already great. There is a risk that a president delivering a hopeful, optimistic message will seem out of touch, but there’s early evidence that Americans were impressed with what they heard last night. CNN released an overnight poll that found 53% had a “very positive” reaction to the State of the Union address, while another 20% had a somewhat positive reaction. A 68% majority said the policies Obama proposed “would move the country in the right direction.” Results like these come with important caveats – many of the president’s critics simply don’t tune in – but it nevertheless suggests the hopeful rhetoric landed on fertile soil.

Hillary Clinton “proposed a 4 percent surtax on the highest-earning Americans, as she seeks to boost taxes for the wealthiest Americans,” Politico reports. “The proposal, which she announced in Iowa, would raise an estimated $150 billion over a decade, a Clinton aide said, and comes after the Democratic front-runner said that she would build on the so-called Buffett Rule that seeks to ensure that the middle class doesn’t pay a higher tax rate than top earners.” Hillary Clinton is responded to some new closer than she likes poll numbers, and is moving left. That is why, while I will not vote for Bernie, I like him in the race.