Democrats trying to unseat each other

[Harry Bosch]

But this trend is extremely predictable and happens over and over. Dems win congress. Then they get cocky. They go against the moderates, go far left. Eventually enough moderates get kicked out and then they go republican. Then the republicans take over. This happens about every 10 years or so.

What do you consider "far left"?

Probably "anything to the left of Nixon"?

What makes you assume this? How do you define "far left"?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The moderates took over the Democratic party with Clinton and his triangulation. And then Nutty the Newt and his Newtzies controlling the House. Shifting right works. Result? The GOP for the most part controlled Congress and the presidency for years. We got Bush and the GOP control of Senate and House. Rank obstructionism of the GOP House and Senate through the Obama years. Far left Democrats? Who ya kidding? Obama was centrist as hell. Nancy Pelosi has been far left? The DCCC? Middle of the road got us Hillary Clinton and then her loss to the orange buffoon. And for two years, Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan. We still have Moscow Mitch.

It has been relatively recently we have seen the rise of the more aggressive and successful Progressives. Who are gaining ground because of the failures of the far right and Democratic moderates over the last few decades. And their biggest enemies seem to be the DCCC.

 

[lpetrich]

Jessica Cisneros on Her Race Against Henry Cuellar - The Atlantic - "The Search for the Next AOC -- Justice Democrats, the organization that brought you Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is hoping 26-year-old Jessica Cisneros will carry the torch in 2020."

Progressives have long been itching to oust Cuellar, who—even though Hillary Clinton won the district by nearly 20 points in 2016—has voted with Donald Trump nearly 70 percent of the time. That’s led Cisneros, a 26-year-old immigration attorney, to label him “Trump’s favorite Democrat,” and separate herself by advocating for a slew of progressive policies, including Medicare for All, a $15 minimum wage, and the Green New Deal.

Immigration and border security are also massively important issues in Texas’s Twenty-Eighth Congressional District, which spans nearly 300 miles along the U.S.-Mexico border. While Cuellar has spoken out against the construction of President Trump’s proposed border wall, he has supported building sections of the wall in his own district. Cisneros has criticized Cuellar’s position as inconsistent, but when I talked to her in an interview last month, her own vision for border security didn’t seem totally coherent: “I’m only one person,” she told me when I asked about it. “Obviously, the [system] that we have right now is broken.”

Jessica Cisneros for TX-28

Believe In Shahid | Current Affairs - Shahid Buttar, who is challenging Nancy Pelosi

For Buttar, it’s simple: A new generation of progressives demands urgent, serious action on climate change, healthcare, immigration, economic inequality, and criminal justice. Nancy Pelosi has made it clear that she is opposed to their agenda. She mocks and belittles them. (“The green dream, or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is, but they’re for it, right?”) The stakes are too high to have the leader of the Congressional Democrats be someone who isn’t seriously fighting for the progressive agenda.

Furthermore, Buttar says, Pelosi represents San Francisco, one of the top 10 most Democratic districts in the country. The arguments for centrism that might apply to a swing district don’t hold there. San Francisco, Buttar says, needs someone with San Francisco values: “We’re a sanctuary city, we care about immigrant rights, but we’re represented by someone who is selling immigrants down the river. We’re a city that supports social services but we’re represented by a Speaker of the House who imposed Republican fiscal austerity rules.”

Issues — Shahid Buttar For Congress 2020

It has been relatively recently we have seen the rise of the more aggressive and successful Progressives. Who are gaining ground because of the failures of the far right and Democratic moderates over the last few decades. And their biggest enemies seem to be the DCCC.

Like Barack Obama's failures. He was stymied by Republican obstructionists in Congress. I think that AOC is right in that his failure is only partially his, that it is also a failure of the Left to give stronger support.

But I think that the Left has been going in the right direction in recent years, getting into Congress, and also into local and state governments. The Presidency is not enough.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Jessica Cisneros on Her Race Against Henry Cuellar - The Atlantic - "The Search for the Next AOC -- Justice Democrats, the organization that brought you Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is hoping 26-year-old Jessica Cisneros will carry the torch in 2020."

Jessica Cisneros for TX-28

Believe In Shahid | Current Affairs - Shahid Buttar, who is challenging Nancy Pelosi

Issues — Shahid Buttar For Congress 2020

It has been relatively recently we have seen the rise of the more aggressive and successful Progressives. Who are gaining ground because of the failures of the far right and Democratic moderates over the last few decades. And their biggest enemies seem to be the DCCC.

Like Barack Obama's failures. He was stymied by Republican obstructionists in Congress. I think that AOC is right in that his failure is only partially his, that it is also a failure of the Left to give stronger support.

But I think that the Left has been going in the right direction in recent years, getting into Congress, and also into local and state governments. The Presidency is not enough.

I do think that both sides are ignoring the moderates who are the largest segment of voters. This could create an opening for a third party to sweep in. But what I fear the most is that right wingers are far more likely to vote than left wing.

 

[Jarhyn]

Jessica Cisneros on Her Race Against Henry Cuellar - The Atlantic - "The Search for the Next AOC -- Justice Democrats, the organization that brought you Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is hoping 26-year-old Jessica Cisneros will carry the torch in 2020."

Jessica Cisneros for TX-28

Believe In Shahid | Current Affairs - Shahid Buttar, who is challenging Nancy Pelosi

Issues — Shahid Buttar For Congress 2020

It has been relatively recently we have seen the rise of the more aggressive and successful Progressives. Who are gaining ground because of the failures of the far right and Democratic moderates over the last few decades. And their biggest enemies seem to be the DCCC.

Like Barack Obama's failures. He was stymied by Republican obstructionists in Congress. I think that AOC is right in that his failure is only partially his, that it is also a failure of the Left to give stronger support.

But I think that the Left has been going in the right direction in recent years, getting into Congress, and also into local and state governments. The Presidency is not enough.

I do think that both sides are ignoring the moderates who are the largest segment of voters. This could create an opening for a third party to sweep in. But what I fear the most is that right wingers are far more likely to vote than left wing.

As I keep saying, fuck the moderates. "Moderates" are a myth created by the republicans. "Moderates" are really just "those to the right of the democrats".

"Court the moderates" is code for "move your platform further right". It is an unreasonable, masked request that the left just fucking commit suicide.

Progressive policy works. If the left wing wants people to vote, they have to stop being the right wing. They have to be the party the left actually wants to vote for. They have to be progressive.

When it's 'moderates' the dialog is all 'PuSh YouR PlAtFoRm RiGhT To GeT VoTeS!'; when it's young people, students, people fresh out of college, it's 'DonT PuSh YoUr PlAtFoRm LEfT, WaIt fOr tHeM To VotE FoR YoU FiRsT'.

Fuck this bad faith bullshit. You are either arguing in bad faith, or you don't realize how these talki g points were designed in bad faith.

Progressives drove the blue wave in 2018.

Progressive policy can and will drive votes.

 

[Harry Bosch]

I do think that both sides are ignoring the moderates who are the largest segment of voters. This could create an opening for a third party to sweep in. But what I fear the most is that right wingers are far more likely to vote than left wing.

As I keep saying, fuck the moderates. "Moderates" are a myth created by the republicans. "Moderates" are really just "those to the right of the democrats".

"Court the moderates" is code for "move your platform further right". It is an unreasonable, masked request that the left just fucking commit suicide.

Progressive policy works. If the left wing wants people to vote, they have to stop being the right wing. They have to be the party the left actually wants to vote for. They have to be progressive.

When it's 'moderates' the dialog is all 'PuSh YouR PlAtFoRm RiGhT To GeT VoTeS!'; when it's young people, students, people fresh out of college, it's 'DonT PuSh YoUr PlAtFoRm LEfT, WaIt fOr tHeM To VotE FoR YoU FiRsT'.

Fuck this bad faith bullshit. You are either arguing in bad faith, or you don't realize how these talki g points were designed in bad faith.

Progressives drove the blue wave in 2018.

Progressive policy can and will drive votes.

Jaryhn my friend: moderates are those who are the right to leftwingers and the left of rightwingers. We are probably the largest voting segment in the country. We generally are the ones who decide elections. But yea, if you want to win elections with a majority, you need to find issues to compromise and entice those in the middle to vote for you.

 

[Jarhyn]

I do think that both sides are ignoring the moderates who are the largest segment of voters. This could create an opening for a third party to sweep in. But what I fear the most is that right wingers are far more likely to vote than left wing.

As I keep saying, fuck the moderates. "Moderates" are a myth created by the republicans. "Moderates" are really just "those to the right of the democrats".

"Court the moderates" is code for "move your platform further right". It is an unreasonable, masked request that the left just fucking commit suicide.

Progressive policy works. If the left wing wants people to vote, they have to stop being the right wing. They have to be the party the left actually wants to vote for. They have to be progressive.

When it's 'moderates' the dialog is all 'PuSh YouR PlAtFoRm RiGhT To GeT VoTeS!'; when it's young people, students, people fresh out of college, it's 'DonT PuSh YoUr PlAtFoRm LEfT, WaIt fOr tHeM To VotE FoR YoU FiRsT'.

Fuck this bad faith bullshit. You are either arguing in bad faith, or you don't realize how these talki g points were designed in bad faith.

Progressives drove the blue wave in 2018.

Progressive policy can and will drive votes.

Jaryhn my friend: moderates are those who are the right to leftwingers and the left of rightwingers. We are probably the largest voting segment in the country. We generally are the ones who decide elections. But yea, if you want to win elections with a majority, you need to find issues to compromise and entice those in the middle to vote for you.

Bullshit. Prove it. CITATION NEEDED.

If you are "on the fence" about voting for avowed fascists and people who gladly welcome white supremecist ethnonationalists, you are not "left of republicans".

 

[Trausti]

Jaryhn my friend: moderates are those who are the right to leftwingers and the left of rightwingers. We are probably the largest voting segment in the country. We generally are the ones who decide elections. But yea, if you want to win elections with a majority, you need to find issues to compromise and entice those in the middle to vote for you.

Bullshit. Prove it. CITATION NEEDED.

If you are "on the fence" about voting for avowed fascists and people who gladly welcome white supremecist ethnonationalists, you are not "left of republicans".

Heh. Do you actually know any conservatives or Republicans? Or is anyone different than you a wacky caricature?

 

[Harry Bosch]

Jaryhn my friend: moderates are those who are the right to leftwingers and the left of rightwingers. We are probably the largest voting segment in the country. We generally are the ones who decide elections. But yea, if you want to win elections with a majority, you need to find issues to compromise and entice those in the middle to vote for you.

Bullshit. Prove it. CITATION NEEDED.

If you are "on the fence" about voting for avowed fascists and people who gladly welcome white supremecist ethnonationalists, you are not "left of republicans".

No problemo:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderate

Moderates make up about 35% of the voting population. And we are growing. While at the same time the parties are both moving right and left.

Secondly, why do you claim that I am on the fence about voting for facists and white supremacists? I'm surprised as you tend to not be one to make personal attacks. BTW: I don't think that the white supremacists would like my skin color much!!

 

[Jarhyn]

Jaryhn my friend: moderates are those who are the right to leftwingers and the left of rightwingers. We are probably the largest voting segment in the country. We generally are the ones who decide elections. But yea, if you want to win elections with a majority, you need to find issues to compromise and entice those in the middle to vote for you.

Bullshit. Prove it. CITATION NEEDED.

If you are "on the fence" about voting for avowed fascists and people who gladly welcome white supremecist ethnonationalists, you are not "left of republicans".

No problemo:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderate

Moderates make up about 35% of the voting population. And we are growing. While at the same time the parties are both moving right and left.

Secondly, why do you claim that I am on the fence about voting for facists and white supremacists? I'm surprised as you tend to not be one to make personal attacks. BTW: I don't think that the white supremacists would like my skin color much!!

Because you are 'moderate'.

If you vote, and you vote for Republicans rather than whatever the left is offering (or for nobody), you support open fascists. Period.

It doesn't matter what your skin color is. Proud Boys are voting for fascist white supremacists too, and a bunch of those idiots are black. Being black (or any other non-white skin color for that matter) doesn't mean you won't vote against your own interests.

"Of the voting population"? Are we now ignoring all the multitudes of young people who don't vote because "both parties are the same" or because "neither party represents me"?

Young people don't vote because they don't want a douche OR a turd. Which brings me back to the point that instead of courting "moderates", we should be courting the people who don't vote because our platform has historically not represented them: young adults.

 

[Jarhyn]

Jaryhn my friend: moderates are those who are the right to leftwingers and the left of rightwingers. We are probably the largest voting segment in the country. We generally are the ones who decide elections. But yea, if you want to win elections with a majority, you need to find issues to compromise and entice those in the middle to vote for you.

Bullshit. Prove it. CITATION NEEDED.

If you are "on the fence" about voting for avowed fascists and people who gladly welcome white supremecist ethnonationalists, you are not "left of republicans".

Heh. Do you actually know any conservatives or Republicans? Or is anyone different than you a wacky caricature?

... Says the person who seems to be doing their best to emulate said "wacky charicature".

 

[Harry Bosch]

No problemo:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderate

Moderates make up about 35% of the voting population. And we are growing. While at the same time the parties are both moving right and left.

Secondly, why do you claim that I am on the fence about voting for facists and white supremacists? I'm surprised as you tend to not be one to make personal attacks. BTW: I don't think that the white supremacists would like my skin color much!!

Because you are 'moderate'.

If you vote, and you vote for Republicans rather than whatever the left is offering (or for nobody), you support open fascists. Period.

It doesn't matter what your skin color is. Proud Boys are voting for fascist white supremacists too, and a bunch of those idiots are black. Being black (or any other non-white skin color for that matter) doesn't mean you won't vote against your own interests.

"Of the voting population"? Are we now ignoring all the multitudes of young people who don't vote because "both parties are the same" or because "neither party represents me"?

Young people don't vote because they don't want a douche OR a turd. Which brings me back to the point that instead of courting "moderates", we should be courting the people who don't vote because our platform has historically not represented them: young adults.

I do consider myself to be a moderate. But I haven't voted for any republican presidential candidates in many many years. I've always voted for the democratic rep and senator. When I lived in Oregon, I did vote for Chris Dudley for governor. He's probably the only republican that I can think of that I've voted for. But he was very socially liberal (pro-choice). Pro-business. His challenger at the time wanted to institute a tax on gross sales (which is crazy). I didn't like that. Plus I know him personally. He played basketball for the Portland Trailblazers. I skied with him a couple times. He's a genuinely nice guy. If it makes me a Nazi to vote for him, have at it.

Secondly, I could be wrong, but I didn't see a great upswing in younger voters in 2016 for Bernie. If I'm wrong, show me. Bernie had considerably less votes than HRC.

 

[Jarhyn]

No problemo:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderate

Moderates make up about 35% of the voting population. And we are growing. While at the same time the parties are both moving right and left.

Secondly, why do you claim that I am on the fence about voting for facists and white supremacists? I'm surprised as you tend to not be one to make personal attacks. BTW: I don't think that the white supremacists would like my skin color much!!

Because you are 'moderate'.

If you vote, and you vote for Republicans rather than whatever the left is offering (or for nobody), you support open fascists. Period.

It doesn't matter what your skin color is. Proud Boys are voting for fascist white supremacists too, and a bunch of those idiots are black. Being black (or any other non-white skin color for that matter) doesn't mean you won't vote against your own interests.

"Of the voting population"? Are we now ignoring all the multitudes of young people who don't vote because "both parties are the same" or because "neither party represents me"?

Young people don't vote because they don't want a douche OR a turd. Which brings me back to the point that instead of courting "moderates", we should be courting the people who don't vote because our platform has historically not represented them: young adults.

I do consider myself to be a moderate. But I haven't voted for any republican presidential candidates in many many years. I've always voted for the democratic rep and senator. When I lived in Oregon, I did vote for Chris Dudley for governor. He's probably the only republican that I can think of that I've voted for. But he was very socially liberal (pro-choice). Pro-business. His challenger at the time wanted to institute a tax on gross sales (which is crazy). I didn't like that. Plus I know him personally. He played basketball for the Portland Trailblazers. I skied with him a couple times. He's a genuinely nice guy. If it makes me a Nazi to vote for him, have at it.

Secondly, I could be wrong, but I didn't see a great upswing in younger voters in 2016 for Bernie. If I'm wrong, show me. Bernie had considerably less votes than HRC.

Then you aren't really much of a "moderate" who needs to be "courted" are you?

Would you vote for Trump rather than support Warren in her attempts to provide education and educational loan reform? Would you vote for, well, any of the Senators really who are afraid to impeach a criminal?

The point is, you aren't a "moderate" that the democrats need to "cater to" if you aren't going to vote for a fascist.

What would it take you to vote for today's current republican party? What would it take for you to just stay home or vote for a third party?

The fact is, you are arguing that democrats need to be more "moderate", but there is no such thing as a "moderate" who says "maybe I'll vote for fascists today".

 

[lpetrich]

AOC's success in unseating the 10-term "King of Queens" was the most spectacular of the 2018 populist-progressive successes, but there were others, like Ayanna Pressley, someone who quickly got compared to AOC. But AP is older, and with previous public-office experience: she was in the Boston City Council over 2010-18.

Jessica Cisneros Campaign raises nearly $460,000 in bid for Texas

Cisneros and her team are proud that their fundraising outpaces even past Congressional primary challengers, including Marie Newman in IL-3, who raised $76,000 in the same period during her first bid in 2017 and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who raised less than $60,000 in all of 2017.

Morgan Harper Raised More Than $300,000 in First Quarter

Morgan Harper, the 36-year-old progressive running for Congress in Ohio’s 3rd Congressional District raised a remarkable $323,000 during the first quarter of her campaign, setting her up for a potent primary challenge to 69-year-old Rep. Joyce Beatty, a four-term incumbent.

...
Harper’s campaign has raised the fourth-largest amount of money among any first-time congressional primary challenger in the initial quarter of their campaign, according to data provided by Data for Progress. Her haul trails Tim Canova, who raised roughly $537,000 in the first quarter of his ultimately unsuccessful 2016 bid; Suraj Patel, who raised more than $525,000 his first quarter against New York Rep. Carolyn Maloney in 2018; and Ayanna Pressley, who raised $364,000 against Michael Capuano that same cycle. (Patel narrowly lost his 2018 primary bid, and he recently announced that he will be launching a second challenge. Pressley won her race and now represents Massachusetts’ 7th District.)

...
Harper’s fundraising news comes on the heels of a successful quarter for Jessica Cisneros, a progressive challenger running against Rep. Henry Cuellar in Texas’s 28th District. In the last quarter, Cisnersos raised $310,000 — a significant boost, likely aided in part by Sen. Elizabeth Warren throwing her weight behind the candidate in September. Marie Newman, a progressive running against incumbent Democrat Dan Lipinski in Ilinois’s 3rd Congressional District likewise saw a successful quarter. Campaign manager Ben Hardin told The Intercept that Newman raised $350,000 in the most recent fundraising period. Newman, who came close to defeating Lipinski in a primary challenge last year, has been endorsed by Warren and Ocasio-Cortez.

 

[Harry Bosch]

I do consider myself to be a moderate. But I haven't voted for any republican presidential candidates in many many years. I've always voted for the democratic rep and senator. When I lived in Oregon, I did vote for Chris Dudley for governor. He's probably the only republican that I can think of that I've voted for. But he was very socially liberal (pro-choice). Pro-business. His challenger at the time wanted to institute a tax on gross sales (which is crazy). I didn't like that. Plus I know him personally. He played basketball for the Portland Trailblazers. I skied with him a couple times. He's a genuinely nice guy. If it makes me a Nazi to vote for him, have at it.

Secondly, I could be wrong, but I didn't see a great upswing in younger voters in 2016 for Bernie. If I'm wrong, show me. Bernie had considerably less votes than HRC.

Then you aren't really much of a "moderate" who needs to be "courted" are you?

Would you vote for Trump rather than support Warren in her attempts to provide education and educational loan reform? Would you vote for, well, any of the Senators really who are afraid to impeach a criminal?

The point is, you aren't a "moderate" that the democrats need to "cater to" if you aren't going to vote for a fascist.

What would it take you to vote for today's current republican party? What would it take for you to just stay home or vote for a third party?

The fact is, you are arguing that democrats need to be more "moderate", but there is no such thing as a "moderate" who says "maybe I'll vote for fascists today".

Yea, I'm more to the left than most moderates. I can't imagine a scenario where I'd vote for Trump. You are more driven by economic issues. I'm more against Trump because his positions on the environment and social issues. I fully expect Roe/Wade to be overturned soon and further great damage to the environment. I'm hoping that these issues will wake the young up to vote even if their ideal candidate isn't elected in the primary. Secondly, I think that the reasons why some of the dems are against impeachment is that they want to beat him in the ballot box and they don't like Pence. I favor impeachment now, but understand these concerns.

It would be very difficult to vote for Sanders. This would require another thread to fully flush out. But bottom line, I think that he'd be bad for business. I don't know what I'd do if he won in the primaries. I'd also have a difficult time voting for Warren. I will if she is the choice. However, I'm not impressed with her intellect. She's concerned about the environment, so she wants to outlaw nuclear power!?? What? She wants to lower the cost of education, so her solution is to eliminate all college debt. Well that doesn't help my daughters who haven't started college yet. It doesn't help the college grad who just paid off this last loan.

I'd vote for all the other dems (other than crystal lady) in a second over trump.

 

[Jarhyn]

I do consider myself to be a moderate. But I haven't voted for any republican presidential candidates in many many years. I've always voted for the democratic rep and senator. When I lived in Oregon, I did vote for Chris Dudley for governor. He's probably the only republican that I can think of that I've voted for. But he was very socially liberal (pro-choice). Pro-business. His challenger at the time wanted to institute a tax on gross sales (which is crazy). I didn't like that. Plus I know him personally. He played basketball for the Portland Trailblazers. I skied with him a couple times. He's a genuinely nice guy. If it makes me a Nazi to vote for him, have at it.

Secondly, I could be wrong, but I didn't see a great upswing in younger voters in 2016 for Bernie. If I'm wrong, show me. Bernie had considerably less votes than HRC.

Then you aren't really much of a "moderate" who needs to be "courted" are you?

Would you vote for Trump rather than support Warren in her attempts to provide education and educational loan reform? Would you vote for, well, any of the Senators really who are afraid to impeach a criminal?

The point is, you aren't a "moderate" that the democrats need to "cater to" if you aren't going to vote for a fascist.

What would it take you to vote for today's current republican party? What would it take for you to just stay home or vote for a third party?

The fact is, you are arguing that democrats need to be more "moderate", but there is no such thing as a "moderate" who says "maybe I'll vote for fascists today".

Yea, I'm more to the left than most moderates. I can't imagine a scenario where I'd vote for Trump. You are more driven by economic issues. I'm more against Trump because his positions on the environment and social issues. I fully expect Roe/Wade to be overturned soon and further great damage to the environment. I'm hoping that these issues will wake the young up to vote even if their ideal candidate isn't elected in the primary. Secondly, I think that the reasons why some of the dems are against impeachment is that they want to beat him in the ballot box and they don't like Pence. I favor impeachment now, but understand these concerns.

It would be very difficult to vote for Sanders. This would require another thread to fully flush out. But bottom line, I think that he'd be bad for business. I don't know what I'd do if he won in the primaries. I'd also have a difficult time voting for Warren. I will if she is the choice. However, I'm not impressed with her intellect. She's concerned about the environment, so she wants to outlaw nuclear power!?? What? She wants to lower the cost of education, so her solution is to eliminate all college debt. Well that doesn't help my daughters who haven't started college yet. It doesn't help the college grad who just paid off this last loan.

I'd vote for all the other dems (other than crystal lady) in a second over trump.

I'm against trump.for a LOT of reasons. Everything from his economic positions, to his environmental and regulatory positions, to his social positions.

But young people don't have the background in the economy to care much either way about it. You don't talk "economy" to young people. It isn't about "waking them up", it is about speaking to them as they are.

That means talking about the things that they DO see as mattering in their lives today. It means talking about the fact that they can't afford a home, or mortgage. It means offering them the hope of an education that won't result in them being debt slaves. It means offering them a future where a single medical bill won't shift them from being solvent to being on the streets. It means talking to them, and listening.

As to the people who have just paid off their loans... Do we talk that way about any other disease in society? Don't cure cancer because it does nothing for the guy who just went into remission?

That's just fucking stupid.

We can keep moving after solving the debt problems today. We can still move towards free higher education for your daughters. We can even talk to her about those things right now, today: contact her.

As for nuclear power, honestly, wind and solar with battery tech are going to be cheaper anyway.

 

[lpetrich]

I do think that both sides are ignoring the moderates who are the largest segment of voters. This could create an opening for a third party to sweep in. But what I fear the most is that right wingers are far more likely to vote than left wing.

A third party? Duverger's law makes it very difficult for one to get started. It takes the disintegration of an existing one to make room for a new one. First the Federalists, then the Whigs. Of the two parties, the Republicans are the most at risk of going that way, since their base seems to be white people who consider themselves victims of racial persecution.

 

[lpetrich]

Democrats dread Kennedy-Markey showdown in 2020 | TheHill

The party’s lawmakers and strategists say they do not understand why the rising Democratic star sees the need to primary the longtime progressive, further exacerbating divisions at a time when fissures between establishment and progressive Democrats plague the party.

...
While a number of recent high-profile primary challenges have come down to ideological differences, Kennedy and Markey are not particularly far away from each other on the political spectrum, both supporting initiatives like “Medicare for All” and the Green New Deal, which was championed by Markey in the Senate.

Shadow Lobbyist Crowley to Raise Money for Kennedy’s Race Against Green New Deal Chief Sponsor – Sludge - "Crowley is one of several revolving-door influence peddlers who will host an upcoming fundraiser for Kennedy." - the same Joe Crowley that AOC so notably primaried.

After taking more than a million dollars from corporate PACs over his congressional career, Rep. Joe Kennedy III (D-Mass.) pledged to stop accepting money from these PACs in his primary against incumbent Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.). But it appears he is not going to turn away money from corporate lobbyists.

...
Crowley is not just the guy whom AOC beat; he is now senior policy advisor at Squire Patton Boggs, a powerful D.C. lobbying firm that represents large corporations such as oil company Royal Dutch Shell, Management and Training Corp.—the third largest private prison company in the U.S.—and insurer UnitedHealth Group. Crowley joined the firm in February despite not being allowed to formally lobby his former colleagues in Congress until January 2020 under congressional ethics laws. However, Crowley has already begun working on think-tank efforts that further the interests of⁠—and are partially funded by⁠—Squire Patton Boggs’ clients.

Lots of other big-name lobbyists will be supporting Joe Kennedy III. In this one, it's the young one who is supported by big-money lobbyists, and it's the old one who is supported by Joe Crowley's nemesis, AOC.

Ocasio-Cortez Takes Aim at Crowley and Kennedy For Challenge to Green New Deal Co-Champion Ed Markey | Common Dreams News

"While Ed Markey is fighting for the Green New Deal in the Senate, Joe Kennedy is getting campaign support from Crowley hosting a high-dollar fundraiser on October 15th," Ocasio-Cortez's team wrote in an appeal for donations that would be split between her and Markey.

"Joe Kennedy thinks that with the backing of the establishment and the old guard of the Democratic Party that he can beat a progressive champion for justice," Ocasio-Cortez added. "Let's show Kennedy that he's wrong."

 

[Harry Bosch]

I do think that both sides are ignoring the moderates who are the largest segment of voters. This could create an opening for a third party to sweep in. But what I fear the most is that right wingers are far more likely to vote than left wing.

A third party? Duverger's law makes it very difficult for one to get started. It takes the disintegration of an existing one to make room for a new one. First the Federalists, then the Whigs. Of the two parties, the Republicans are the most at risk of going that way, since their base seems to be white people who consider themselves victims of racial persecution.

Totally agree. I didn't word my post above well. What I'm really trying to say is that the left is far more fractured than the right. And the turnout on the left is puny. I fear a segment on the left losing hope, then running third party. A third party person on the left drawing 2% of the vote will throw the election to Pence/Trump.

 

[RVonse]

I do think that both sides are ignoring the moderates who are the largest segment of voters. This could create an opening for a third party to sweep in. But what I fear the most is that right wingers are far more likely to vote than left wing.

A third party? Duverger's law makes it very difficult for one to get started. It takes the disintegration of an existing one to make room for a new one. First the Federalists, then the Whigs. Of the two parties, the Republicans are the most at risk of going that way, since their base seems to be white people who consider themselves victims of racial persecution.

Totally agree. I didn't word my post above well. What I'm really trying to say is that the left is far more fractured than the right. And the turnout on the left is puny. I fear a segment on the left losing hope, then running third party. A third party person on the left drawing 2% of the vote will throw the election to Pence/Trump.

Not necessarily. At this stage there are a lot of people who do not feel represented by either red or blue. A third party may indeed get enough votes that no party would be able to win required majority electoral votes. And that alone would be a huge wake up call for the plutocrats.