Yeah. It’s not like Bloomberg who was a Republican right up until he converted for the sole purpose of running for prez (and still has R policies), she’s got several decades of actually doing progressive work.
Hell, I grew up in a family that is Conservative (as in they won’t vote for any other party) and there was a time when I believed that, too.
One of the things that people who have met her say is that she listens. Do that enough with a wide enough group of people and you start to see that the ideas you were sold in conservative circles don’t make sense in the face of the evidence. Even one of the other issues she gets castigating for – shifting to a transition period with M4A – came after consulting with the disability community who raised concerns that a rapid switch would leave them vulnerable. A change that big can’t happen overnight. If you’ve got a problem with paying attention to the concerns of people who are most at risks of literally dying under a system change… I keep saying it, but that’s not a “revolution” I can support. If you’re okay with hurting and killing people who are already incredibly vulnerable, that’s not progress, that’s another version of “give me mine and fuck you.”
To me, progressiveness is how willing we are to make sure people who aren’t us or just like us get rights, opportunities, and fair treatment, not just grudgingly accepting them as along for the ride if they can hang on.
I get that I’m in absolutely no position to judge whether Chuck D or Flavor Flav has more claim to the name “Public Enemy” any more than I’m in a position to judge whether Harrison, McCartney, Lennon or Starr had more right to the name “the Beatles”.
Chuck D and the rest of the crew appeared as Public Enemy without Flav in 91 or 92 in Minneapolis (the other Prince club that had the symbol, not 1st Ave.)
The 1968 shitshow is not going to happen again, that was the point of the rule changes following the Hunt commission. The nomination will be won by a candidate with more than 50% of the delegates. That might mean that the candidate with a a plurality but not majority on the first vote gets surpassed on the second or third, but that’s not a brokered convention, it is just the rules of the primary process.
Bernie really needs to learn how to say “No” to people offering their support.
Seriously, if I were looking to tank Bernie, I couldn’t do better than shit like this. Pro-tip: surrounding yourself with assholes and clowns only works if you’re Republican.
I am being optimistic here as I feel she is the only candidate that even comes close to Sanders in terms of policies…so fingers crossed (though I doubt I’d bet real money on it).
And Professor Cornell only knew Warren before she did her transformational research work on bankruptcy in America. Colleagues who knew her from before, during, and after that period of research have shared stories of how radically Warren changed over that time period.
I disagree. Arriving at the right answer is a process that often has to go through the wrong answer to really reach understanding. Someone who is right from the beginning but doesn’t know why often only has a shallow understanding of their own correctness.
Is Sanders surrounding himself with them? Did he ask for her support? Or did she endorse on her own, and you’re expecting Sanders to reach out and stop her?
