I must be honest. I have dreaded and avoided writing about the Democratic primary field. Fewer men belong to the Taylor Swift ex-boyfriends club than people who are running for president. (Barely.)
But, I feel an obligation to discuss this shitshow for the three people out there who give a crap what I have to say.
The first Democratic Primary debate is June 26th and 27th. It will be televised by NBC and it's family of networks which means not one but two nights of Chuck Todd. Please hold your excitement. I understand though. I, too, am waiting with baited breath for consecutive nights of fun and insight with Chuckie.
Anyway, the debate has to be spread across two nights because 23 people are in the race. However, only 20 can participate in the debates. The DNC used polling and small dollar donation criteria to determine who was eligible.
So, in part one of this blog post I am going to give a quick analysis of the 10 people who will participate in night one. The other 10 will be covered next week while the three who didn't make it I have no interest in discussing. Just being honest. Frankly, about 12 or 13 of the 20 who did make it aren't worth discussing.
Supposedly the makeup of the groups were determined by a random draw. A representative from each campaign went to NBC headquarters where the names were drawn.
The order which they will appear on stage has not been determined.
For this analysis I will do a countdown from the candidate I view as the 10th candidate to the one I see as the top candidate. My criteria is simple. I'm basing this on whom I see as the best candidate and their viability to the Democratic base.
10. John Delaney-I don't know a whole lot about Delaney. I do know he is a centrist, which immediately gets the side-eye from me. His centrism was on full display when was booed at a California Democratic event when he shit all over Medicare For All. He babbled some nonsense about it was not practical, but of course he supports universal healthcare. That is centrist doubletalk for, "Medicare For All would mean my donors...errrr...the pharmaceutical and medical insurance companies would no longer be able to turn ungodly profits on the backs of sick people." Next.
9. Amy Klobuchar-I gotta say I like the senator from Minnesota. When I saw her on television she impressed me as the sweet nerdy woman who is lowkey super attractive. (I know that sounds a bit piggish.) But, then I actually researched and listened to her. Her treatment of her staff which in and of itself isn't disqualifying but certainly says something about her temperament and character. What is even more disturbing is her centrism and corporatism. She seems way too interested in "getting back to normal" instead of actually addressing the real problems that face this country. She is also very dismissive of Progressives and our ideas which the majority of Americans support. She is stuck on this asinine belief that bipartisanship is the answer and Republicans will be receptive to that. Anyone that tone-deaf and naive can't be the nominee.
8. Julian Castro-I don't have much to say about the former Obama official. He has some strong policies toward criminal justice reform which is super important. He supports Medicare For All. But, his approach to most issues is Republican light. Even his healthcare stance despite supporting Medicare For All is sketchy in areas.
7. Tim Ryan-The representative from Ohio is another (of way too many) centrist Democrats in the field. He does have some strong populist ideas on trade. However, he is quite conservative on some issues and neoliberal on others. He is an admirer of third way politics which is largely responsible for the mess we're in now. He jumped on the Medicare For All train but quickly began hedging. Overall the guy is to the right of clowns like Steny Hoyer! Yeah, no thanks!
6. Beto O'Rourke- I have probably pissed off some folks having him this low. But, you know what I say about being pissed off...Anyway, I actually like Beto. It's hard not to. However, his politics are trash and we all know it. Dude has no policy ideas. He is all platitudes and disingenuous energy. Beto is trying to be white chocolate Obama. The problem is he doesn't have anywhere near Obama's charisma. And, whether you liked what he was saying or not, Obama's speeches were littered with substance. O'Rourke can't even provide solid reasons for wanting to be president other than he "was born for this". Muthaf****a, really?! If B really wants to help his party and his country he will stop this farce and run again for the senate seat in Texas. He almost beat Ted Cruz in 2018 and John Cornyn is more vulnerable than Cruz was. The Democrats could greatly use that seat. But, no, Beto is on some inane misguided ego trip.
5. Cory Booker-Lawd. Lawd. Lawd. Sen. Cory Booker. Some people think Booker is pretentious and phony. I don't. That cringy corniness is real, sadly. Now, what is fake is Cory's persona he is a Progressive. Sen. Booker is the quintessential neoliberal corporatist Democrat. Simply look at his ties to the banking industry and charter schools. His support of charter schools which actually are often detrimental to low income urban students (regardless of the bullshit charter proponents spout) is borderline disgusting. He says he cares about low income and inner-city people but his policies make that extremely difficult to reconcile. He didn't exactly help inner-city people in Newark, New Jersey when he was the mayor. Now, in fairness to Booker his stance and actions on criminal justice reform should be greatly commended and I would argue is extensively more substantive than anyone else in the Democratic field. That said though he is not a good candidate. And, his "can't we all get along" mantra is ridiculous. He has been in the Senate long enough to know Republicans have zero interest in "getting along".
4. Bill de Blasio-Look, honestly de Blasio is fourth because he isn't as awful as the six people beneath him. He fancies himself a Progressive but often has corporatist twinges. He has done some awesome things as the New York City mayor. He certainly has cleaned up (some) the relationship between the police and communities of color. He was on the right side of the Amazon headquarters deal. Although he did attempt to somewhat be on both sides. I like the dude, but his progressiveness is a bit too fluid for me.
3. Jay Inslee-The governor of Washington doesn't have a chance in hell of winning. He knows that. He is in the race to push one issue, climate change. That is enough for me. He understands the existential treat we are facing. Outside of climate change Inslee's politics are bordering between liberal and progressive. In some ways that might make his #3 spot too high, but again, his harping on the climate change issue is more than enough to deserve being this spot.
2. Tulsi Gabbard-Some of y'all...most of y'all about to be triggered in some way. Whatevs. I stated my issues regarding Tulsi in a video a few months ago. She seems to possess a cursory affinity for authoritative leaders. She has a very disturbing and strange appeal to some alt-righters and the Jimmy Dore left. Her position on Syria's president, Bashir Al-Assad, is a bit unsettling. However, with all of that said she is unquestionably the second best candidate in this field of 10 and in the overall top five. Tulsi has an impressive progressive record in Congress. Despite her past views she has proven to be an advocate for the LGBTQ community. She is mostly on the correct side of surveillance and torture issues. Some of her past recent comments about torture are troubling. (See her 2014 interview with an Indian morning show tv host.) Gabbard's approach to cultural and immigration issues is largely correct. She stood in solidarity with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ro Khana in opposition to "PayGo" which was a House resolution that significantly hampers the ability of genuine progressive bills to be brought to the House floor let alone passed. More than anyone else in the Democratic caucus she has said the absolute correct and moral things about Venezuela, Iran and Ilhan Omar. Tulsi is a complicated figure but she's head and shoulders above the eight folks below her!
1. Elizabeth Warren-Do I really need to explain this? Nobody, and I mean nobody, in the field of 23 has provided more policy substance than Warren. Almost weekly she has introduced a new different well articulated and ardently substantive policy idea. Some critics say she's been too wonky and that's fair. But, for people who constantly squawk about the importance of policy over platitudes they should be ecstatic with Warren's wonkiness. Another critique she has received from her left is that many of her policy ideas don't go far enough (ie: aren't Democratic Socialist enough). Again, that is a fair criticism which I somewhat agree with. No doubt Warren is more interested in "fixing" capitalism than completely overhauling the system. But, her policies directly address income inequality, corporate cronyism, unbalanced taxation (the rich not paying their fair share) and excessive corporate/wealth greed. Elizabeth Warren has also been able to (I believe brilliantly) strike the balance of addressing how these income inequality and cronyism issues adversely affect communities of color in a true progressive manner that those to her left can't accuse her of identity politics. She has also more than adequately addressed climate change, criminal justice reform and immigration. Her most glaring flaw has been her hedging on going full board for Medicare For All. Frankly, it's a sign of how she has great political instincts but also has a twinge of neoliberalism. This twinge is what caused her to stay neutral in 2016 and not endorse Bernie Sanders, which who she was clearly more politically aligned. Some on the progressive left have not forgiven her for this and are holding it against her. I won't go into that clusterfuck right now. (Let me just say: let it the eff go!) Warren is the clear premiere candidate of this group. I would've liked to see her go up against Biden and Buttigieg and destroy their craven bs but I am sure Bernie will do it just fine.
The debates will be at 8pm cst each night in Miami.
Hopefully, the debates will expose some of the frauds and shave this ridiculousness down.
Next Saturday I will discuss the other 10.
But, I feel an obligation to discuss this shitshow for the three people out there who give a crap what I have to say.
The first Democratic Primary debate is June 26th and 27th. It will be televised by NBC and it's family of networks which means not one but two nights of Chuck Todd. Please hold your excitement. I understand though. I, too, am waiting with baited breath for consecutive nights of fun and insight with Chuckie.
Anyway, the debate has to be spread across two nights because 23 people are in the race. However, only 20 can participate in the debates. The DNC used polling and small dollar donation criteria to determine who was eligible.
So, in part one of this blog post I am going to give a quick analysis of the 10 people who will participate in night one. The other 10 will be covered next week while the three who didn't make it I have no interest in discussing. Just being honest. Frankly, about 12 or 13 of the 20 who did make it aren't worth discussing.
Supposedly the makeup of the groups were determined by a random draw. A representative from each campaign went to NBC headquarters where the names were drawn.
The order which they will appear on stage has not been determined.
For this analysis I will do a countdown from the candidate I view as the 10th candidate to the one I see as the top candidate. My criteria is simple. I'm basing this on whom I see as the best candidate and their viability to the Democratic base.
10. John Delaney-I don't know a whole lot about Delaney. I do know he is a centrist, which immediately gets the side-eye from me. His centrism was on full display when was booed at a California Democratic event when he shit all over Medicare For All. He babbled some nonsense about it was not practical, but of course he supports universal healthcare. That is centrist doubletalk for, "Medicare For All would mean my donors...errrr...the pharmaceutical and medical insurance companies would no longer be able to turn ungodly profits on the backs of sick people." Next.
9. Amy Klobuchar-I gotta say I like the senator from Minnesota. When I saw her on television she impressed me as the sweet nerdy woman who is lowkey super attractive. (I know that sounds a bit piggish.) But, then I actually researched and listened to her. Her treatment of her staff which in and of itself isn't disqualifying but certainly says something about her temperament and character. What is even more disturbing is her centrism and corporatism. She seems way too interested in "getting back to normal" instead of actually addressing the real problems that face this country. She is also very dismissive of Progressives and our ideas which the majority of Americans support. She is stuck on this asinine belief that bipartisanship is the answer and Republicans will be receptive to that. Anyone that tone-deaf and naive can't be the nominee.
8. Julian Castro-I don't have much to say about the former Obama official. He has some strong policies toward criminal justice reform which is super important. He supports Medicare For All. But, his approach to most issues is Republican light. Even his healthcare stance despite supporting Medicare For All is sketchy in areas.
7. Tim Ryan-The representative from Ohio is another (of way too many) centrist Democrats in the field. He does have some strong populist ideas on trade. However, he is quite conservative on some issues and neoliberal on others. He is an admirer of third way politics which is largely responsible for the mess we're in now. He jumped on the Medicare For All train but quickly began hedging. Overall the guy is to the right of clowns like Steny Hoyer! Yeah, no thanks!
6. Beto O'Rourke- I have probably pissed off some folks having him this low. But, you know what I say about being pissed off...Anyway, I actually like Beto. It's hard not to. However, his politics are trash and we all know it. Dude has no policy ideas. He is all platitudes and disingenuous energy. Beto is trying to be white chocolate Obama. The problem is he doesn't have anywhere near Obama's charisma. And, whether you liked what he was saying or not, Obama's speeches were littered with substance. O'Rourke can't even provide solid reasons for wanting to be president other than he "was born for this". Muthaf****a, really?! If B really wants to help his party and his country he will stop this farce and run again for the senate seat in Texas. He almost beat Ted Cruz in 2018 and John Cornyn is more vulnerable than Cruz was. The Democrats could greatly use that seat. But, no, Beto is on some inane misguided ego trip.
5. Cory Booker-Lawd. Lawd. Lawd. Sen. Cory Booker. Some people think Booker is pretentious and phony. I don't. That cringy corniness is real, sadly. Now, what is fake is Cory's persona he is a Progressive. Sen. Booker is the quintessential neoliberal corporatist Democrat. Simply look at his ties to the banking industry and charter schools. His support of charter schools which actually are often detrimental to low income urban students (regardless of the bullshit charter proponents spout) is borderline disgusting. He says he cares about low income and inner-city people but his policies make that extremely difficult to reconcile. He didn't exactly help inner-city people in Newark, New Jersey when he was the mayor. Now, in fairness to Booker his stance and actions on criminal justice reform should be greatly commended and I would argue is extensively more substantive than anyone else in the Democratic field. That said though he is not a good candidate. And, his "can't we all get along" mantra is ridiculous. He has been in the Senate long enough to know Republicans have zero interest in "getting along".
4. Bill de Blasio-Look, honestly de Blasio is fourth because he isn't as awful as the six people beneath him. He fancies himself a Progressive but often has corporatist twinges. He has done some awesome things as the New York City mayor. He certainly has cleaned up (some) the relationship between the police and communities of color. He was on the right side of the Amazon headquarters deal. Although he did attempt to somewhat be on both sides. I like the dude, but his progressiveness is a bit too fluid for me.
3. Jay Inslee-The governor of Washington doesn't have a chance in hell of winning. He knows that. He is in the race to push one issue, climate change. That is enough for me. He understands the existential treat we are facing. Outside of climate change Inslee's politics are bordering between liberal and progressive. In some ways that might make his #3 spot too high, but again, his harping on the climate change issue is more than enough to deserve being this spot.
2. Tulsi Gabbard-Some of y'all...most of y'all about to be triggered in some way. Whatevs. I stated my issues regarding Tulsi in a video a few months ago. She seems to possess a cursory affinity for authoritative leaders. She has a very disturbing and strange appeal to some alt-righters and the Jimmy Dore left. Her position on Syria's president, Bashir Al-Assad, is a bit unsettling. However, with all of that said she is unquestionably the second best candidate in this field of 10 and in the overall top five. Tulsi has an impressive progressive record in Congress. Despite her past views she has proven to be an advocate for the LGBTQ community. She is mostly on the correct side of surveillance and torture issues. Some of her past recent comments about torture are troubling. (See her 2014 interview with an Indian morning show tv host.) Gabbard's approach to cultural and immigration issues is largely correct. She stood in solidarity with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ro Khana in opposition to "PayGo" which was a House resolution that significantly hampers the ability of genuine progressive bills to be brought to the House floor let alone passed. More than anyone else in the Democratic caucus she has said the absolute correct and moral things about Venezuela, Iran and Ilhan Omar. Tulsi is a complicated figure but she's head and shoulders above the eight folks below her!
1. Elizabeth Warren-Do I really need to explain this? Nobody, and I mean nobody, in the field of 23 has provided more policy substance than Warren. Almost weekly she has introduced a new different well articulated and ardently substantive policy idea. Some critics say she's been too wonky and that's fair. But, for people who constantly squawk about the importance of policy over platitudes they should be ecstatic with Warren's wonkiness. Another critique she has received from her left is that many of her policy ideas don't go far enough (ie: aren't Democratic Socialist enough). Again, that is a fair criticism which I somewhat agree with. No doubt Warren is more interested in "fixing" capitalism than completely overhauling the system. But, her policies directly address income inequality, corporate cronyism, unbalanced taxation (the rich not paying their fair share) and excessive corporate/wealth greed. Elizabeth Warren has also been able to (I believe brilliantly) strike the balance of addressing how these income inequality and cronyism issues adversely affect communities of color in a true progressive manner that those to her left can't accuse her of identity politics. She has also more than adequately addressed climate change, criminal justice reform and immigration. Her most glaring flaw has been her hedging on going full board for Medicare For All. Frankly, it's a sign of how she has great political instincts but also has a twinge of neoliberalism. This twinge is what caused her to stay neutral in 2016 and not endorse Bernie Sanders, which who she was clearly more politically aligned. Some on the progressive left have not forgiven her for this and are holding it against her. I won't go into that clusterfuck right now. (Let me just say: let it the eff go!) Warren is the clear premiere candidate of this group. I would've liked to see her go up against Biden and Buttigieg and destroy their craven bs but I am sure Bernie will do it just fine.
The debates will be at 8pm cst each night in Miami.
Hopefully, the debates will expose some of the frauds and shave this ridiculousness down.
Next Saturday I will discuss the other 10.
