Bernie Sanders announces 2020 Presidential campaign.

[The Romulan Republic]

I actually think that Bernie will be hammered less than he was in 2016, since its not just him vs. the "establishment". Unless he maintains front-runner position, then everyone will want a piece of him (same as any other frontrunner).

This is kind of the point. Nobody with an interest in beating him was grilling him in 2016. Clinton undrestimated him until he started winning primaries then had her hands tied behind her back trying to keep from losing his base.

You know, I really don't want to get into another rehash of 2016, I really, truly don't, but I would be remiss if I did not object to such a frankly absurd claim. Because I remember Bernie and all his supporters being routinely branded racists and misogynists (while one of Clinton's surrogates suggested that women who supported Sanders only did so because they wanted to meet men). I remember Clinton on the debate stage accusing him of supporting Castro's dictatorship and vigilante militia groups on the border. I remember the Nevada Democratic Party more or less outright accusing him of inciting terrorism after the (greatly exaggerated) "riot" at the Nevada convention. As well as of course the endless arguments from Clinton supporters that Sanders should drop out (and then when he finally did, the Bernie or Busters/possible Russian bots turned right around and called him a traitor for it, or suggested that he was blackmailed or forced to by Clinton). Among many other examples.

If that was going easy on him, I shudder to think what an actual grilling would be. I can only assume that it would be a literal grilling as they slowly roast Bernie to death over a fire. Or are you talking about more thoroughly questioning him on policy, rather than relying cheap personal attacks? In that case, I would entirely welcome such a focus.

Seriously, no one says you have to like Bernie Sanders, and he's at best my second or third choice this time around, but this double standard will never cease to irritate me. I'm honestly not sure what could be thrown at Bernie that hasn't been thrown at him, unless someone has a video of him pledging loyalty to the USSR or confessing to sexual assault or something.

That’s not going to be a problem this time. And him being the front runner means that everyone wants a piece of him from day one. Nobody is going to underestimate him, or pull punches in fear they’ll underestimate him, this time.

The notion that anyone "pulled punches" in the 2016 primary is laughable. Or it would be if that whole miserable cluster fuck wasn't far too sad to laugh about.

[FireNexus]

The notion that anyone "pulled punches" in the 2016 primary is laughable. Or it would be if that whole miserable cluster fuck wasn't far too sad to laugh about.

We’ll see. Hillary Clinton is the candidate that managed to dig up the one picture of Obama wearing a turban and get the entire news media discussing it for weeks. If you think what you describe doesn’t represent a pulled punch, we have very different ideas about a punch looks like.

But I only learned about something as significant as the fact that his kid and kid’s mom were on welfare while he was running for mayor on the Burnout Party Ticket instead of trying to get gainful employment to support them in the mid-1970s a few weeks ago. I’m 100% sure that Clinton had that information and didn’t use it.

(Note: Not shitting on welfare recipients. Shitting on being a man in your 30s with a young child and not making a legitimate effort to provide support for your child. As a man in my 30s with a young child who has made a lot of sacrifices for him, this fact is probably the most offensive thing I’ve ever learned about Bernie. And this was with even kind of having an understanding that he was a deadbeat in the 1970s in general.)

[Akumz Razor]

For what it's worth, I do remember seeing that anecdote thrown around quite a bit during the 2016 primary, albeit usually from antisocialist right wingers and not Clinton supporters.

[FireNexus]

For what it's worth, I do remember seeing that anecdote thrown around quite a bit during the 2016 primary, albeit usually from antisocialist right wingers and not Clinton supporters.

They referred to him sleeping on couches and whatnot. But I did a dive, and Mott being on welfare doesn’t appear to have been discussed at all until February 6th when some Twitter user posted a newspapers.com clipping from an issue of the Burlington free press where she spoke about some tenants rights bill she supported because she had trouble getting an apartment due to being on welfare.

I don’t have newspapers.com so I’m not 100% sure it’s a legit clipping and not a photoshop, but haven’t seen it discredited as a fake. If some asshole on twitter went through the Burlington Free Press to dig up dirt on Bernie and found that so easily, what did the actual professional opposition researchers find? What did they miss due to holding their fire that they will find?

[The Romulan Republic]

I don't know enough about Bernie's financial circumstances in the '70s to really comment on how much of it was his fault, being a slacker, etc. vs circumstance. But that's kind of beside the point here. As to whether Bernie got a free pass, I'd say that the accusations of racism, misogyny, and support for white border vigilantes and communist dictatorship were nastier than calling him a slacker, if perhaps less fact-based.

Its just possible Clinton went after him on the wrong things, though.

Anyway, what I hope is that we'll see a less viciously-polarized race all around this time. My concern is, first and foremost, that we get a nominee who can beat Donald Trump and the neo-fascists. That means getting the best nominee we can, but it also means not tearing every candidate to shreds in a vicious, divisive primary that will leave whoever wins so battered and so tainted that they can't get the turnout they need in the general. If Bernie's the nominee, I want him to have the best shot at winning. If, say, Corey Booker or Kamala Harris is the nominee, I want them to have the best possible shot too. Those who are really loyal to progressive policies and, frankly, to the country will be those who put party unity ahead of discrediting opposing primary candidates at all costs, or settling scores from 2016 (I'm referring to the entire Democratic Party and the Bernie Independents here, not FireNexus personally).

Edit: To be clear, that doesn't mean Democrats should hold back on debating policy, or that a candidate should be given a free pass if it turns out they did something really awful (in this day and age, I'm pretty much expecting at least one candidate to flame out spectacularly in a sex-abuse scandal before the primary is done). Just that we should avoid vicious, no-holds-barred mudslinging and character assassination, because its ultimately at the detriment of the larger goal.

[The Romulan Republic]

Bernie Sanders raises 5.9 million dollars in the first day of his campaign, about four times the previous record jointly held by his 2016 campaign and Kamala Harris's campaign:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/21/politics ... index.html

Its early days, and we'll have to see if he can keep this up long-term, but this is a pretty compelling initial indicator that the grass-roots support for Bernie is still going very strong.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, the attacks on Bernie Sanders have started, and the initial salvo seems to be focussed on his refusal to commit to calling Venezuelan socialist leader Maduro a "dictator", or support his removal:

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/ ... ro-1179636

Florida Democrats are denouncing Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders for refusing to call Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro a dictator — a politically explosive issue in the nation’s biggest swing state.

Sanders also would not say whether he considered Venezuela’s assembly leader, Juan Guaidó, as the nation’s interim president, which is the position of the United States and a majority of Latin American countries European countries.


Both of Sanders’ positions play into the hands of President Trump and the GOP, say Democrats. The president just held a rally in Miami on Monday to denounce Maduro and socialism, an appeal to the state’s growing block of Venezuelan-American voters. Many Venezuelans have flocked to the state as the country’s economy crashed and repression increased.

Democrats, already alarmed that Trump’s inroads with Venezuelans could help him peel off an otherwise-reliable Democratic voting bloc in a toss-up state, were quick to denounce Sanders’ comments.

“He is not going to be the nominee of the Democratic Party. He has demonstrated again that he does not understand this situation,” Rep. Donna Shalala, a Miami Democrat who represents Venezuelan exiles and, told POLITICO. “I absolutely disagree with his imprecision in not saying Maduro must go.” Shalala has filed legislation aimed at helping Venezuelan immigrants.

The emerging issue hasn’t yet spilled into the broader Democratic primary for president. Most candidates haven’t weighed in, some by choice.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and former Vice President Joe Biden, however, have clearly stated they consider Maduro a dictator and Guaidó the legitimate leader of Venezuela. And Sen. Elizabeth Warren told Pod Save America that she believed Maduro was a dictator and suggested she supported the “diplomatic part” of Trump’s backing of Guaidó, though she faulted him for too much “saber rattling.”

One Democratic Hispanic consultant said the remarks will cause a needless “frenzy” in South Florida’s Hispanic community.

Sanders did not embrace Maduro in his Tuesday interview with Univision’s Jorge Ramos, who quickly touched on Guaidó being declared the interim president of Venezuela by the nation’s National Assembly following Maduro’s questionable election.

But when he was asked whether he recognized Guaidó as the legitimate leader of the country, Sanders answered, “No.”

"There are serious questions about the recent election. There are many people who feel it was a fraudulent election," Sanders added.

In a follow-up question, Ramos asked Sanders if he thought Maduro is a dictator who should step down. Sanders refused to say yes or no.

"I think clearly he has been very, very abusive,” Sanders replied. “That is a decision of the Venezuelan people, so I think, Jorge, there's got to be a free and fair election. But what must not happen is that the United States must not use military force and intervene again as it has done in the past in Latin America, as you recall, whether it was Chile or Brazil or the Dominican Republic or Guatemala.”

Sanders also said that he believes “the United States has got to work with the international community to make sure that there is a free and fair election in Venezuela.”

That comment puzzled Shalala. “I do agree the international comm needs to come together and the U.S. needs to work with the international community," she said. "But that’s been happening.”

After Shalala posted her disagreement with Sanders on Twitter, the Vermont senator’s deputy chief of staff, Ari Rabin-Havt, replied to her that “this view represents the long and horrific history of American politicians imposing their will on the people of Latin America. Bernie stands with the Venezuelan people to demand free and fair elections and for self-determination for all people around the world.”

Rabin-Havt also noted Sanders has condemned Maduro.

The United States was the first to recognize Guaidó as Venezuela’s leader last month. About 64 other nations have followed. However, the United Nations still recognizes Maduro, though it has called for talks, as roughly 50 countries side with him — including U.S. foes Cuba, China, Iran, Nicaragua, North Korea, Russia and Syria.

Sanders has long had sympathy for leftist governments. Once a self-described socialist — he now uses the term "democratic socialist" — Sanders has spoken favorably in the past about socialist and communist strongmen. Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, Sanders once said, wasn't "perfect" but "totally transformed" the country. And Nicaragua’s leftist leader, Daniel Ortega, was "an impressive guy," Sanders argued.


Over the decades, Miami has become a home for exiles from some of those leftist governments, with Cuban-Americans leading the way and leaning strongly Republican. Venezuelans and Nicaraguans tend to vote Democratic once they become U.S. citizens and register to vote in Florida.

But Democratic consultants and community leaders say there’s evidence that could change and that the GOP’s anti-socialist messaging helped Republicans in 2018 and could help Trump in 2020.

Helena Poleo, a Democrat who’s a former journalist from Venezuela and is a Spanish-language commentator, called Sanders comments “disgusting. The Florida Democratic Party needs to denounce this now.”

The state party made its position on Maduro clear, without mentioning Sanders by name.

“Florida Democrats have been unequivocal: We recognize Juan Guaidó as the President of Venezuela, denounce the legitimacy of the Maduro regime and his efforts to remain illegally in power," the party said in a statement. Its comments echoed those of Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), who represents one of the largest Venezuelan populations in the United States.

State Sen. Annette Taddeo, a Miami Democrat, said she was “dumbfounded” and believed Sanders wasn’t properly briefed.

“He’s obviously clueless,” Taddeo said.

“Seems the Senator has already written Florida off his presidential campaign strategy,” deadpanned Ric Herrero with the Cuba Study Group, which advocates for more engagement with Havana, an incidental ally of Caracas.

One of the state’s top Democratic consultants for Hispanic outreach, former state party political director Christian Ulvert, said he was disappointed with Sanders for making such “extremely ignorant” comments. Ulvert, who’s of Nicaraguan descent, said he found Sanders’ comments harmful on a personal level as did his husband, who’s from Venezuela and has relatives suffering under Maduro.

The day before Sanders’ comments aired on Al Punto, Ulvert had written to the Democratic National Committee chairman concerning the location of the party’s 2020 presidential convention and noted that Trump was trying to make inroads based on his anti-socialism message. Ulvert said “everyone in our party from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Joe Biden have recognized Juan Guaidó as the acting leader of Venezuela and said Maduro must go,” and now Sanders is complicating that message.

“This helps Trump and it makes our job harder as Democrats,” Ulvert said. “What this will do is whip into a frenzy South Florida’s Hispanic community on both sides of the aisle. It’s an unnecessary distraction.”

Edit: I'm somewhat neutral on this issue myself- while I do regard Maduro as a dictator, I am wary of attempts to intervene in a heavy-handed or, God forbid, military manner in Venezuela. But I do regard this as legitimate criticism- a substantive debate on policy, rather than personal mudslinging (as long as it doesn't cross over into McCarthyist "Bernie is a commie" fear-mongering). Its a debate we need to have.

I am, however, irritated by the cynical admission by some that they are basically supporting Maduro's overthrow so that they can win Florida. Why not try actually standing for something besides short-term strategic gain?

[The Romulan Republic]

Sanders agrees to sign an "affirmation" to run as a Democrat:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/20/politics ... index.html

(CNN)Sen. Bernie Sanders plans to sign a party pledge affirming that he will run for president as a Democrat in 2020 and serve as one if elected, senior campaign adviser Jeff Weaver told CNN on Wednesday.

The Democratic National Committee said on Tuesday that it planned to meet in the coming week with the presidential primary campaigns and distribute a form to the candidates, who under bylaws agreed on last August will be required "to affirm in writing" that they "are a member of the Democratic Party, will accept the Democratic nomination" and "will run and serve as a member of the Democratic Party."
RELATED: Bernie Sanders raises nearly $6 million in 24 hours after 2020 launch, campaign says
Sanders, an independent from Vermont who caucuses with Democrats in the Senate and ran in the party's 2016 primary, announced his second White House bid on Tuesday morning. His refusal to more formally embrace the party has been a sore spot with some Democrats.
According to the DNC, all the announced campaigns have been invited to the meeting. Once they receive the form, they will have a week to return it.
Bernie Sanders Fast Facts
Bernie Sanders Fast Facts
"The DNC will present presidential campaigns that have currently announced their candidacy or the creation of an exploratory committee, with the rules and other materials next week at a briefing and this will include the candidate affirmation form," a DNC official told CNN. "As any additional candidates enter the race, they will be provided with the same information and will be required to return the form in the same time frame."
Despite the criticism from some in the party, Sanders entered the 2020 race with stronger Democratic support than he had four years ago. The rest of his state's congressional delegation -- Democrats Sen. Pat Leahy and Rep. Pete Welch -- have endorsed him. In 2016, Leahy backed Hillary Clinton and Welch withheld his support for Sanders until just before the Vermont primary.
T-shirts, tote bags and tweets: How presidential candidates are scrambling for small donors
T-shirts, tote bags and tweets: How presidential candidates are scrambling for small donors
Sanders declined the Democratic nomination in all three of his Senate campaigns, choosing to run as an independent after winning the party's primary.
In 2016, he declared as a Democrat in New Hampshire to participate in the presidential primary there, as required by the state's rules. The move was challenged by a local Republican, but Sanders was ultimately permitted to run by the state's ballot commission since Vermont does not have party registration. New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairman Ray Buckley defended Sanders' placement on the party's ballot.

So apparently the Democratic Party recently changed their rules to require candidates to run as Democrats, unlike Bernie in 2016 (I suspect this was targeted deliberately at Sanders). Sanders is apparently willing to do so, though that may damage his "anti-establishment" cred. with some of his base.

Personally I don't really care if he has an I or D next to his name- I care about his character and policies. But if he wants the Democratic nomination (and its the only responsible course to pursue if he doesn't want to be a spoiler and help Trump, like Schultz), then he has to play by DNC rules.

Edit: Interesting to see that he's already getting Congressional endorsements.

I'm also curious as to how much force this pledge has. If Bernie, hypothetically, won the nomination and then switched to Independent, or was elected President and then after his inauguration declared himself an independent, could the DNC sue him for breach of contract or something? Or is this effectively just a gentlemen' agreement?

[FaxModem1]

NPR

Are Democrats Ready To 'Feel The Bern' Or Is Sanders The 'MySpace' Of 2020?
February 23, 20197:00 AM ET
Domenico Montanaro - 2015

Sen. Bernie Sanders speaks during a campaign rally in June 2016 at Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego, Calif. He launched a second presidential campaign on Tuesday, with a big burst of donations from supporters, but new challenges ahead.
Sandy Huffaker/AP
Bernie Sanders has again proved he should not be underestimated in a presidential contest.

Despite talk of his coalition potentially fracturing with such a big Democratic primary field, the Sanders faithful showed they've still got his back. In the 24 hours following the Vermont independent's announcement Tuesday that he was again running for president, he raised a whopping $6 million.

He took in $600,000 from people who signed up to make recurring monthly payments to his campaign. That will give him a guaranteed source of revenue that could help him last for a very long time in a protracted primary fight. It's a model that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who like Sanders identifies as a democratic socialist, also touted.

2020 Update: Bernie Sanders Launches Presidential Campaign
"It's like Netflix," she tweeted, "but for unbought members of Congress."

Others see Sanders and his 2020 run as less Netflix and more something else.

"Bernie Sanders is the MySpace or the Friendster of the Democratic left," said Jamal Simmons, a Democratic strategist, who worked as an adviser to the Democratic National Committee during Barack Obama's presidential run in 2008. Sanders, Simmons noted, is like the startup that had the great idea, but doesn't become the one to fully capitalize on it.

Whichever you agree with, Sanders is undoubtedly going to have a major impact on the 2020 race, a far more crowded affair than 2016.

He has several advantages in this campaign for the Democratic nomination:

A proven ability to raise lots of money
Support with a strong activist base
A clear sense of what he's running for
But Sanders also has several disadvantages:

In 2016, he had the advantage of a challenger. Now, Sanders will face front-runner scrutiny. Zac Petkanas, the former director of rapid response for Hillary Clinton wrote Wednesday: "n truth, the 2016 Clinton campaign never named him in a single negative television or digital ad. And the media never truly educated the primary voting public with the intensity reserved for candidates seen as viable."
He has to contend with the Democratic instinct to want someone new. Before Hillary Clinton in 2016, the party hadn't given the nomination to someone in a contested primary who was either a previous nominee or runner-up since Adlai Stevenson in 1956. (Stevenson went on to lose Dwight Eisenhower – and by a wider margin than the first time). Republicans, on the other hand, have often nominated the runner-up from a previous primary.
That also leads to Sanders' age. Many in the restive, younger activist base would rather not vote for someone turning 78 later this year before voting even takes place in the early states. (That will be a problem former Vice President Joe Biden would have to contend with, too, if he decides to jump in. Biden turns 77 in November.)
Sanders is not a Democrat. Though he caucuses with Democrats and ran for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sanders has declined to officially become one, which has rankled some in the base who are proud to wear the label. (The DNC, in fact, will meet with the campaigns at a briefing and present them with an "affirmation form" that states that candidates will run and serve as Democrats. "Candidates who have officially announced their candidacy will have a week to return a signed copy of the affirmation form to the DNC," according to a party official. The requirement is part of the party's rules this cycle.)
He's less popular with non-whites, who are so key in Democratic primaries. In 2016, Sanders only won 21 percent of the black vote compared to 49 percent of the white vote, including 54 percent of whites without a college degree. (Sanders did do better with younger nonwhite voters.)
He'll need to explain his "socialist" label. Trump is using "socialism" as a cudgel against Democrats, and Sanders' explanation of what it means to him is going to be especially key since Democrats are saying their top issue in 2020 is nominating someone who can beat Trump.
People close to Sanders acknowledge his challenges and the differences with 2016. On the socialism label, for example, Larry Cohen, chairman of Our Revolution, an outside group which grew out of Sanders' 2016 campaign, stressed that Sanders is about "innovation and supporting entrepreneurs."

Cohen noted, for example, Sanders' support for the Vermont ice cream brand Ben and Jerry's, whose founder Ben Cohen (no relation to Larry) was named one of Sanders' campaign co-chairmen.

"Organizing other businesses with social consciousness, that's been a big part of his life," Larry Cohen said.

Sanders has also changed the business of how the Democratic Party goes about choosing its candidates. The role of superdelegates, for example, has been scaled back because of Sanders and his objection that they skewed too heavily in favor of Clinton in 2016. The DNC will also allow candidates who meet a grassroots fundraising threshold to participate in debates, regardless of how they're doing in the polls.

And he is a main reason the Democratic candidates this year are advocating for progressive positions like Medicare-for-all and a $15 minimum wage. Ironically, Sanders' success in transforming the party may be part of what does him in, because there are now more options for the progressive left to choose from than in 2016.

"Does it have to be him?" Arnie Arnesen, a New Hampshire radio show host and Sanders supporter in 2016, told NPR's Asma Khalid last month. "I don't think it does, and I admire him. I admire him to pieces."

Sanders was known for having a cult-like following and huge crowds in 2016. But many of the Democratic candidates this year are also drawing packed crowds early in this campaign. Sen. Kamala Harris, for example, drew 20,000 people for her kickoff rally in Oakland, Calif.

The big crowds are a likely sign of overall Democratic enthusiasm, with the base itching to take on Trump and try to stop him from reelection. Sanders has to fight the idea that the enthusiasm behind him can be replicated by others.

He's also having to fight for the head and heart of his candidacy.

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, for example, could potentially peel off from the intellectual, ideological part of Sanders' coalition (the head).

And if former Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke gets in, he threatens to pull from the emotional, grassroots piece of his base that wants to root for someone (the heart).

Cohen said Sanders welcomes Warren as an "ally," who is helping to rebuild the progressive base, and his team believes it can draw distinctions with O'Rourke to paint him as not as progressive, especially on trade. O'Rourke was one of just 28 House Democrats to support giving President Obama fast-track authority to negotiate trade deals, like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP.

Whether he can hold onto it all — and expand to win a majority of delegates is an open question and major challenge.

"That's why we have 18 months until the convention to test that out," Cohen said. "For people like me, it's about what kind of political world we build, not just the White House. It's about governing; it's the nature of the support base that will remain active, that you have an activist base, not just a candidate addiction."

As far as competing with those other candidates, Cohen noted, "The facts are quite clear — $6 million, 300,000 individual donors. Add up all the others, you don't get to that number."

Sanders' path to victory — or defeat

Sanders is one of the big fishes people were eagerly watching as he deliberated whether to run. And his entry is already giving some shape to how the contest could play out.

The early states, for example, are likely going to take on even more significance now in winnowing the field. It's easy, for example, to see Sanders' winning path — and how he loses. Sanders nearly won Iowa, a caucus state, in 2016, and he won the New Hampshire primary handily, by 20 points.

And those two early states take on extra significance for Sanders, who is not expected to be a major player in South Carolina, a state where 61 percent of Democratic voters in the 2016 primary were black. Hillary Clinton beat him there by almost 50 points.

This year it's likely to be a battle between the two leading African-American candidates, Harris and New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, and possibly Biden, if he decides to run.

If Sanders sweeps Iowa and New Hamsphire this time, he might be hard to stop. If he loses one (especially New Hamsphire) or both, Sanders might have the money to continue, but winning a majority of delegates before the convention would be much more difficult.

What's more, it's easy to see how New Hampshire will be the filter in a potential fight between Sanders and Warren, who are both from neighboring states. It will also mean higher stakes in Iowa for candidates like Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who is from bordering Minnesota, and Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, another Midwesterner, to defeat Sanders.

So, between Warren and him, the New Hampshire primaries will shown who will lead.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yup, if Bernie can't win New Hampshire (which borders Vermont and went overwhelmingly to him in the 2016 primary), he's toast. Unless he wins Iowa and loses New Hampshire, but that seems unlikely to me.

Basically, if the first three are Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, then you're going to have to win one to be seen as viable after that point. If you win one, you're still in the game. If you win two, you're the clear front-runner.

Edit: All this is of course assuming the Bern doesn't win SC, but he'd have to make some truly dazzling strides with the black vote for that to happen. If he doesn't win Iowa or NH (his traditional strong territory), he ain't winning SC either. So we'll know by NH whether Bernie has staying power, or is down for the count.