Democratic Debate 11 Goes Out With A Whimper

If, like me, you were hoping for more with the 11th Democratic debate which was to feature a 1 on 1 with Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders, you were abysmally disappointed.

This Sunday’s 11th Democratic Candidate Debate featured only Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders in a 1 on 1, after every other candidate dropped out, and was nothing more than an opportunity for each candidate to rehash what they’d already said seemingly countless times earlier – on the stump, and on “debate” stages.

Previously scheduled to be held at Arizona Federal Theatre, 400 W Washington Street in Phoenix, AZ 85003, the debate was relocated and held at CNN’s Washington D.C. studios, before moderators only, with no live audience members, in order to limit possible exposure to COVID-19 coronavirus, which is now sweeping the country and world. Only 3 Moderators – Dana Bash, and Jake Tapper of CNN, and Ilia Calderon from Univision, who replaced Jorge Ramos, who had self-quarantined following possible COVID-19 exposure – were present.

The debate started out slowly, and even though there were only 2 candidates, the “rules” were just as before, that each candidate was allotted 90 seconds to respond to a question. I had hoped that there would be more interaction between the 2 candidates, and was only briefly satisfied with by their more free-wheeling interactions which Jake Tapper allowed, while

Bernie Sanders Addressed Georgetown University On Democratic Socialism

Try as they might, pundit and naysayers of most all stripe continue to castigate, demonize, and mischaracterize Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders as a “socialist” in the “classical” sense.

The “classical” sense, or definition of “socialism” is when a government controls the means -and- the method of production. Period. End of conversation.

In the United States, there has NEVER been, nor will there ever be, any “government factory.”

So, there’s that to consider.

But, think about the coins and currency (money) in your pocket.

You might have an argument for calling it “socialist,” because it’s
• made by the government,
• on government-owned machines,
• using government-owned paper, ink, and metals,
• by government employees, and is effectively
• owned by the government (on temporary “loan” to you, though it is in actuality, a promissory note, itself – but monetary theory is a topic for discussion another day).

BUT… the reason it’s NOT socialist is that EVERYTHING – the inks, the metals, the papers, the stamping and printing machines… EVERYTHING – was obtained by Publicly Bid Open Contracts FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

Yeah.

So, there’s also that to consider.

And then, there’s our military… which issues official government-owned uniforms to government employees, who work using government-owned equipment, and their healthcare – which is given at NO COST TO THEM -and- TO THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS – using government-owned equipment, in government-owned healthcare facilities and hospitals, with government-owned-and-provided medicines.

And, in that scenario, the government employees control the means –and– the method of production, per se. It’s a “socialist” system if ever there was one!

But,, once again, ALL of those materials, and all the manpower to perform ALL those functions COMES FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR via Publicly Bid Open Contracts.

Yeah.

So, there’s that to consider, as well.

Guess it must not be “socialism,” eh?

At least since 1931 (and likely at least 20 years or so earlier), the great “demon” of socialism has been a source of name-calling and fear-baiting in government.

The word “socialism” has been tossed around more than a Caesar’s Salad with oil and vinegar dressing. And, it’s only done for political hay-making purposes. In other words, it’s much like “The Boy Who Cried ‘WOLF!'”

Here are two examples from the Congressional Record of 1931:

Congressional Record–Senate, 28Feb1931, p6448

You see, in October 1917, something happened in Russia, and that country changed its name, which included the word “socialist” in it. Thereafter, it was easy to demonize the word, simply because of association with what happened in Russia.

The “something” that happened in Russia was the “October Revolution,” (i.e., the Russian Revolution) in which Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924) and his merry band of men (mostly) known as the Bolsheviks, overthrew the Russian government, which at the time had been long ruled by Czars from the Romanov family, the royal family of Russia – which was a 300-year long imperial dynasty (the 2nd in Russian history), and one of ineptitude, nepotism, incompetence, excess, corruption, and hubris – which in all fairness, also included a few successes, but exceedingly few.

Congressional Record – House 2March31 p6850

It was actually the 2nd (or 3rd, depending upon what source you read) that year, with the first being in March (or February, again, depending upon what source you read). An earlier revolution in 1905 had also happened, and the situation and circumstances of the that revolution was culminated in the 1917 revolutions. Riots, work stoppages, strikes, food shortages, economic upheaval, lack of industrialization, were almost commonplace, and social upheaval was in the air, and in the hearts and minds of Russian civilians.

In the early 1900’s, Russia was one of the most impoverished nations in the world, and most European countries, and did much of the world, viewed Russia as being a backwards, and undeveloped nation, which was also plagued with high poverty, among other social ills. It was only a relatively few years earlier, in 1861, that serfdom had been made illegal in Russia, though it had been illegal in Europe for much longer.

“Serfdom” is a practice of the landed gentry (wealthy real estate/properly owners) in which indentured servitude of the lowest social class members, called “serfs,” occurred, though which the impoverished serfs were in some way indebted to the land owner, typically in exchange for the privilege of working a plot of land for their own purposes, which in more modern times in America is called share-cropping. After serfdom was outlawed, the former serfs had freedom to organize, and they did.

Industrialization, which occurred much later in Russia than in other nations, was the harbinger of significant social change. Between 1890 and 1910, the populations of the well-known cities St. Petersburg, and Moscow, doubled in size. Such overcrowding brought along other social ills such as destitute living conditions for industrial workers, and with it, disease.

Decisions to grow agricultural products in the harsh northern Russian climes were similarly fraught with difficulty, and production was stymied, which in turn brought about food shortages, and their accompanying ills. In conjunction with the Crimean War (1854-56) arising from Russian pressure on Turkey which directly threatened British commercial and strategic interests in the Middle East and India, combined with Russian involvement in other armed conflicts (notably with Japan), their economy was brought to a practical stand-still.

The “Bloody Sunday Massacre” of unarmed peaceful protestors by government troops in St. Petersburg on January 22, 1905, set the stage for even greater civil unrest shortly thereafter.

THE POINT BEING…

History is full of events of people revolting when food and housing – 2 of the 3 most fundamental human needs of food, clothing, and shelter – cannot be obtained.

The same thing happened in the United States, albeit with less violence, during the Great Depression.

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, aka “FDR”, and his administration, sought to do everything humanly possible to PREVENT another occurrence of a “Great Depression” by correcting laws that led to the problem.

In the years since, Republicans (mostly), have done their damndest to tear down, and destroy everything FDR accomplished – including their wet-dream of privatizing Social Security – in order to hand it over to Wall Street speculators, who are salivating like hungry dogs to get their greedy hands on The People’s money.

As evidence of mostly Republican effort (though in all fairness, some Democrats have been involved, as well – aka “establishment Democrats,” or Wall Street Democrats In Name Only, or DINOs) to tear down the laws and rules protecting the people, look at the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act (repeal and replaced by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act – 145 pages, and signed into law by President CLINTON in 1999, the Glass-Steagall Act passed in 1933, signed by FDR, was 37 pages in length, and forbade the commingling of money from Insurance companies, Stock Brokerage houses, and Banks, i.e., each industry could not perform the roles which the others did), which led DIRECTLY to the “Great Recession” during the George W. Bush administration, in which numerous “too-big-to-fail” banks collapsed, insurance companies went under, people lost jobs, and automobile manufacturers requested a bail-out… while the people got no bail-out.

Following, are the transcribed remarks made by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders at Georgetown University November 19, 2015 about what he means when he mentions “democratic socialism.”

––––––––––––––••••––––––––––––––

––––––––––––––••••––––––––––––––

––––––––––––––••••––––––––––––––

In his inaugural remarks in January 1937, in the midst of the Great Depression, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt looked out at the nation and this is what he saw.

He saw tens of millions of its citizens denied the basic necessities of life.

He saw millions of families trying to live on incomes so meager that the pall of family disaster hung over them day by day.

He saw millions denied education, recreation, and the opportunity to better their lot and the lot of their children.

He saw millions lacking the means to buy the products they needed and by their poverty and lack of disposable income denying employment to many other millions.

He saw one-third of a nation ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished.

And he acted. Against the ferocious opposition of the ruling class of his day, people he called economic royalists, Roosevelt implemented a series of programs that put millions of people back to work, took them out of poverty and restored their faith in government. He redefined the relationship of the federal government to the people of our country. He combatted cynicism, fear and despair. He reinvigorated democracy. He transformed the country.

Bernie Sanders delivers his long-awaited speech on Democratic Socialism at Georgetown University. He also speaks about his vision for bringing American foreign policy into the 21st century.

And that is what we have to do today.

And, by the way, almost everything he proposed was called “socialist.” Social Security, which transformed life for the elderly in this country was “socialist.” The concept of the “minimum wage” was seen as a radical intrusion into the marketplace and was described as “socialist.” Unemployment insurance, abolishing child labor, the 40-hour work week, collective bargaining, strong banking regulations, deposit insurance, and job programs that put millions of people to work were all described, in one way or another, as “socialist.” Yet, these programs have become the fabric of our nation and the foundation of the middle class.

Thirty years later, in

Would You Visit A Cuban Beach?

Suppose that one day, you were on the beach in Varadero Beach, which is slightly EAST of Havana, Cuba, or in some other scenically tropical locale in that Caribbean island nation.

And on that day, suppose that it was a lovely sunny day, with pretty puffy white clouds floating around, the temperature was a balmy 82ºF, and a gentle breeze was blowing across the Gulf of Mexico onto the beach where you were located.

You’d probably say that it’d be an idyllic setting, for sure. Maybe even a picture perfect day on a lovely sandy-white beach!

Agree?

Now, suppose that you returned home and you said to your friends, “Wow! What a beautiful day it was on the beach in Cuba! It was a wonderfully lovely sunny day, clear skies, with a mild breeze, and 82ºF. It was absolutely PERFECT!”

And then… just as the words left your mouth, your friends started to call you a “communist sympathizer” simply because you told them how beautiful and perfect a day it was while you were on the beach in Cuba.

It’d be absurd, wouldn’t it?

And you’d think they were at least two bricks shy of a load – right?

In essence, that’s what some are doing to Bernie Sanders.

Simply because

Who’s Zoomin’ Who? Corporate/BIG MONEY Democrats Try To Abort Bernie’s Campaign.

Tom Perez, Democratic Party Chairman

It has occurred to me that Democratic Party Chairman Tom Perez and other Corporate/BIG MONEY Democrats such as Hillary Clinton, et al, are most likely the ones behind the anti-Bernie movement within the party -AND- were most likely the ones who changed debate participation rules mid-stream to anoint multi-billionaire Bloomberg to counter Bernie+Liz… a process through which omitted Tom Steyer, also a billionaire – albeit one with a conscience.

James Carville (RIGHT) with Bill Clinton in 1999 at the White House.

They (the C/BM Dems, and their corporate media masters/handlers, including Pete Buttigieg and Bill Clinton strategist James Carville) attempt to portray themselves as “centrists” or “moderates” and Bernie as “radical,” or “communist” (like Bloomberg did), ostensibly to court voters, especially including (they claim) fence-sitting Republicans, and undecided Democrats. But it’s “an inconvenient truth” that the very words they use also happens to be the Republican party line and anti-Democrat talking point.

Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) at his “Conversation with Cory” campaign event at the Nevada Partners Event Center February 24, 2019 in North Las Vegas.

Julian Castro speaks to media members in Miami, FL, June 27, 2019.

Naturally, Julian Castro, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Andrew Yang, and others, have loudly and justifiably complained about Tom’s hypocritically unilateral decision to

Biden whistles past Obama graveyard in New Hampshire Debate.

Yesterday evening’s Democratic Debate in New Hampshire, was the 8th of 12 in an ongoing series winnowing the party’s 2020 field of nominee candidates. The Friday night event which lasted from 8 – 11PM EST was held at St. Anselm College in Manchester, and was sponsored by ABC, WMUR, and Apple News.

Moderators George Stephanopoulos and David Muir of ABC, Linsey Davis, Adam Sexton, Monica Hernandez

Candidates former Vice President Joe Biden, former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, billionaire businessman/entrepreneur Tom Steyer, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, and businessman Andrew Yang rounded out the field.

https://twitter.com/538PollBot/status/1225977849829580801
“58% of Americans are dissatisfied with the size and influence of corporations in 2020 while 41% are satisfied, according to Gallup polling.”

Of course, most people are whistling past their own graveyards, whatever they may be – particularly since most Americans are only one paycheck, one illness, one job loss away from utter devastation and homelessness.

Candidate Biden was consistent throughout the debate, and never ceased to mention that he was with the former POTUS Obama. Clearly, he’s riding Barack’s coattails. Or, at least he’s trying to.

But, let’s look to history to see if we can discern anything of bearing for today.

From an earlier entry titled

Who will it be? Biden, Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg?

As the chart below shows, Elizabeth Warren is the Democratic candidate most likely to be chosen as the party’s Presidential nominee.

Warren and Buttigieg are the only two candidates who have an upward trajectory, while Biden and Sanders both show a downward trajectory, with Biden’s downward trajectory more pronounced than Bernie’s.

California Senator Kamala Harris has announced that she has dropped out of the race.

New Jersey Senator Cory Booker has announced that he won’t be in the 6th Democratic Debate December 19 debate at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, where PBS NewsHour and POLITICO will be the sponsors, with Moderators

Elizabeth Warren in Three Charts

MA Senator Elizabeth Warren -D

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren is steadily rising as the Democratic Party’s favored nominee for President.

As of October 1, 2019, aggregate polling averages from Real Clear Politics indicated that she was within 4.2 percentage points of tying with former VP Joe Biden in public approval to be the Democratic Party’s nominee for President.

Today’s aggregated average polling (10-2-19) shows that Warren has gained 1.4% points from yesterday, while Biden has slipped 1.1%.

Polling: 10-2-19

At this rate – given her candidacy’s current trajectory and trend, the current conditions, and barring unforeseen circumstances – by the end of the week, Elizabeth Warren will very likely tie with Joe Biden by the week’s end, and establish a commanding lead over Biden in popularity no later than 30 days (by the end of October 2019) early-to-mid January 2020.

Clearly, her message is increasingly, and rapidly resonating with voters.

In comparison, former Vice President Joe Biden’s ratings are largely flat-lined-to-declined, having started out at 29.0% on December 9, 2018, moved through a high of

Democratic Tea Leaves II

In a recent entry dated August 8, 2019, entitled Reading Democratic Tea Leaves I noted one, or two very fine, somewhat minor points overlooked by most pundits.

One, that like most other Democratic nominee candidates, former Vice President Joe Biden’s support has largely stagnated – even though it has been higher than most other candidates.

Vice President Joe Biden, Official Portrait 2013

And second, only two other candidates have had any SIGNIFICANT INCREASE in their level of support (as defined by polling) since the inception of their candidacy: South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg, and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren.

Since the announcement of his candidacy as the Democratic nominee for President, former Vice President Joe Biden’s support has gone from 29.0% to 30.8%. That’s an increase of only 6.21%.

October 26, 2016; South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg

In sharp contrast, “Mayor Pete” has gone from 1.0% and is now (August 10) at 6.5%, and has polled as high as 8.4% from April 20 through May 2. That’s an increase of 550% to date. If fluctuations are considered (low to high), that’s 740%.

Senator Warren, however, has gone from 5.3% and is now at 18.3% – her highest ever polling. That’s an increase, and fluctuation of 245.28%.

Senator Sanders started at

Reading Democratic Tea Leaves

The Democratic candidates’ field is as great for the upcoming 2020 General Election as the Republicans’ 2016 was – and, that may, or may not be a good sign.

The 2016 GOP clown car was populated by, among others, Donald Trump, Texas Senator Ted Cruz, Ohio Governor John Kasich, Florida Senator Marco Rubio, retired pediatric neurosurgeon Ben Carson, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee.

Aside from them, there were 10 others who withdrew before the primaries, so say it was a crowded field, was a gross understatement.

Now, it’s the Democrats’ turn.

The 20-candidate field has not yet been winnowed, per se – at least not by prospective primary voters.

Among them, is one of the last candidates to join that field was former Vice President Joe Biden, who had the advantage of name recognition among all voters, and potential voters.

Because of his name recognition advantage, Biden’s “popularity” within the massive field has led the next closest competitors – which are Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren – sometimes by double digits.

A notable game-changing exception was made following the first Democratic debate at The Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts in Miami, Florida, with NBC Moderators Savannah Guthrie, Lester Holt, Chuck Todd, Rachel Maddow and José Diaz-Balart on Night 2 (June 27) when California Senator Kamala Harris took former Vice President Joe Biden to task for his opposition as then-Senator from Delaware to busing to remedy and resolve the problem of segregation in California pubic schools.

Up until that time, Harris was polling 7.0%, while Biden was at 32.0%. After that night, support for Harris doubled to 15.2%, while Biden experienced a corresponding 6-point drop to 26.0%.

Since that high, Harris has continued to fall, and as of August 7 was polling at 8.3%.

Up until then, Sanders, the next-closest competitor, had fluctuated from 16.5% to 24.0% (his highest), to 14.0% (his lowest), and as of August 7, was polling at 15.8%.

Biden’s polling has been as high as

2020 Democratic Crystal Ball

Biden, Bernie, Warren, Buttegieg, Harris…

Let the winnowing begin!

Much is being made about former Vice President Joe Biden’s candidacy to be the Democratic nominee for President. Pundits point to polling showing him with narrowing leads over Senators Bernie Sanders (VT-I), and Elizabeth Warren (MA), respectively, all whom have double digit support, while South Bend, IN Mayor Pete Buttigieg, and California Senator Kamala Harris are contending runners-up, in that order, with single-digit support among those polled.

However, since Biden announced his candidacy – he was the last Democratic candidate to announce, and did so on April 25, 2019 – detractors within and without the party have noted several weaknesses of his, including his historic ham-handed touchy-feely behavior with women, his shifting position on abortion vis-à-vis the Hyde Amendment – which forbids the use of Federal funds to pay for abortion, except in cases to save the life of the woman, or in pregnancy arising from rape, and/or incest – and perhaps most ignobly, his handling as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the matter concerning Anita Hill, who testified under oath that Clarence Thomas, then a nominee for Supreme Court Justice to replace the seat being vacated by the impending retirement of Thurgood Marshall, had sexually harassed her while her supervisor as Assistant Secretary of Education in the Office for Civil Rights at the Department of Education, and then again as the Reagan-appointed Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, where he later fired her.

Critics have noted that other female witnesses, all interviewed by the FBI, were prepared to substantiate Hill’s testimony, but were not called because of a private compromise between Biden, as the Committee Chair, and Republicans, who feared their corroborating testimony would sink the 1991 George H.W. Bush nominee.

Additional criticism of Biden’s candidacy revolves around his ethnicity, and the increasing concerns that Anglo candidates – even in the Democratic party – historically have not had the best interests of racial/ethnic minority communities at heart.

Then, there’s the matter of his age – now 77 – which, if elected, would make him even older than the current White House occupant, who was aged 70 when elected. But, consider also that Bernie Sanders is one year older than Biden, and that the majority of POTUSes – 39 (86.66%) – have been aged 45 to 64, while 25 (55.55%) were aged 50 to 59.

Essentially, Biden, perhaps more so than any other Democratic candidate, represents

Was the Wall Street Bailout Socialist?

Having viewed an interview on MSNBC by Martin Bashir with Vermont U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, I was taken with a question Mr. Bashir asked Sen. Sanders toward the conclusion of the interview.

Martin Bashir: Mr. Sanders, how is it possible that people like Eric Cantor appear to encourage capitalism for everyone until a bank fails, and then socialism is acceptable because ‘we have to bail out the banks… we have to support them.’ But all of us – individual citizens in this society – well, if capitalism swipes us aside, we have to accept that?

Because it’s always good to be certain, I doubled checked a couple resources to be certain of what I was hearing.

Here’s what I found: