Promises, Promises

I'm baaaaaaaaaaack. Probably just for this one "essay." Yea, some of you may recall hearing that one before.

Despite moseying off a few months back, I've pretty regularly been reading essays and comments here and occasionally upvoting (or alternatively gnashing my teeth at) comments.

Rather than belaboring this and/or that, I'll just cut to the chase.

This is what I consider the best discussion on the democratic primary that I've come across. It was just sooo spot on imo that I wanted to share it with you good folks:

One more thing.... It looks like Politico has declared our ol' pal Markos dead:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/07/17/democratic-netroots-m...

Cheers!

Share
up
19 users have voted.

Comments

It's very significant that they declared netroots Nation dead, but as usual they get it wrong.
They say that the GOS started it's decline in 2008.
In fact, by rankings, DKos peaked in 2015. It's immense decline happened because of Markos rejecting Sanders (an act that Politico only gives two sentences to).

up
21 users have voted.
Wally's picture

@gjohnsit

I'm not so sure influence can be completely measured by rankings.

The author of the article Bill Scher is gauging his assessment on how many candidates (all of them) showed up at the Kos Networks gathering right before the 2008 primary and now when only 4 of a coupla dozen wanted to engage with him and his denizens.

Scher's analysis of the Clinton-Obama rift also lends some interesting history to the discussion about Clinton/Obama factionalism in another current essay here on C99%.

up
6 users have voted.

@Wally
I just looked at who attended.
NN has been declining in political influence since 2008.

So there are two ways it's "decline" can be measured.

up
9 users have voted.

@gjohnsit

netroots because netroots rejected Sanders? I don't think that. Most current Democratic hopefuls very much wanted people to reject Sanders in 2015. However I agree that most Democratic hopefuls no longer show up at netroots because of Sanders and 2015.

What happened then? But first, what did not happen then? Hillary did not show up, claiming a prior commitment.

Netroots' dates are set a year in advance, so a prior commitment is unlikely. Hillary's prior commitment turned out to be an Arkansas Democratic Party annual fundraiser. Arkansas. Democratic. Annual. So, my first question is, who sets the date of an annual fundraiser more than a year in advance? Second, did Hillary ask her fellow Arkansas Democrats, whom her husband had lead as Governor and President, for a date that conflicted with netroots? If so, why? If not, did she see the conflict with netroots and ask, a year ahead of time for them to change the date of their annual fundraiser? If not, why not? Passing that...we're back to what did happen?

As always, Netroots invited all Democratic Presidential hopefuls to attend. As stated, Hillary did not show up. Her main competitor, did, however, show up. And shortly after being introduced by Markos, Sanders was interrupted by those purporting to represent Black Lives Matter, an organization whose initial funding had come from Hillary fan, George Soros.

And what did Markos do to protect his invited guest and give him the time to speak that was the reason for both netroot's invitation and Sanders' presence? Nothing. Markos left Sanders twisting slowly, slowly in the wind.

For many, seeing this on TV was a first impression of Sanders, who then lagged badly in name recognition. So, Sanders' campaign took a hit only a couple of months into its official existence. Because Sanders show up at netroots and got sandbagged and Markos was either complicit from the jump or did nothing to help Sanders, like calling for security to escort out those interrupting Markos's invited guest speaker.

Regardless of whether or not a Democratic Presidential hopeful was gleeful when Sanders got sandbagged, why would any Presidential hopeful risk anything like that happening when he or she got up to speak? The risk is too great. Staying within the controlled environments of one's own rallies and the orchestrated Presidential debates is far more prudent and, thanks to the "miracle of television," reaches as many or more people as would speaking at netroots.

IMO, the article's failure to mention the 2015 debacle takes away a lot from the author's cred.

up
17 users have voted.
Azazello's picture

@HenryAWallace
Sanders has said that his reception at a rally at the Phoenix Convention Center later that same day was what convinced the campaign that they were viable.
So maybe his weekend in Phoenix was a net positive despite the Netroots ambush.

up
8 users have voted.

@Azazello

the topic was why many Democratic Presidential hopefuls have stopped going to netroots, when their attendance used to be almost 100%.

Also, while Bernie may have decided his campaign was viable, in the sense of sustainable, there is a theory that he did not enter the 2016 primary race to win it because he didn't think he had a prayer of winning it. There was a NYT article to that effect. While I do not believe much that I read in the NYT anymore, I found that article credible because it answered a number of questions that I had at the start of Bernie's 2016 primary campaign. Therefore, while I did not buy the article 100%, I found it at least plausible that Bernie entered the race thinking he'd never win it.

This essay linked the article and many of the replies to the essay agree or disagree with the basic premise: https://caucus99percent.com/content/my-inner-journey-sanders-date-phase-2

up
7 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@HenryAWallace

n fact, by rankings, DKos peaked in 2015. It's immense decline happened because of Markos rejecting Sanders (an act that Politico only gives two sentences to).

He is referring to the mass banning and people leaving during the primary after kos said that no untruthful criticism of Herheinous was allowed. After that the kids decided that even truthful criticism of her was right wing talking points and they grouped up in roving gangs to HR people and get them banned. This is still happening there when anyone doesn't agree that Russia Russia Russia cost Her the election. This is when the ranking for DK started its downward slide into the basement where it now dwells.

up
12 users have voted.

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

CS in AZ's picture

@HenryAWallace

Arizona. He was pretending to be too afraid of setting foot anywhere in the state.

https://Netroots-Nation-is-going-to-Arizona-Daily-Kos-is-not

It was actually Adam B (who hates Bernie, and pretended to have a tiff with kos over NN deciding to come to Arizona) who set up the entire scene; NN invited Bernie under false pretenses (that he was to give a talk about immigration) and then allowed him to be totally shut down by those “activists” — all to drive the narrative that “Bernie had a problem with black people.” That little act infuriated me, even more than I already was about kos’s stupid boycott.

Other candidates would be well advised to stay away, IMO.

up
13 users have voted.

@CS in AZ A D Kos luminary I gather? Who is he or she and where does he or she come from?

And, speaking of TOP, does anyone know whatever happened to the long ago banned from TOP Toquedeville?

up
2 users have voted.

Nastarana

CS in AZ's picture

@Nastarana

https://www.dailykos.com/user/Adam%20B

I know nothing more about him, except what I observed of his actions during the NN 2015 fiasco and his postings on dkos.

up
2 users have voted.

@CS in AZ Marcos's hitman.

"If you need legal advice, get a lawyer." OOOH, dontcha jest loove that tough guy talk. Now, if you need a digital assassin, OTOH, Mr. AdamB is available.

up
1 user has voted.

Nastarana

@gjohnsit

It went south in September 2006 when Bill Clinton brought all of the lefty bloggers to his Harlem office for lunch. He dispersed the cash, showed them the dollar signs on the wall, and they all fell in line and sold us out ever after.

Slowly but surely, it got worse and worse until it blew up in 2015

up
8 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

lotlizard's picture

(The Politico article talks about how in 2006 the “blogosphere” helped Lamont, now governor of Connecticut, beat Joe Lieberman for Senate in the Dem primary but was unable prevent a loss to “Kissyface” in the general.)

up
4 users have voted.

@lotlizard

about a month or so ago, I began noticing a lot of favorable press coverage of Warren. With that, I think she has a better shot than Biden.

For one, thing, Warren is not weighed down by a long, crappy Senate record, as is Biden. She even gets credit, unjustly, IMO, for the Consumer Protection Agency and every on camera speech she's ever made, as though speeches were legislative acts that improved people's lives, rather than bloviating applause lines for TV camera. On the other hand, African Americans seem to be supporting Biden, as they did Hillary, despite several racist remarks made by him being publicized lately; and she does have the "Pochantas"/affirmative action issue.

For another thing, Warren is not tied to the Obama administration in the same way that Biden is. That may help Biden with blacks, but hurts him with at least a segment of Democratic leftists. As far as leftists, none of them want much to do with a President Biden; however, leftists are divided as to whether is stealth establishment. And, she is a woman, which Biden obviously is not. Plus, AFAIK, she hasn't done anything physically inappropriate with anyone of any age or gender.

up
5 users have voted.
Wally's picture

@HenryAWallace

I think left-of-center folks need to start really considering Warren's shortcomings.

dkmich has been doing a pretty, pretty good job of pointing them out here.

This article does a very thorough job of it re the issues but there's also the matter of how she presents herself which I, at least, feel is very ineffective and susceptible to successful Trump attacks: https://www.eartheer.org/post/is-elizabeth-warren-a-progressive

The deal breakers for me (I supported Draft Warren way back when) have been her voting twice to increase Trump's already increased military budgets and her standing up to enthusiastically clap at Trump's State of the Union when he railed that the US would never have socialism. Only Bernie sat and didn't clap as far as I saw.

Cheers.

up
12 users have voted.
Shahryar's picture

@Wally

Trump probably won't debate. Instead he hold Nuremberg style rallies where he says "Pocahontas" a lot.

That's a self-inflicted wound. Besides, she's a weak Republican. That can't help.

up
6 users have voted.
Wally's picture

@Shahryar

It's difficult to even imagine there not being presidential debates.

He might take that tact for Bernie. But I think he'll be eager to go full Rowdy Roddy Piper on anyone else.

up
2 users have voted.
lotlizard's picture

@Wally

up
1 user has voted.