dagblog - Comments for "Feeding the Dinosaurs: The Death of Movement 2.0"

More accurately, Obama

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 07:56:54 +0000

In reply to Princeton U. historian Julian

More accurately, Obama hobbled the party structure on ascension and then tried to unhobble it quickly before his 2nd term ended. LBJ was in a whole different time, and Carter was relatively short term, up for a food fight. Hillary was ready to take the time and energy - pre-election she was willing but conditions were too chaotic. After was never to be.

Princeton U. historian Julian

artappraiser — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 04:44:33 +0000

In reply to Feeding the Dinosaurs: The Death of Movement 2.0

Princeton U. historian Julian E. Zeltizer ( the editor of a new book, The Presidency of Barack Obama: A First Historical Assessment..) addresses your topic here in detail:

Where Is Barack Obama? The former president’s reticence in the Trump era is only hurting his party

@ The Atlantic, March 10

scroll down to middle, starting with paragraph

When Republicans invested in state and local elections, with an eye toward controlling the redistricting process in 2011, the president did not fight back by leading an equally aggressive effort for his party.....

I note he is not blaming Obama exclusively, he does add this

Like most Democratic presidents before him, as the political scientist Daniel Gavin argued, he didn’t pay attention to the financial or electoral health for the party.

That was the question the

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 04 Feb 2018 12:31:45 +0000

In reply to Something Democrats should be

That was the question the article notes from 2010 when the GOP was beating up Dems on the bailout, Obamacare, et al - and they could only muster 300,000 calls to Congress after unilaterally disarming.

8 years later, it ain't got any better. Of course the Trump campaign spend is augmented greatly by the Russian dirty tricks spend. And still we don't respond, we just complain to Facebook and Twitter.

Something Democrats should be

artappraiser — Sun, 04 Feb 2018 06:59:55 +0000

In reply to Feeding the Dinosaurs: The Death of Movement 2.0

Something Democrats should be paying attention to: the Trump campaign spent $5.8 million in 2017 on digital advertising, almost 1/3 of its entire budget for the year. Was anyone countering that messaging?
— Tom Bonier (@tbonier) February 4, 2018

follow the links to an

artappraiser — Fri, 02 Feb 2018 00:22:21 +0000

In reply to Feeding the Dinosaurs: The Death of Movement 2.0

follow the retweets to end up at an interesting district-by-district a-nightmare-to-analyze thing on 2018:

Important perspective https://t.co/bTsCri0tGS
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) February 1, 2018

Thank goodness

rmrd0000 — Wed, 31 Jan 2018 01:37:01 +0000

In reply to Why are you unconcerned with

Thank goodness

Why are you unconcerned with

HSG — Wed, 31 Jan 2018 01:29:10 +0000

In reply to You are aware of the current

~~Why are you unconcerned with policies?~~ Oh I don't care.

You are aware of the current

rmrd0000 — Wed, 31 Jan 2018 00:27:29 +0000

In reply to Whose policies, if

You are aware of the current Constitutional crisis?

Whose policies, if

HSG — Wed, 31 Jan 2018 00:19:56 +0000

In reply to Hal, your purity standard

Whose policies, if implemented, - Obama's or Sanders' - would be better for the only community you care about?

On a secondary note, why are you almost completely unconcerned with policies? In the 1990s, the Clinton's policies did grievous harm to the only community you care about, yet you still support them. Why don't you care about policies?

Currently, we are in a

rmrd0000 — Tue, 30 Jan 2018 23:29:20 +0000

In reply to So you're saying that Obama

Currently, we are in a Constitutional crisis. So whatever faults Obama had and whatever infrastructure he didn’t leave, we need to be building today. I don’t see Sanders doing that. Sanders was/is not President and won’t be President. I love alternate world sci-fi, but I can’t expand on what Sanders would have done. It is likely we would be in a depression.