US Politics: Birthing Again

[GrimTuesday]

Wait, is Elizabeth Warren actually speaking to the Democratic Native American Caucus? Man, I actually like Warren quite a bit, but talk about an unforced error.

 

[Tywin et al.]

17 minutes ago, Guy Kilmore said:

My favorite is he criticized her for having the number of Covid deaths wrong at 150k because of the taping of her message.  Kind of like, oh yeah, right.....they are at 170k now.

Well the guy is consistent, he does always want credit for his bigly numbers.

[Fury Resurrected]

27 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said:

Wait, is Elizabeth Warren actually speaking to the Democratic Native American Caucus? Man, I actually like Warren quite a bit, but talk about an unforced error.

 

I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.

[Fez]

1 hour ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I suspect their internal polls may be showing weakness in those two states, and perhaps some hidden strength in WI that makes them not give up on it.

It would still seem like political malpractice to ignore them. If Biden wins MI and PA, then if he wins literally any other state (or the ME/NE combo; which there's a good chance of), then its over. There are still some Republicans who understand basic math, and I'd think they have to know if that if they throw in the towel on MI and PA they are all but giving up on winning the election legitimately. It doesn't matter how long the odds are, they have to compete for them. Unless they think there's some Clinton state that would be easier to pick off than holding either MI or PA, and I don't think there are any.  

[Fez]

Cindy McCain is speaking tonight at the DNC, narrating a video about John and Biden's decades long friendship and endorsing Biden.

I'm not necessarily surprised that she's speaking at the DNC, but I am a little surprised that the news didn't leak until now (I guess its easier when there's no travel plans to hide). It does make me wonder if there are any more Republicans that will speaking tomorrow or Thursday that we also haven't heard of.

[Tywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Fury Resurrected said:

I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.

On a different note, the world gets even better....

Quote

Patricia and Mark McCloskey, the St. Louis homeowners who pointed guns at protesters earlier this summer, are scheduled to speak at the Republican National Convention next week, an aide familiar told CNN on Monday.

News of the couple's expected appearance, first reported by the Washington Post, comes as Republicans are gearing up for an unorthodox convention, as part of efforts to energize voters during a pandemic and going into the last three months of the campaign. Democrats kicked off their party's national convention Monday in a night of programming headlined by former first lady Michelle Obama, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, among others.

 

A spokesman for Trump Victory and a Republican official confirmed to CNN later Monday that former Covington Catholic student Nick Sandmann, Andrew Pollack, the father of Parkland shooting victim Meadow Pollack, anti-abortion activist Abby Johnson, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem and Pennsylvania congressional candidate Sean Parnell will also be among the speakers at the Republican convention. The lineup, which is still being formed, was first reported by Breitbart News.

 

The McCloskeys drew national attention in late June after they were seen in a viral video brandishing guns outside their mansion at protesters walking on a private street en route to demonstrate outside the St. Louis mayor's residence. The Missouri couple was charged in July with unlawful use of a weapon, a class E felony.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/17/politics/patricia-mark-mccloskey-rnc-st-louis-couple-guns-protesters/index.html?fbclid=IwAR0B19BAWGxfyXrl08yc95kMOnud6LIPv2wVNNwKIsVjKanCWeYRPo6E9uM

#ResponsibleGunOwners

[TrackerNeil]

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

On a different note, the world gets even better....

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/17/politics/patricia-mark-mccloskey-rnc-st-louis-couple-guns-protesters/index.html?fbclid=IwAR0B19BAWGxfyXrl08yc95kMOnud6LIPv2wVNNwKIsVjKanCWeYRPo6E9uM

#ResponsibleGunOwners

Why did I not predict this? 

[Tywin et al.]

9 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

Why did I not predict this? 

If we're predicting things, Darren Wilson, come on down. 

[DanteGabriel]

2 hours ago, GrimTuesday said:

Wait, is Elizabeth Warren actually speaking to the Democratic Native American Caucus? Man, I actually like Warren quite a bit, but talk about an unforced error.

 

I'd assume she's trying to make amends after the big fuckup she had with the genetics test. Help me understand. Should she not speak to that caucus?

[Week]

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

If we're predicting things, Darren Wilson, come on down. 

A comedian tweeted that Brock Turner was another speaker at the RNC. It was not immediately clear whether it was true or not. That, friends, is the current RNC.

Eta- Warren has attempted to make amends. I can't speak to the efficacy of appropriateness, however I find her to be credible and honest - YMMV.

https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-joins-bipartisan-group-to-improve-va-outreach-to-native-american-veterans 

[TrackerNeil]

6 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

I'd assume she's trying to make amends after the big fuckup she had with the genetics test. Help me understand. Should she not speak to that caucus?

In politics, I accept that some things will be forever true:

1. Hillary Clinton is always wrong
2. The media will adopt a "both sides" narrative even if one side is Cthulhu
3. Liz Warren will never get past this issue no matter how unlikely she is to ever become president.

It's no coincidence that two of those three are about women. 

[DanteGabriel]

 

[The Anti-Targ]

7 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

I'd assume she's trying to make amends after the big fuckup she had with the genetics test. Help me understand. Should she not speak to that caucus?

If you are trying to make nice with a group of people some degree of reaching out and trying to engage is probably recommended. I hope she did that and was asked to be part of the caucus meeting and she's not just gate crashing.

Looks like the tweet in @DanteGabriel post confirms she was invited. So really move on, nothing to see here.

[DanteGabriel]

1 minute ago, The Anti-Targ said:

If you are trying to make nice with a group of people some degree of reaching out and trying to engage is probably recommended. I hope she did that and was asked to be part of the caucus meeting and she's not just gate crashing.

I think it takes a certain amount of desire to find fault to first assume that Warren was doing this without the invitation of that caucus. I should start keeping score to see how often the Most Pure posters here unintentionally mimic attack lines from right wing trolls.

[JGP]

1 hour ago, DanteGabriel said:

I'd assume she's trying to make amends after the big fuckup she had with the genetics test. Help me understand. Should she not speak to that caucus?

If she were to, say, give kind of a nod and bit of lip service -and- if the tribal structures in the US are similar to how they are implemented in Canada, ie: INAC [Indian Act] band councils that seem to work more with government than representing their people, I can't imagine it would be interpreted well by the overall communities and could possibly undermine further messaging afterward.    

That said, before moving on, if her intention is to make genuine redress I think she should: illustrate an understanding of the harm perpetrated, acknowledge she did so, and genuinely apologize... On a platform like that it's hard to imagine it wouldn't go a long way [but being white myself, I could be wrong] 

[The Anti-Targ]

1 minute ago, DanteGabriel said:

I think it takes a certain amount of desire to find fault to first assume that Warren was doing this without the invitation of that caucus. I should start keeping score to see how often the Most Pure posters here unintentionally mimic attack lines from right wing trolls.

I mean with some people its more in the realms of possibility that they would push their way into a conversation. But little as I know of Warren she does not present as the kind of person who would force her way in to white-splain to people why they should forgive and forget. 

[Lollygag]

Warren's been in talks with various tribal leaders since this all went down. It's making lemonade from lemons to turn the increased attention (albeit negative) from someone very prominent who owes you into real policy improvements.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/19/elizabeth-warren-apologizes-native-american-event-1468119

[Week]

7 minutes ago, JEORDHl said:

If she were to, say, give kind of a nod and bit of lip service -and- if the tribal structures in the US are similar to how they are implemented in Canada, ie: INAC [Indian Act] band councils that seem to work more with government than representing their people, I can't imagine it would be interpreted well by the overall communities and could possibly undermine further messaging afterward.    

That said, before moving on, if her intention is to make genuine redress I think she should: illustrate an understanding of the harm perpetrated, acknowledge she did so, and genuinely apologize... On a platform like that it's hard to imagine it wouldn't go a long way [but being white myself, I could be wrong] 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/19/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-native-american.html

https://www.npr.org/2019/02/01/690806434/warren-apologizes-to-cherokee-nation-for-dna-test

Quote

"Senator Warren has reached out to us and has apologized to the tribe," Hubbard said in a statement. "We are encouraged by this dialogue and understanding that being a Cherokee Nation tribal citizen is rooted in centuries of culture and laws not through DNA tests. We are encouraged by her action and hope that the slurs and mockery of tribal citizens and Indian history and heritage will now come to an end."

(Full disclosure: I voted for Warren)

 Seems genuine and a true effort to make amends. I understand that people may not forgive her - that's their right - we can still recognize trying to do the right thing after a serious, public mistake.

[Tywin et al.]

14 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

I'd assume she's trying to make amends after the big fuckup she had with the genetics test. Help me understand. Should she not speak to that caucus?

She loses with the racist right either way. If she turned the invite down they'd attack her for that too.

14 minutes ago, Week said:

A comedian tweeted that Brock Turner was another speaker at the RNC. It was not immediately clear whether it was true or not. That, friends, is the current RNC.

GOP Jesus is okay with this.

[GrimTuesday]

8 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

I'd assume she's trying to make amends after the big fuckup she had with the genetics test. Help me understand. Should she not speak to that caucus?

For me, it's more about optics. I think that Warren has terrible instincts (or employs people with terrible instincts) and don't think that this is a good look. I never acted like she was gatecrashing, but hoping up on a platform for Native American Democrats after being made to look like an idiot on that issue recently looks bad.

I said it in my original post, I like Warren a lot, I think she is the second best progressive in the Senate, but it feels like she makes a lot of unforced errors that gives our opposition more fuel for the fire.