January 20, 2020

Is this gender-related? The NYT endorses both Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren.

I like the illustration, but this is semi-nuts:



The nice illustration is by Jules Julien. It's even better if you go to the article page, here.

If Kamala Harris were still in the race, would the Times have picked 3?

Let's read:
On the Democratic side, an essential debate is underway between two visions that may define the future of the party and perhaps the nation. Some in the party view President Trump as an aberration and believe that a return to a more sensible America is possible. Then there are those who believe that President Trump was the product of political and economic systems so rotten that they must be replaced....

Democrats must decide which of their two models would be most compelling for the American people and best suited for repairing the Republic.... The history of the editorial board would suggest that we would side squarely with the candidate with a more traditional approach to pushing the nation forward, within the realities of a constitutional framework and a multiparty country....

[But now b]oth the radical and the realist models warrant serious consideration.... That’s why we’re endorsing the most effective advocates for each approach. They are Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar.....
You decide if you want to go realist or radical, and the Times has picked the best realist and the best radical. This is similar to choosing the best Democrat and the best Republican when there are active primaries in both parties.

Anyway, the question becomes why Warren over Sanders? The NYT observes that Sanders is 79 (Warren is 70) and he just had a heart attack. But it's not just that. The Times says he's "overly rigid, untested and divisive." Meanwhile, "Senator Warren is a gifted storyteller." Oh, yes, I remember the story of how Bernie told her a woman can't be President and the story of how she is a person of color. But the Times means:
She speaks elegantly of how the economic system is rigged against all but the wealthiest Americans... In her hands, that story has the passion of a convert, a longtime Republican from Oklahoma and a middle-class family, whose work studying economic realities left her increasingly worried about the future of the country....
How do we know Warren was "a longtime Republican"? I agree it's a good story!

I'm skipping over a lot, but here's the part where the Times has a reservation (sorry, I just stumbled into that word, but I do see the humor potential):
In her primary campaign...  she has shown some questionable political instincts. She sometimes sounds like a candidate who sees a universe of us-versus-thems, who, in the general election, would be going up against a president who has already divided America into his own version of them and us.... The senator talks more about bringing together Democrats, Republicans and independents behind her proposals, often leaning on anecdotes about her conservative brothers to do so....
For those who opt for moderation, why is Amy Klobuchar the one? The Times ticks through the alternatives. Pete Buttigieg is young. Andrew Yang has no governmental experience. Bloomberg is "the candidate in the race with the clearest track record of governing," but he's not campaigning in the normal way. Joe Biden is "prone to verbal stumbles," and he just "tinkers at the edges of issues," and talks about "merely restoring the status quo." So: Amy!
The senator from Minnesota is the very definition of Midwestern charisma, grit and sticktoitiveness. Her lengthy tenure in the Senate and bipartisan credentials would make her a deal maker (a real one) and uniter for the wings of the party — and perhaps the nation.... Her record shows that she is confident and thoughtful, and she reacts to data — what you’d want in a crisis....
I think the NYT really wants Amy Klobuchar to be the one. And you know me: I said it in December 2018: "Why aren't the Democratic candidates better? I'm just going to be for Amy Klobuchar."

Here's how the NYT ends its dual endorsement:
Democrats would be smart to recognize that Mr. Trump’s vision for America’s future is shared by many millions of Americans. Any hope of restoring unity in the country will require modesty, a willingness to compromise and the support of the many demographics that make up the Democratic coalition....

There will be those dissatisfied that this page is not throwing its weight behind a single candidate, favoring centrists or progressives. But it’s a fight the party itself has been itching to have... the very purpose of primaries...

May the best woman win.
I think there's a dual endorsement here not because there are 2 women left and the NYT wants a woman, as if there's no way to distinguish them because there's only one factor, gender. I think the NYT wants to stand back for a while and let voters have their time with the radical option and get rid of one of the radicals (Bernie, they hope), and later when things settle down, they'll let us know that the realist is better suited to go up against Trump. They hope to give Amy some traction in the meantime, and if it comes down, in the end, to Elizabeth and Amy, they'll advise Democrats to pick Amy.

But chances are, it will boil down to Biden and Bernie, and if it does, that's when we'll know how dedicated the Times is to the realist side of the Democratic Party. They'll embrace Biden.

173 comments:

readering said...

I could live with either one. But doubt both still around for California in March.

Oso Negro said...

The single executive is so male-centric. So phallic. Why not a co-vaginate Presidency for contemporary times? Neither woman needs to lose.

Birches said...

Wow. Trump's totally going to win reelection and the NYT knows it too.

Sharc 65 said...

No, it's because they're women.

Kevin said...

The NYT cannot choose just one woman.

So the NYT suggests a political three-way.

Sharc 65 said...

I'm a Midwesterner. Klobuchar has negative charisma. Less than a turnip.

henry said...

Two half-wits equal one candidate?

Oso Negro said...

Like a pair of ovaries, with alternating progressive ova sliding down the Fallopian tubes of America hoping for woke insemination but ending in a bloody mess?

Shouting Thomas said...

Then there are those who believe that President Trump was the product of political and economic systems so rotten that they must be replaced....

Tiresome. Democrats losing is not an existential crisis.

rehajm said...

But chances are, it will boil down to Biden and Bernie

I'm not buying this line of logic this time around. The polls for the primaries are all over the place. All it takes it a decent showing on one state fora candidate to declare momentum and keep going. There's two candidates with essentially unlimited budgets and no incentive to drop out early.

There's a candidate on the sidelines slowly biding her time. Her time.

NYT gets the ball rolling to get the electorate thinking about gender with what they have left to work with...

Temujin said...

Such 1619 thinking. If only there had been a black woman running...And on MLK Day they could have made their perfect choice.

Cruel world.

Clyde said...

So for the NY Times Intersectionality Prize, Women>Gay. Tulsi Gabbard is a woman of color. Why is the NY Times so racist and homophobic?

Leland said...

The NYT concludes that women are all alike.

David Begley said...

They look like aliens from Mars.

Browndog said...

When all the liberals and the media tell me that women are inherently better at governing I'll assume the exact opposite is true.

Bob Boyd said...

Look at the expression on Klobuchar's face.
She looks like she's watching someone eat their salad with a comb.

clint said...

"Then there are those who believe that President Trump was the product of political and economic systems so rotten that they must be replaced...."

Wait, what?

Are they suggesting that Donald Trump is a corrupt Washington insider? That doesn't seem likely.

Or... what are the "political and economic systems so rotten..." -- the Electoral College? The American electorate?

Anyone have a clue what they mean?

stevew said...

What if the voters aren't deciding based on the criteria the NYT favors? Who cares how eloquently Liz Warren speaks about anything if she thought to be lying and embellishing most of the time? What if a confident and thoughtful Amy Klobuchar is understood by the voters to be lacking in leadership ability and vision?

henry said...

clint - Anyone have a clue what they mean?

they mean we are not worthy of their rule. thus we must pay for not anointing them.

Tommy Duncan said...

"Senator Warren is a gifted storyteller."

"The senator from Minnesota is the very definition of Midwestern charisma..."


Well then, now we know what qualities are needed to lead and represent the most powerful nation in the world: A good President is an effective liar with a Minnesota accent who can eat a salad with a comb.

Kevin said...

Or... what are the "political and economic systems so rotten..." -- the Electoral College? The American electorate?

Anyone have a clue what they mean?


Capitalism & Democracy.

Those have always been the stumbling blocks to the socialist utopia.

D. said...

Bloomberg is the soda jerk.

donald said...

And by most of the time Clint, you mean a constant barrage of non stop lying.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Wow NYT picks the two worst candidates left on the stage, over-entitled meangirl Amy and the serial fabricator Pocahontas. Guuuurl Power!!!

Neither one will win Iowa or NH or SC. Neither one will be left standing anywhere near the convention. Neither one has advocates that will put them on a ticket when it goes to the 3rd ballot. Why this empty gesture of an "endorsement" now, NYT?

Question: why is OK for the president to ask the FBI/DOJ/CIA to dig up dirt on his political rival?

Beasts of England said...

Where’s Steve Harvey when you really need him?

David Begley said...

“best suited for repairing the Republic....”

In the opinion of the NYT. I’d say a majority of Americans think Trump is fixing things and want more Trump. Dishwasher soap! China!

narciso said...

when your candidate doesn't win, existential crisis,

Matt said...

Warren is delusional, hypocritical trash.

Perfect for this degenerate society.

#HonkHonk

Tommy Duncan said...

If Biden or Sanders win the nomination they'll need a running mate who can check at least two of these boxes:
--Identifies as female during the campaign
--Is gay or at least non-binary
--Is a minority, preferably black
--Is a socialist

What would Warren or Klobuchar need as a VP candidate?

Bay Area Guy said...

"If Kamala Harris were still in the race, would the Times have picked 3?"

I read this as:

If Kamala Harris were still in the BED, would the Times have picked a 3-some?

wendybar said...

BAHHAHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHHAHHAHAHAH!!!

Fernandistein said...

Those pictures make them look like they're running low on oxygen.

America’s Politico said...

Prof:

I am on record saying that Warren is the next POTUS. I stake my entire two-decade long political consultancy. Once she is the POTUS, I will retire and move to Dane county (already thinking of buying a property around Madison). Trump is going to lose all 50 states. And, GOP will lose the Senate. Warren will have WH, Senate, and House at her back. So, sky's the limit!

The big question remains, who will be Warren's VP - or the next VPOTUS? Choices are as follows:

1. J. Castro - Warren needs Hispanics to vote for her. So, he gets a big shot.
2. A governor with record and who will go with Warren wants - So, governors from WA, NM, CO, and MT are in the mix.

That's all folks.

Cheers,
Raj

John henry said...

Pdjt just announced that the next aircraft carrier will be named the USS Doris Miller.

Who was Miller? He was a mess an (kind of permanent kp as a regular job). At pearl harbor he grabbed a machine gun and fired at Japanese planes, earning a Navy Cross.

Oh yeah, he was black.

That is some world class racism by pdjt.

If he wanted to name an important ship after a black man why not AL Sharpton, Dingell, Dinkins or some other famous black politician? Naming it after some lowly enlisted man nobody has ever heard of is a slap in the face of the black community.

Shame on the Donald!!

(note that the last 2 paras were meant as sarcasm)

John Henry

MartyH said...

If Trump is evil incarnate, then the question should be, who is most electable? The Midwest was where Trump sealed his victory; they need to nominate someone who can win Ohio. Who has the best shot at that? That's who you should endorse.

Danno said...

Looking at the bluish tone of the pics, I can only surmise the Dems are going for the Smurf vote, bigly.

Mattman26 said...

Biden hardest hit, no?

Fernandistein said...

Or... what are the "political and economic systems so rotten..." -- the Electoral College? The American electorate?

It doesn't matter because the original statement was meaningless: "Then there are those who believe that..."; one can always find some "those people" who believe just about anything.

David Begley said...

I can’t take any of these Dems seriously. They are all clowns and losers.

I also can’t take this impeachment seriously either.

M Jordan said...

Long post for a dying cultural institution: the newspaper endorsement. It means NOTHING. In 2016 Hillary Clinton got 500 newspaper endorsements, Donald Trump 28 (wikipedia). “Not Donald Trump” got more than Donald ... 30.

530 to 28. Who won?

Browndog said...

Pdjt just announced that the next aircraft carrier will be named the USS Doris Miller.

Politically correct pandering. Trump didn't name the ship, the navy did.

Should Doris Miller be honored, and maybe have a ship named after him?

He was. This is the 2nd ship bearing his name.

JPS said...

America's Politico:

I know I'm asking a question whose answer you'll deem obvious one way or another, but I confess I don't know which: Is your comment at 7:32 satire?

(Subquestion: Has Laslo adopted a new persona, the veteran political consultant who foresees Elizabeth Warren winning West Virginia against Donald Trump?)

rhhardin said...

The intellectual idiocy of the left is best represented by women.

Skeptical Voter said...

If those are the photos/drawings of Warren and Klobuchar used in the NYT article, it's clear that The Gray Lady likes gray ladies.

And I agree that Liawatha is a "gifted story teller".

Bay Area Guy said...

The NYT has been grabbed by the political pussy.

Gusty Winds said...

The photo is PERFECT!! It is a good representation of the oxygen being sucked out of me every time I hear either of them spew their bullshit.

gilbar said...

this one is fun!
"Her lengthy tenure in the Senate and bipartisan credentials"


lengthy tenure == Thirteen Years, just STARTING her third term
How many US Senators have SHORTER tenures? do ANY US Senators Have Shorter Tenures?
I guess, Mitt, Sally, and Kirsten??

bipartisan credentials ???
What the??
I couldn't think, of ANY; so i did a amy klobuchar bipartisan credentials search on duckduckgo

The top two items were:
THIS NYT's article
Amy's WEBSITE

the NEXT 3, were ALSO from Amy's website
the Next 2, were back to the same NYT's article
finally, we came to one that wasn't hers, Or the NYT... It was Wikipedia

it had, ONE sentence in it with the word bipartisan... That sentence was:
In February 2017 she called for an independent, bipartisan commission to investigate ties between Russia and President Donald Trump

mikee said...

I, for one, am just glad that Hillary Clinton will never, ever, be President of the United States. And her second X chromosome has nothing to do with that joy.

I am also certain that I will be just as glad neither of these Democrats will be President, ever, either.

Larry J said...

Shouting Thomas said...

Then there are those who believe that President Trump was the product of political and economic systems so rotten that they must be replaced....

Tiresome. Democrats losing is not an existential crisis.


But his putting two conservatives on the supreme court and appointing over 100 to lower courts is a problem for the left. Add to that the exposure of the Deep State - once the mutterings of fevered conspiracy theorists but now proven fact - along with exposing the "DC Family Plan" corruption (hardly limited to the Bidens) is an existential crisis.

bleh said...

Being the only “woman of color” on the faculty of Harvard Law was another good story.

Fernandistein said...

The NYeT is meddling in U.S. elections.

Which reminds me, Sputnik News is on
http://icecast-ruvr.cdnvideo.ru:80/rian.voiceeng
and it's like rilly boring.

walter said...

Power to the...
It's high time.
They want it.

tcrosse said...

"The senator from Minnesota is the very definition of Midwestern charisma..."

It's that irresistible Minnesota charisma which propelled Hubert Humphrey, Harold Stassen, and Walter Mondale to the White House.

Bay Area Guy said...

When you're a big time international newspaper, they let you do what you want. You can grab 'em by the headline......

Krumhorn said...

When you get down to it, the NYT picked the best of a distressingly poor lot. I still think that Bloomberg is the best Dem choice to run against Trump, and he may well have a respectable shot at it as a last minute choice to coalesce around after more leftie blood-letting (and hair-pulling). But they couldn’t pick him at this stage. That will come later.

- Krumhorn

Susan said...

It will be interesting to see how they react to Ivanka Trump becoming the ACTUAL first female president in a few years. Females won't be so interchangeable then I'd bet.

Beasts of England said...

The New York Times chooses Martin Luther King day to tell minority Democrat candidates to sit in the back of the bus.

Lyle said...

They even framed Warren to the right of Klobuchar.

tcrosse said...

And the Poison Chalice goes to....

tcrosse said...

They can both campaign 'til they're blue in the face. Neither will ever be President.

walter said...

tcrosse said...charisma which propelled Hubert Humphrey, Harold Stassen, and Walter Mondale to the White House.
--
And "aggressively normal" Scott Walker

Sebastian said...

"this is semi-nuts"

If they had picked just one, they would have been completely nuts?

"a return to a more sensible America is possible."

Like, with lower growth and higher unemployment.

"The history of the editorial board would suggest that we would side squarely with the candidate with a more traditional approach to pushing the nation forward"

But then, the NYT has gone all-out prog 24/7.

"within the realities of a constitutional framework "

Hey progs, in what sense is the living Constitution a "reality," and why stay within the confines of a racist document that is, like, more than 100 years old?

"Senator Warren is a gifted storyteller."

Now that's funny. Yes, she makes up stories. Gifted?

"She speaks elegantly"

Wait, I get that progs like her politics, but "elegantly"?

"how the economic system is rigged against all but the wealthiest Americans"

Sorry, progs, Trump has that covered.

"that story has the passion of a convert, a longtime Republican from Oklahoma and a middle-class family"

OMFG. One of the many stories she giftedly told, or maybe not. But wait, wasn't her family lower middle class and Native American or something?

"she has shown some questionable political instincts. She sometimes sounds like a candidate who sees a universe of us-versus-thems"

But the NYT's own vilification of Trump and his supporters is not us-versus-them?

"For those who opt for moderation, why is Amy Klobuchar the one?"

Because of the Althouses of America. Amy is a woman who can fake being "serious." What else does Althouse need to rationalize her next vote?

"The senator from Minnesota is the very definition of Midwestern charisma, grit and sticktoitiveness. Her lengthy tenure in the Senate and bipartisan credentials would make her a deal maker (a real one) and uniter for the wings of the party — and perhaps the nation.... Her record shows that she is confident and thoughtful, and she reacts to data"

See, that's how they feed Althouse's need for rationalization.

"I'm just going to be for Amy Klobuchar."

Yes, we remember that policy analysis. It nicely articulated the desirable direction for the country.

"Democrats would be smart to recognize that Mr. Trump’s vision for America’s future is shared by many millions of Americans. Any hope of restoring unity in the country will require modesty, a willingness to compromise"

That's right! Millions of America share Trump's vision of peace and prosperity, putting American first with foe and friend, limiting illegal immigration, appointing conservative judges, and resisting the deep-state attack non the political system. It's funny, though, to see the NYT speak of modesty. What "compromises" with Republicans do they favor?

"They hope to give Amy some traction in the meantime, and if it comes down, in the end ,to Elizabeth and Amy, they'll advise Democrats to pick Amy."

Sure. Unless the Althouses of America invent some reasons to swing toward Liz.

J. Farmer said...

The images remind me of the ones you would see in those Magic Eye stereogram books that were popular in the 90s.

Tina Trent said...

If I was a democrat cis-ladysexual, I might be insulted by the galaxy of insults built into that endorsement. "Two for the price of one" -- "women can't stand on their own two feet" -- "girls and NYT editorial board members are bad at math."

What were they thinking?

gilbar said...

tcrosse said...
And the Poison Chalice goes to....


no! No! NO! look, it's So simple, that I could say it:
The pellet with the poison, is in the vessel with the pestle
The Chalice from the Palace, has the brew that is true

Big Mike said...

If Kamala Harris were still in the race, would the Times have picked 3?

Nope. Kamala Harris all by her lonesome. But she’s gone and hardly anyone cares. Memo to the New York Times, there are 49 states where the people want no part of being like California.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Warren is a fascist.
Forced government controlled heath care is the definition of FASCISM. Mussolini would approve.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Heh

Had to make em' purple and blue - they are both lilly white.

gilbar said...

Forced government controlled heath care is the definition of FASCISM. Mussolini would approve.

so would Bismarck

Michael K said...

"Then there are those who believe that President Trump was the product of political and economic systems so rotten that they must be replaced...."

Yes he was. That's why America threw a brick through the window of the corrupt ruling class, of which those two are members.

Gunner said...

Ha Ha! Steyer is such a joke that they do not even mention him.

Gahrie said...

We all know that the NYTimes has picked the Democrat in every election going back at least as far as Kennedy...right?

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

when it comes to radicals - not a lot of daylight between Bernie and Warren.

rehajm said...

It's a bit early for newspaper endorsements innit? Perhaps they know the two they want are losers and will pick some more later...

John henry said...

Brown dog,

You are right, the Navy picks the name. But, especially for a major ship like a CVA the president has a lot of input. Did he suggest the name? Maybe, maybe not but what does that matter? Pdjt gets credit for it.

How many black votes do you think this garners him?

John Henry

Angle-Dyne, Servant of Ugliness said...

"Democrats would be smart to recognize that Mr. Trump’s vision for America’s future is shared by many millions of Americans.

Any hope of restoring unity in the country will require modesty, a willingness to compromise and the support of the many demographics that make up the Democratic coalition — young and old, in red states and blue, black and brown and white. For Senator Klobuchar, that’s acknowledging the depth of the nation’s dysfunction."


Bit of a muddle here, eh? That first and last sentences above appear to be a recognition that compromise with deplorables is necessary to "restor[e] unity". (Gee, ya think?). But that point is ignored in the rest of the passage, the object of the necessary unifying now referring only to the diverse demographics of the Dem coalition.

The clunky switcheroos in a way do serve the purpose of the editorialists, when one considers that Klobuchar (that modest moderate centrist realist sensible sane non-radical "boring" candidate) is no different from her allegedly more radical peers in her willingness to demonize half the country, stooping to the same incendiary, demagoguing (and idiotic) rhetoric about their opponent and his supporters.

Guess it's illustrative of how far gone the Dems are that a candidate who indulges in insane rhetoric can be marketed as the sensible moderate who'll return us to normal. (It's more disturbing that people who should know better accept her as such.)

lgv said...

Blogger Big Mike said...
If Kamala Harris were still in the race, would the Times have picked 3?

Nope. Kamala Harris all by her lonesome. But she’s gone and hardly anyone cares. Memo to the New York Times, there are 49 states where the people want no part of being like California.

1/20/20, 8:41 AM



Exactly what I thought, too. Harris would have been the lone endorsement. She checks another box.

And yes, it is definitely because they are women. Why else would Klobuchar get an endorsement from the Times?

John henry said...

Here's a list of cvas since 1965. Only 1 named after a military man. Doris Miller will be the second.

All the rest named for politicians. (perhaps ambiguous in the case of Washington and Eisenhower)

CVA-66: America(1965-2005);,
later CV-66
CVA-67: John F. Kennedy (1968-____), later CV-67

CVAN-68: Nimitz(1975-____),
later CVN-68
CVN-69: Dwight D. Eisenhower(1977-____)
CVN-70: Carl Vinson (1982-____)
CVN-71: Theodore Roosevelt (1986-____)
CVN-72: Abraham Lincoln(1989-____)
CVN-73: George Washington(1992-____)
CVN-74: John C. Stennis (1995-____)
CVN-75: Harry S. Truman (1998-____)
CVN-76: Ronald Reagan (2003-____)
CVN-77: George H.W. Bush (2009-____)
CVN-78: Gerald R. Ford (under construction)

Birches said...

Ugh, Raj has one thing right that I hadn't thought about until now....Jared Polis, CO's governor, will probably be on the shortlist for most VP slots. He's Mayor Pete with experience.

Quaestor said...

The nice illustration is by Jules Julien.

Don't know if I like his photoshoppery. Too off-the-shelf-fx for my tastes.

But I like his fries.

Mmmmmm... Curvy.

wendybar said...

The NYTimes hasn't endorsed a Republican since at least 1960, so why should we care??? https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2943053655738705&set=gm.658034201608174&type=3&theater

rehajm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rehajm said...

C'mon girls- Try pushing them together to make one good one!!!

tcrosse said...

Bobby Vinton had it all figured out in 1963

tcrosse said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
narciso said...


https://twitter.com/peterjhasson/status/1219130715599790080

Sarah Rolph said...

Isn't Tulsi Gabbard still in the race?

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Hillary branded Tulis a Russian asset -> Massive numbers of loyal leftwing Maddow-brains clicked-in like stepford wife robots. Yes master!

Howard said...

The scold and no more wire hangers. The New York times is already conceding the election to Trump

Char Char Binks said...

Endorsement bullshit. Pick one, or get off the pot.

Darrell said...

Nice illustration. Photo tracing.

You decide.

Nonapod said...

Let's look into the actual policy positions of who NYT deems a the "realist".

Amy Klobuchar wants free comunity college for everyone. So far I haven't seen anything to suggest how that would actually be paid for other than some vague allusion to closing a tax loophole?

She's an advocate for boosting teachers pay. I have a close friend who is a highschool band teacher that makes around $90k + crazy good benefits and summers off. He seems to be doing fine, but what do I know? Maybe he really needs to be making 6 figures. How this increase in pay is going to be paid for seems to be some combination of Federal and State money. So more taxes.

She wants to eliminate the Electoral College... of course.

She wants to end new leasing of federal land for oil drilling and end offshore drilling. So I assume she's not a fan of this amazing new (largely) independence we've achieved from Middle Eastern oil?

She wants to pay farmers for adopting climate friendly practices. So, more taxes.

She wants to ban "assault weapons".

She wants to expand Obamacare coverage. So you can look forward to another round of premium increases and posibly a new tax that isn't a tax except when it is declared to be somehow.

She wants to grant Citizenship for "dreamers". And I'm pretty sure she raised her hand in favor of free healthcare for illegals?

She wants to increase the capital gains tax and raise corporate taxes. She also wants to increase taxes on "the wealthy". I guess she's not a fan of a roaring economy with it's attendent low unemployment and wage increases.

Maybe it's just me, but most of these don't seem like "realist" positions at all but rather somewhat fantasitical. Mostly because I can't imagine how most of this could be paid for without destroying the economy with heavy new taxes. But maybe the NYT's editorial board seems to believes in magic.

narciso said...


that's all they have:

https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/19/lev-parnas-is-another-fake-bombshell/

Iman said...

Amazingly, every presidential candidate endorsed by the NYT for the last 60 years has been a...

DEMOCRAT.

Iman said...

readering said...
“I could live with either one. But doubt both still around for California in March”

Funny. You couldn’t hold on to a hair comb around one and your scalp around the other.

gilbar said...

John henry BIZARRELY said...
Here's a list of cvas since 1965
Only 1 named after a military man
CVA-67: John F. Kennedy
CVAN-68: Nimitz
CVN-69: Dwight D. Eisenhower
CVN-71: Theodore Roosevelt
CVN-72: Abraham Lincoln
CVN-73: George Washington
CVN-75: Harry S. Truman
CVN-77: George H.W. Bush
CVN-78: Gerald R. Ford


are you saying that these 9 names are ALL for one boat?
Or, what IS it; that You Think you're saying?

Francisco D said...

It doesn't matter which Democrat the NYT endorses. They just want a Democrat to win BAMN.

If the Dems in the White House, they will staff the administration with the same collection of Deep State hacks.

Bernie might be different but I doubt it.

Robert Cook said...

Forsooth...I say NAY to both!

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

VOX

the slow drip of trickle down government fascism

...Only later, in her third year in the White House, does Warren say she would pursue Medicare-for-all legislation that would actually PROHIBIT private health insurance, as would be required for the single-payer program that she says she, like Bernie Sanders, wants.

Robert Cook said...

"Yes he was. That's why America threw a brick through the window of the corrupt ruling class, of which those two are members."

HA! You don't think Trump is a member of the corrupt ruling class?

Limited blogger said...

The NYT has given up.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Nonapod said

She [amy] wants to eliminate the Electoral College... of course.

They all do. Giving the vote to NY and CA and removing the vote from less populated states is the big left-wing goal.
The "popular vote" is also the Russian method.

RNB said...

So they're Dr. Manhattan?

narciso said...

a commissioned flag officer, as I mentioned I was perusing the techno thriller ghost fleet about a us attempt to recover from a sneak attack by a Chinese nationalist junta, enabled by all the technology transfer we've done over the last 40 years

roesch/voltaire said...

Understandable to me as I have been an Amy supporter since the beginning.

narciso said...

I don't see the point of going on with f chuck


https://dailycaller.com/2020/01/19/david-perdue-jeff-flake-chuck-todd-touche/


flake btw was a favorite of the Iranian American committee, that pushed for the iran deal

Robert Cook said...

"...Only later, in her third year in the White House, does Warren say she would pursue Medicare-for-all legislation that would actually PROHIBIT private health insurance, as would be required for the single-payer program that she says she, like Bernie Sanders, wants."

Don't get your knickers in a twist: this is Warren's way of signaling she'll never try to implement a "medicare for all" tax-funded healthcare system. If it's important enough to do it--and it is--why announce that it'll be on a second- or third-tier of tasks that she'll "get to" in her third year? It's her way of making and breaking a campaign promise in one smooth statement.

Phidippus said...

AA: "...the realist side of the Democratic Party."

I fear that that will be difficult to find. Like a Mobius strip, the Democrat Party has only one side: the crazy side.

BarrySanders20 said...

Storytellers are prominent in many Native American cultures, passing on the wisdom of generations on to the young.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfWe7c_pj-U

In her storytelling tradition, Liz will soon remind everyone what Ten Bears said to her back when she went by the nickname "Josey":

Ten Bears : It's sad that governments are chiefed by the double tongues. There is iron in your words of death for all Comanche to see and so there is iron in your words of life. No signed paper can hold the iron. It must come from men. The words of Ten Bears carries the same iron of life and death. It is good that warriors such as we meet in the struggle of life... or death. It shall be life.

She will then accuse Ten Bears of saying that a woman could not be elected Chief, since only the word of "men" can hold the iron, and Ten Bears will have to be canceled.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Q the media:

It's all lies! It's all lies! You can't prove anything. Conspiracy!

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Cook - I thought we were to take these Dems at their word? Their word is kaka?

Quaestor said...

CVN-78: Gerald R. Ford (under construction)

Wait a minute... Gerald R. Ford has been in commission for almost exactly 2.5 years, bro.

This use of full names bugs me. A warship name with an embedded initial looks and sounds particularly maladroit. It should just be just USS Ford nothing else. USS Gerald R. Ford is the excruciatingly obvious product of committee thinking by a conclave of edumahcated know-nothings appointed by President Chronic.

Ford is an impressive ship, now that her electromagnetic catapults are working more or less to spec, but her sailors must be chagrined every time they must include that stupid, stupid, STUPID R-dot in their conversation.

In WWII our ships had some good names, but these were for the most part subs — Darter, Silversides, Sealion, Barb, Trigger are cool names (But Grunnion, Perch, Herring? Sounds like a menu.) — and lowly fleet auxilliaries, Antares, Procyon, Ajax, Marcellus. Those are NAMES, Jack. USS Gerald R. Ford is a fucking label.

Susan said...

That's one way to get people of color on the ballot!

Quaestor said...

roesche/voltaire writes: Understandable to me as I have been an Amy supporter since the beginning.

Sorry to be so relentlessly pedantic, but you seem to have misspelt aimless.

And don't capitalize your adjectives, this isn't 1720.

Robert Cook said...

"Cook - I thought we were to take these Dems at their word? Their word is kaka?"

OF COURSE! (Look at Barry O. as a recent prime example.)

Levi Starks said...

“Any hope of restoring the country”
I’m afraid Trumps already ticked that one off the list.

Birches said...

Gilbar wins the thread.

Automatic_Wing said...

Midwestern charisma, grit and sticktoitiveness, lol. It must have taken a hell of a brainstorming session to come up that as the leading reason to make this person President. You can just imagine these poor interns sitting around trying to think of reasons to be excited about Amy Klobuchar.

jaydub said...

gilbar: "John henry BIZARRELY said...Here's a list of cvas since 1965....are you saying that these 9 names are ALL for one boat? Or, what IS it; that You Think you're saying?"

Speaking of bizarre, JH lists 9 different hull numbers and their respective names and you're asking whether nine CVs with different hull numbers and different names could be the same ship? What exactly is your point and have you ever heard of Google?

BTW, calling a ship that is over 1000 feet stem to stern and over 100,000 tons displacement a "boat" is kind of like calling Buckingham Palace a cabin.

narciso said...

the ford, gets taken out of commission, early in ghost fleet,

hombre said...

Whereas most politicians, including Trump, are bullshitters, Fauxcahontas is a pathological liar, easily qualifying her as the likely leftmedia choice.

Either way, I think Victor Davis Hanson and Bill O’Reilly have it right. If a Democrat is elected President, it will be the end of our constitutional republic.

John henry said...

No, gilbar, it is a list of cvas plural

I was pointing out that with a couple exceptions, all were named for politicians.

Naming a major ship like a CVA for a military man is very unusual. Almost ubheard of.

And for an enlisted man? O, the horrors. This is an enormous break with tradition.

Prior to 1985 or so, the Navy had a very well defined naming policy. Battleships for states, aircraft carriers for revolutionary war battles (Saratoga, Ticonderoga) or naval air battles (coral sea, midway), or famous rw ships (constellation, enterprise) with a few exceptions like kitty hawk (first flight)

Oilers had Indian names, ammo ships volcanos and explosives, attack subs after ocean critters and so on

Anyway it is a big deal and welcome, especially, I suspect, among my enlisted shipmates.

John Henry

Quaestor said...

Sarah Rolph writes Isn't Tulsi Gabbard still in the race?

Since her candor in the matter of the former candidate, Ms. Gabbard is no longer in the race.

Human or otherwise.

narciso said...

I think the point that political figures, not flag officers, get preference in naming,

Levi Starks said...

Ok, I misread, it was “restoring unity”
Then by the NYT standard we can only ever be united under a Democratic President.
At least they realize that no true democrat could ever be swayed to unite behind a republican, however they hold out hope that a Republican might be open minded enough to support a democrat.

narciso said...

sorry got a head of myself, there is supposedly an adaptation of one of ted bell's works, seeing how American assassin came out, I'm not very sanguine,

TML said...

why does it say "Democrats' top choices" and not "our top choices" if it's the NYT endorsement?

MN Irish said...

"Sharc 65 said...
I'm a Midwesterner. Klobuchar has negative charisma. Less than a turnip."

Amen. She's the type of person you avoid at a family reunion. ("Umm, I think I need to go get more potato salad.")

TANSTAAFL said...

Is this gender-related?

Naw, it's desperation related.

John henry said...

Quaestor said...

CVN-78: Gerald R. Ford (under construction)

Wait a minute... Gerald R. Ford has been in commission for almost exactly 2.5 years, bro.

Yes, well, I just took the list as I found it. The Gerald R. Is I suspect so that a very minor congressman an even more minor president doesn't get confused with another, more notable, ford. Christina or Edsel for example.





and lowly fleet auxilliaries, Antares, Procyon, Ajax, Marcellus.

And what about the USS Great Sitkin? What are we., chopped liver? Www.greatsitkin.org

John Henry

Automatic_Wing said...

And for an enlisted man? O, the horrors. This is an enormous break with tradition.

Yeah, except we all know that they're not naming the ship for him because he was an enlisted man, they're naming the ship for because he was black. There were lots and lots of enlisted guys who did heroic things on 7 Dec, 1941. A cook running over and voluntarily manning a machine gun is cool, but there were a lot of enlisted sailors who did more, like these guys:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Medal_of_Honor_recipients_for_the_Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor

All that said, if there has to be an aircraft carrier named after a black guy, Doris Miller is probably the best choice.

Yancey Ward said...

Isn't this the NYTimes way of placeholding the nomination for Shelob? If they endorse Warren and Warren craters in Iowa and New Hampshire (my prediction now), then the nomination is all but assured to go to Biden or Sanders- one of which will end up with the most delegates even if the convention is brokered.

The NYTimes should have just endorsed one or the other- this co-endorsement is juvenile and completely undermines the value of the endorsement. If I were Warren, I would make a public statement telling the NYTimes to take its endorsement and stick it up their collective ass.

tcrosse said...

Not so fast, NYT. The Dea Ex Machina has yet to appear.

MN Irish said...

Why choose two? What do you get when you cross Elizabeth Warren with Amy Klobuchar? It seems that the NYT did the math and came up with Hillary Clinton.

Sam L. said...

"Democrats must decide which of their two models would be most compelling for the American people and best suited for repairing the Republic...." That would be NEITHER.

Levi Starks said...

As to referring to as a large ship as a “boat”
Enlisted sailors who are actually crew members will certainly refer to their own ship as a “boat” sometimes satirically when not particularly happy with “management”
I served on a Destroyer USS Waddell DDG 24 and while it was a Warship, Lower ranking sailors like myself called it the “warboat”
And as an aside it was named for a confederate officer. That’s not gonna happen today.

Mark said...

a more traditional approach to pushing the nation forward

There's a contradiction in motion.

"Tradition" means to "hand on." It does not mean, tear down to hubrisly seek to create a new order.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The Schitt show.

What an embarrassment. Adam Schitt speaks for America's stepford wives.

tim in vermont said...

The NYT likes Klobuchar because her name sounds like that of an Iranian mullah. Like Osama bin Biden.

Quaestor said...

And what about the USS Great Sitkin? What are we., chopped liver?

Beats me.

What was so great about it?

Quaestor said...

...a more traditional approach to pushing the nation forward

I found this phrase to be somewhat... shall we say... unenlightening.

Then I pulled down my handy-dandy samizdat copy of the Inner Party New Speak Stylebook.

You may fill in the blanks ad lib.

Saint Croix said...

They'll embrace Biden.

Will they color him blue? Purple? Pink?

AllenS said...

A shorter explanation of what the NYT said, is this: it takes two women to do the job of one good man.

Quaestor said...

And what about the USS Great Sitkin? What are we., chopped liver?

Well, there is that jocular anagram awaiting.

tcrosse said...

So they endorse both Warren and Klobuchar. German for Both is Beiden. Coincidence? I think not.

Quaestor said...

They'll embrace Biden.

Not too hard, I trust.

Osteoporosis and all that...

Known Unknown said...

I don't believe this is an endorsement for the presidency (too early for that) but rather and endorsement for the Democratic nominee.

Drago said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Drago said...

jaydub: "BTW, calling a ship that is over 1000 feet stem to stern and over 100,000 tons displacement a "boat" is kind of like calling Buckingham Palace a cabin."

Naval Air types routinely refer to the carriers as "boats and the Surface Warfare lads do not appreciate it...which makes it even better.

JAORE said...

May the "best" woman win.

Really, so these two are the top two (tied for first place) women on the entire planet?

Sorry, my mother would have said, "Better, son, a correct choice among two would be for the better one.)

Drago said...

Gerald Ford was both a WW2 Naval Officer (Reserves) as well as President.

Thats why he got the carrier named after him.

Drago said...

As far as the New York Times endorsing 2 dems for President, that's NOTHING!!

The entire FakeCon LLR-lefty crew has endorsed ALL the democrats!!

And not just for 2020 but for the next 2 generations!!

George Will, Mad Boot, Bill Kristol and the rest of the Charlie "Deadbeat dad" Sykes/Rick Wilson crew have ALL stated they want the dems to win at all levels for all offices for decades!...

.....you know, to "conserve conservatism"...(wink wink)...

Iman said...

Pencil neck geek
Democrat freak
Reigning over Burbank
Like an Underoos streak

Wince said...

Biden's response to the NYT endorsement: "These two don't pass the 'sniff test'."

n.n said...

Sex politics. Surely, they wouldn't accept a male with simulated feminine physical or mental attributes, perhaps a trans-social male in female clothing. That would be unvarnished progress: one step forward, two steps backward for the rites... rights of women.

GingerBeer said...

Hard to imagine how John Delaney's campaign can recover from this unexpected blow.

Churchy LaFemme: said...

They look like aliens from Mars.

Nope

mtrobertslaw said...

In national elections, many people make decisions on how they will vote based on physical characteristics of a politician or even how a politician carries herself or moves through space. Warren's bizarre spider dance and the fact that Klobuchar's visage can be seen as emanating pure meanness make both unelectable.

Earnest Prole said...

#DemsSoWhite

gilbar said...

John henry said...
I was pointing out that with a couple exceptions, all were named for politicians.


And I was pointing out, for the ignorant out that (TMY)
that EVERY ONE I LISTED, SERVED IN COMBAT

wow! you people are NOT the sharpest hoes in the shed, are you

wildswan said...

tomahawk, comb and sickle

comb runs moderately well from tomahawk and sickle
tomahawk hammers sickle, sickle wraps around tomahawk, the two fall into the abyss together
Voters elect rutabaga

cash, more cash and sickle

sickle cuts cash in half
more cash buys sickle, sickle wraps around more cash, the two fall into the abyss together
half-cash goes on to North Dakota, missing the North Carolina primary

write-in, Donald Trump, and the Democratic primary season
will be more interesting.

gilbar said...

CVA-67: John F. Kennedy USNR
CVAN-68: Nimitz USN
CVN-69: Dwight D. Eisenhower USA
CVN-71: Theodore Roosevelt USAV
CVN-72: Abraham Lincoln Illinois militia
CVN-73: George Washington USA
CVN-75: Harry S. Truman USAR
CVN-77: George H.W. Bush USNR
CVN-78: Gerald R. Ford USNR

THESE ALL SERVED, AS LISTED

Howard said...

Gilbar Thank you thank you very much that clears it all up for everybody. You boys had me on tender hooks.

Bay Area Guy said...

Sheriff Bart in "Blazing Saddles, asked the most pertinent racial question of the modern era .

So, with these picks, I guess the NYT has answered the question.

AllenS said...

Not sure if anyone upthread has mentioned this, but maybe the NYT is trying to screw the whole nominating process up for someone else, who isn't presently running, to come and rescue the Dems, someone like Crooked Hillary! EEEEEEEEEEKKKKKKKKKKKKKK!

Jon Ericson said...

Blue and purple, even.

https://babylonbee.com/news/the-babylon-bee-editorial-board-endorses-that-lady-who-screamed-during-trumps-inauguration-for-the-democratic-primary

rehajm said...

Not sure if anyone upthread has mentioned this...

Me me me! Though I think it’s less screw it up and more trying to meticulously micro manage the process to get to the second vote.

John henry said...


Blogger gilbar said...

And I was pointing out, for the ignorant out that (TMY)
that EVERY ONE I LISTED, SERVED IN COMBAT


But that was a selective list. Of all the carriers, that I listed originally, there were a number who did not serve in combat and some who did not serve at all in the military.

Reagan
Stennis
Vinson
Lincoln
Nimitz
Eisenhower

I don't think that Nimitz or Eisenhower served in combat, though that may depend on the definition we use as combat. I am thinking of up front, under fire.

I wondered about carriers and found, via Air and Space Magazine an 82 page memo from the Secretary of Defense to several congressional committees dates July 13, 2012. It is titled A report on policies and practices of trhe US Navy for naming th evessels of the Navy. It details the historic and then current practices.

A couple pages of discussion on carrier names but the key sentence is "In other words, while carrier names are still "individually considered", they are now generally named in honor of past US presidents." Thus the Eisenhower is named for president, not General Eisenhower. The Ford is named for President, not Lt(jg) Ford and so on.

The Doris Miller falls under the "individually considered" (a fancy name the report uses instead of "exceptions") as do the Stennis and the Vinson.

Those interested in Naval history, such as myself, may find the report interesting. it is here https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8Rk_52AMEzwVVRUU3F0bEdveTA/edit?pli=1

The Air & Space article is a much briefer summary and is here:

https://www.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/how-do-you-name-an-aircraft-carrier-22717003/

John Henry

John henry said...

Re boat vs Ship

Y'all forgot canoes.

I was in what was called "Admiral Rickover's Canoe Club" for a while in '68

And yachts

The Navy's 1 star rank is officially called Commodore. (Or used to be, not sure now) but was never used because Commodore is a civilian rank and is often the person in charge of a yacht club. Carter, I think it was, tried to reinstitute it and all the wives complained. They wanted to be married to admirals. So the Navy went back to Rear Admiral (upper half) and Rear Admiral (lower half)

They still have commodore as a position, commanding a squadron or a convoy. Just not as a rank.

John Henry

John henry said...

Two other recent exceptions:

The USS Carter is a nuclear attack submarine. It breaks convention by naming a "boat" (a submarine) after a living person. It also breaks by naming a sub after a President. But Carter was a submariner so it is fitting in his case. And his presidency, even more ignominous than Fords, should not have a carrier wasted on it.

Also LBJ had an LCS (Little Crappy Ship or Littoral Combat Ship according to viewpoint) These ships are pretty miserable failures. So fitting to put LBJ's name on one.

I can't wait to see where they put Obama's name.

And the USS Donald J. Trump will be the biggest, brashest ship ever!

John Henry

Joanne Jacobs said...

"Midwestern charisma" must mean "no charisma."

If the NYT had endorsed Klobuchar as a not-too-old, not-too-young moderate -- just Klobuchar -- they might have helped her get into the race. As it is, she's in the Cory Booker lane of death. Or irrelevance, which is the same thing.

I think Biden will win the nomination, pick Klobuchar for VP and lose to Trump, bigly. But I never thought Trump could win a primary, so what do I know?

Nichevo said...

A couple pages of discussion on carrier names but the key sentence is "In other words, while carrier names are still "individually considered", they are now generally named in honor of past US presidents." Thus the Eisenhower is named for president, not General Eisenhower. The Ford is named for President, not Lt(jg) Ford and so on.

The Doris Miller falls under the "individually considered" (a fancy name the report uses instead of "exceptions") as do the Stennis and the Vinson.

Those interested in Naval history, such as myself, may find the report interesting. it is here https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8Rk_52AMEzwVVRUU3F0bEdveTA/edit?pli=1


Yeah and it's krep. Back to Enterprise, Lexington, Yorktown, Hornet, Independence, and a'that. No more people for capital ships. WWII had all the carrier names we will ever need.