General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs Our Revolution trying to unseat Al Franken?
Last edited Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:01 PM - Edit history (1)
I received an email that made me wonder if the Our Revolution people are trying to replace Al Franken with one of their own.
Anybody hear anything about this?
And there's this: https://now.justicedemocrats.com/petition/resign-franken
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
moda253
(615 posts)
yardwork
(65,857 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)yardwork
(65,857 posts)yardwork
(65,857 posts)
JonLP24
(29,427 posts)Personally, I have a problem with Franken's inappropriate behavior whether he should resign or not I'm not going there but I can't imagine him being very effective with this hanging over his head. His approval ratings among all demographics have plummeted in Minnesota.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/thinkprogress.org/franken-minnesota-poll-numbers-06a5f9eb786a/amp/
As far as this being some plot I imagine there are many that see this as a nonpartisan issue and based on that you can find people on the left calling him to resign Vice has called for him to resign and they're one of my favorite news organizations.
I haven't given my opinion much at all on Franken but it doesn't matter what any of us say, this is still bad for him.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)
hedda_foil
(16,664 posts)Demit
(11,238 posts)Mark Sanford survived lying about hiking when he was cheating on his wife with his girlfriend.
It's bad for awhile then it blows over. Unless, of course, we keep it alive by constantly saying this is still bad for him. Tell me, how long did people say this is still bad for him about those three politicians above?
JonLP24
(29,427 posts)I hardly said anything at all on this topic so I'm doing very little keeping this alive but what you want me to say? Being accused of sexual battery is a good thing? Taking his name off of a rape bill being removed from appearances, etc I just don't see how he can be effective with this hanging over his head. I'll let this play out but it doesn't matter what I say.
Demit
(11,238 posts)It matters what you say when you throw around wildly inaccurate terms. Please go back to not saying anything at all on the topic!!
JonLP24
(29,427 posts)Which includes butts. It is the closest term that is accurate. I would never grab someone's ass because that is sexual battery then there is the photo of where she is unconscious. If you don't want me to say more don't reply because I get in My Posts.
Demit
(11,238 posts)And what constitutes it differs from state to state (check Minnesota's law, for example).
The photo shows that, contra what Ms Tweeden alleged, there was no "grabbing."
You're hazy both on terminology and on what actually happened.
I think you should quit while you're ahead.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(123,674 posts)Demit
(11,238 posts)Not that I'm trying to do the old whine of "well it's not illegal," but I don't think people should casually throw around terms they don't understand.
JonLP24
(29,427 posts)What are the charges for touching someones butt that is 23 years old or older
Could be a battery, or sexual battery. Best to contact an attorney in your area immediately if you have been charged with a crime or even accused and suspect this may turn into a criminal case.
https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/what-are-the-charges-for-touching-someones-butt-th-1679229.html
If you want me to stop it helps not to reply. I'd rather not talk about this but she is unconscious which makes it worse from a legal perspective they are on a US military airplane so I believe US federal law would apply. I'm not a lawyer so I can't litigate this especially with other people who aren't lawyers either.
Demit
(11,238 posts)If you want people to stop setting you straight in matters of fact, stop making claims that aren't true.
JonLP24
(29,427 posts)I never said or even feel like you're setting me straight. The Leeann Tweeden accusations are an addition to her accusations. If he didn't grab her he is way too close.
True Dough
(22,260 posts)I'm no lawyer and "sexual battery" may not be a fitting charge, but the accusations against Franken aren't too far from that. I saw another DUer who tried to frame Franken's alleged butt-grabbing as a "boundary violation." Talk about trying to sanitize the language!
"Hey, did you hear more women have stepped forward and accused Franken of boundary violations?"
As I have said elsewhere, I was initially prepared to convict Senator Al based on his vague and weak responses but a few other possible interpretations of his statements have convinced me to leave the door open to the outcome of an ethics violation. Although, as you said, his reputation is taking a beating in the meantime.
If Franken is guilty as charged, then I think he should go. I have read plenty of DUers' comments that we can't afford to lose him and his evils are far lesser than those of Trump or Roy Moore. That's not where we should set the bar. Again, I'll supply a simple analogy as a litmus test for values/principles:
Your son Johnny comes home from high school and says Billy grabs girls inappropriately and everyone knows it. Yet Billy was made captain of the football team despite it. Your response would be what? "Yeah, groping girls really isn't a big deal. You can do such things and still ascend to great heights with no fear of significant repercussions. The important thing, Johnny, is that our football team needs Billy to win, and winning is what matters most, no matter what, because players on the other team do things that are even more vile than what Billy has done."
That's how some people here would raise their own child?
JonLP24
(29,427 posts)Letting the ethics committee do its thing and make their recommendation is my position as well. I have not taken a position on whether he should resign or not because I feel it deracts from the issue like the notasbadasism. I agree Franken isn't a shameless sociopath like Trump or Moore but it doesn't excuse his actions.
Demit
(11,238 posts)That wasn't Ms Menz. And no, sorry, but being "way too close" is not grabbing or groping. And there's no federal law that covers stupid gags of pretending to feel up somebody who is wearing a kevlar vest. Do you think before you write or are you into that whole stream of consciousness thing?
JonLP24
(29,427 posts)I was talking about both.
womanofthehills
(9,582 posts)would not lie about Al touching her butt. Yea right. OMG! have you talked to any Republican women? The ones I know are from outer space - "reality is on a back burner bigly."
CountAllVotes
(21,472 posts)
FarPoint
(13,877 posts)We have been infiltrated... compromised ...just like our blogs and discussion boards by Russian Trolls...we have paid, planned covert operations trying to disrupt anything strong we have.. Al Franken is an example.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)It wasn't their fault that Trump won and we need to get into a working coalition-alliance with them on some kind of common program if there's to be any real chance of defeating not only Trump but Trumpism.
BannonsLiver
(18,993 posts)But anything short of 100 percent ideological compliance = establishment, third way etc.
They don’t want friends. They want the party.
moda253
(615 posts)All the time.
They aren't your friend. They are a manipulator. And you are being duped.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)
Gothmog
(160,029 posts)
Tumbulu
(6,508 posts)I just can’t take any of these groups anymore.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)yardwork
(65,857 posts)
Voltaire2
(15,346 posts)Would you mind posting it?
Meanwhile Al has done himself in. He needs to step aside and let the governor appoint a viable replacement.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)Don’t believe the RW nonsense.
Voltaire2
(15,346 posts)cwydro
(51,308 posts)So far it’s been pure nonsense.
Voltaire2
(15,346 posts)
tazkcmo
(7,419 posts)The GOPee has a verifiable track record of lying. Sen Franken has a verifiable record of accountability. See the difference? Or, how about I accuse you of grabbing me rear end, do it anonymously, offer no proof or corroborating witnesses and you quit your job?
Another difference is the GOPee-ers deny, deny, deny while Sen Franken acknowledges guilt, apologizes and calls for an investigation. But yeah, GOPee child molesters and Sen Franken are the same. Geez.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)Spot on.
Curious about DUers who seem to want one of our best senators to resign.
BannonsLiver
(18,993 posts)cwydro
(51,308 posts)They’re amongst us here...a shame.
moda253
(615 posts)Because heaven forbid we push back against people that shit on is constantly. Do tjat and then you are taken to task for it. Meanwhile our entire party gets splattered with mud by these folks. It is a god damned joke. I only started posting here again after the election but I have been a LONG TIME reader and what I can tell you from being a mostly reader is that this place has changed and it is time that we get our house in order.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)We have MIRT, and I think they do a very good job overall. I served on MIRT, and I was amazed at the knowledge some of the longtime MIR team members have.
I suppose it’s possible that they have been infiltrated occasionally, but they keep out the worst.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)supposed to hear about before the "lock her up" people believed?
I could round up as many conservative women who eagerly soak up hostile partisan lies within a short walk in our rural neighborhood. The only trick would be finding ones with the guts to put their own names to the lies they enjoy so much privately. That'd take a little more time.
Remember, there will be a senate ethics committee investigation of these claims. Perhaps we should insist on waiting for that before leaping in.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)Well said.
ollie10
(2,091 posts)this is a set up. and you not only fell for it, you are promoting it
still_one
(98,117 posts)I want Franken to resign.
Even though the Governor is a Democrat, Minnesota has a mechanism where they can call for a special election to fill a vacant seat, and there is no way I want to risk a Norm Coleman getting in their before 2020.
A DEMOCRAT was elected to serve until 2020, and we need a chance to take back the Senate in 2018 before anyone even considers resigning.
It isn't a question of NOT believing, it is a question of cutting off one's nose to spite their face.
If Democrats regain control of the Senate in 2018, then I will be less impassioned about it, but with the potential for another Supreme Court nominee coming up before 2020, plus a whole host of other issues relating to Civil Rights, Women's Rights, the environment, etc. it is damn foolish for Democrats to push for his resignation, unless another Democrat is guaranteed to occupy that seat until 2020, or we regain a comfortable majority in the Senate in 2018.
However, the issue that some seem to be ignoring is that it is up to the people of Minnesota to decide this, and the only ones that I have heard suggesting his resignation are NOT from Minnesota
yardwork
(65,857 posts)Voltaire2
(15,346 posts)still_one
(98,117 posts)called, and it is NOT worth even taking the chance of a special election before 2020 that someone like Norm Coleman can get in
The stakes are simply too high, and there is no doubt that the propaganda that the right wing would throw at a special election would be as bad as it gets
Voltaire2
(15,346 posts)The people of Minnesota get to decide who occupies their senate seats. If the rules call for a special election, that seems fair enough.
The seat would be up for election in 2018. A solid appointment with broad state-wide support should do fine.
still_one
(98,117 posts)is why I do NOT want Franken to resign.
The stakes are simply too important. Sorry, but I don't want to chance another Gorsuch before 2020.
A Democratic was elected in that seat to serve until 2020, and Franken should NOT resign
Demsrule86
(71,077 posts)still_one
(98,117 posts)for the country, and the progress that has been made in the last 70+ years.
It is reckless and foolhardy at the very least
If such a resignation happens, it will be done at a time when it doesn't put us at a disadvantage. To much of that garbage has already happened, and those requesting this, are effectively equating it with the Moore's, Weinstein's and Trump's behavior, and that is a gross falsehood.
Demsrule86
(71,077 posts)you don't reward GOP bullshit...and I wish some would spare me the 'we are better than this'...we need to win and stop pretending that we are so fucking pure...I swear...some others don't understand ...that unless you win the other guy calls the shots... nothing progressives want is accomplished. How many times have I heard winning is important but the soul of the party...yada yada yada. No winning is the only thing.
still_one
(98,117 posts)Demit
(11,238 posts)Almost a week since the two anonymous women told their stories. Where are the hordes of women you anticipate? They don't even have to "come forward," since they now know they can make accusations anonymously and they'll get published. Where are they?
There's ten long years in between the stories we've heard and the present day. Is it possible there aren't any more women with stories?
George II
(67,782 posts)...and one who claims inappropriate contact while her husband was taking a photograph of them.
Demsrule86
(71,077 posts)attack.
Alice11111
(5,730 posts)They all seem to have strong Repub connections. Except for the photo, it was some form of touching butt. How many people who took thousands of quick photos might have accidentally brushed or touched a butt. The kiss was with stated consent, plus it was in the same skit used for 4 years.
This is like a Hillary Hit job that works so well for the evil
with their ungodly stupid and ill informed base.
BTW, I'm a victims' advocate, civil rights atty, about 30 years.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)The email I received is from an old friend.
Voltaire2
(15,346 posts)You might want to make that clear.
Meanwhile in Minnesota there are a lot of good Democratic options for replacing Franken. We need to not be partisan hypocrites on this issue.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)among left-wing anti-Democrat types after the Democratic sweep earlier this month, or -- extremely on point -- their many attempts to unseat other Democrats, their refusals to endorse Democratic candidates needing help, and their active opposition to other Democratic candidates.
And not least, of course, their constantly reiterated claim of the need to kick -- NOT REPUBLICANS -- but Democrats out of office and out of the Democratic Party.
Or that they are constantly piggybacking their efforts on Republican and Russian aggressions, which serve all three anti-Democratic groups.
When people tell you what they are, it's wise to believe them. When they SHOW you what they are it's downright stupid not to believe them.
We may not know they're trying to undermine Franken, who is a prominent member of the Democratic Party leadership. But it'd be stupid not to suspect they are. Of course.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)Some of the responses here are defensive. Makes me wonder what's going on.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)involved, people excited by the call for change and believing the official blurb without examining the behavior. Understandable if any of them were feeling defensive, of course.
But, of course, there are the rest. Professional right-wing and Russian trolls and the anti-Democrat leftists whose hostility is focused on moderate liberalism and the Democrats they claim to want to "reform." From those, defense is merely a tactic of aggression.
The biggest "of course," meaning I share your suspicion.
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)My god, I'm tired of these people. I had hoped we were finally rid of the so-called "progressives" whose mission is to take over the Democratic Party against the wishes of the majority of Democrats, but apparently the plague is still here.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Their interests intersect with those of left-wing zealots in defeating Democrats, and it's only going to get worse. Hopefully, clueless innocents will become fewer as the lines harden up.
Sensible and very aware conservative David Frum of The Atlantic warned one night in his usual understated fashion that we risk underestimating just how fierce the battle for power is going to be.
Those who've taken over the GOP have no intention of losing, and they'll do their best to break us in order to win.
karynnj
(60,168 posts)However, even if you accept the worst possible Franken allegation it is nowhere near the Corfman allegation against Moore or all the stories of him in the mall.
Not to mention, the entire me too movement, freeing many to tell stories they had kept silent out of feat is going to get both the worst offenders and many who did things that - in today's light - are unacceptable.
I suspect that the culture, especially in humor, swung too far. There will be many embarrassed for things they did absolutely not seeing today's consequences.
I suspect that Franken's former career might have made him vulnerable because so much is out there on his past. My 20 something kids and their cousins were speaking of how tough it might be for anyone in their generation. To rum in the future because even anonymous people have so much out there on social media.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)of course, and I can't imagine them trying to normalize Moore. Isn't that a Republican thing?
But their disgust with Moore doesn't mean they can't put his scandal to use against Democrats through false equalization. As they are specifically doing.
Agree that behaviors that were probably normal to Franken's former career can be twisted against him. We've seen him on stage doing ribald humor, and that picture of him hamming in the airplane.
But it's still not established that he ever did anything genuinely, knowingly offensive, and that includes the airplane picture. Remember, to be offensive the object has to have been offended, and this particular object both engaged in ribald comedy with herself as the object for years and has also been supporting the kind of vicious right-wing lies Hannity spreads for years.
Otoh, 3 or 4 dozen women who'd previously worked on Franken's staff or with him when he was at SNL, most long departed, say he never behaved disrespectfully or inappropriately to them.
karynnj
(60,168 posts)I think on the left, there is disgust towards more than Moore. Clearly Weinstein, Charlie Rose, Mark Halpern and others are being exposed and they are losing the positions they have.
Democrats have been stronger than Republicans on women's rights, including on the issue of workplace sexual harrassment. However, even there, most of the party was silent when Anita Hill spoke out and many excused Democrats for things they would have condemned Republicans for. Imagine all the Bill Clinton allegations were against GWB. I would imagine our position would have been more unified and consistent with our values.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)and secondarily about his treatment of Anita Hill and also all the other women he agreed to refuse to allow to testify. To this day I'm angry and haven't forgiven him, and there are many like me.
As for Bill Clinton, you do realize not one single allegation of unwanted advances was ever witnessed or proven in another way and that most were in fact substantially disproven by witness accounts? The allegations themselves were the "scandals." The alleged rape can't be disproven, but after reading all that is known, and realizing that her story was full of holes and raised a bunch of questions, only partisan malice could overcome doubt that this woman should be believed.
Far more important, though, is that all the Bill Clinton allegations would never have been made against GWB. We don't do that.
The nasty right-wing billionaires who fund vast lie machines don't exist on the left. The left has no counterpart to the vicious lies right-wing radio broadcasts by the thousands every day. Nor do we have the vast crowds of people eager to believe slanders in order to overset a democracy they only support when it elects their choices. Oh, sure, we see some of that here, all right, but it's nothing to the appetite for malicious partisan lies on the right.
karynnj
(60,168 posts)I also know the government and most large companies had training on sexual harrassment and apropriate behavior in the work place. This happened because women demanded it. A CEO dating an intern is not good. However, LYING about it under oath, coahing others to lie
And obstruction to justice were the charges.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)(over 7 because they started well before he was sworn in), none of which could be proven (but that wasn't necessary, was it?) they finally got him almost accidentally when they abandoned the current gate to ask him about his affair and he lied to try to protect himself and poor Monica.
This was one time it didn't work for the right. You'll recall that the nation, including many conservatives, was so disgusted with the politically corrupt impeachment of a popularly elected president that, in a mid-term election, when the GOP expected to pick up a bunch of seats, they lost them instead. Speaker of the House Newt had to resign and make a new career out of selling fake awards and cancer cures.
Again, WE, the Democratic Party, don't do that stuff. There's a reason why archconservative billionaires were able to corrupt and take over the Republican Party to destroy our democracy, and why the Democratic Party are the ones they and the Russians have to defeat to achieve their goals.
That to-the-bone corruption and reliance on deception on the right are the reasons why, if you ever have to guess without evidence who's likely to be innocent and who's likely to be guilty of this type of charge, the odds are very heavy that the Democrats are being lied about and the Republicans are not.
karynnj
(60,168 posts)Back to the WH - even though the media knew he was a drunk until he was 40.
Yes, I have seen Clinton people say it was Gore's fault for not using Clinton more. Long term it hurt us. Maybe in 2000, 2004 when he put his book out 2 months before the convention and in 2016, when it allowed Republicans horrified by Trump to equate him to Clinton. That was why he brought those women.
We would have been better off if Clinton had lost the 1992 primary over his problems. With Perot and Bush at
39 percent, we would have had a President Btown or any of the others. I bet it would have been a better path.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)How many senators should we help the Republicans take out by simply presenting women who claim they all grabbed their buttocks?
3, 5, 10, 25, all 48? I think those eager to trash other peoples' careers should seek out their own comfort zone for the number of careers destroyed ahead of time. NOW, not later, in the dark in the middle of the night.
Note that I don't ask whether an ideological commitment to believing these claims SHOULD be put ahead of, say, the future of healthcare, Social Security, Medicaid, etc. That's a very personal decision, and I've already heard way too much from those here who are currently putting ridding the nation of inappropriate male behavior above all else put together.
Budget and tax plans anyone?
karynnj
(60,168 posts)To jump to demanding he resign is very premature. Also thinking this a ploy to reduce the number of Democrats ignores MN has a Democratic governor.
Just as I think NJ will go with an alternative to Menendez in the primaries, we need wait to see if MN Democrats still support Franken.
I think we need to think where we draw the line.
Exactly how I see them.
Early in the campaign there was talk of a growing group, doing to the Democratic Party what the Tea Party did to Republicans.
This was when the RU accounts were at a peaked frenzy.
This talk came from the same people who now align with Our Revolution.
It is quite obvious by the description in your post that they are doing exactly what they set out to do.
They should be viewed as usurpers to our democracy & never be assumed that their goals are in favor of the Democratic Party.
They are the Tea Party redeux & they have set their sights on the Great Democrats in our Govt.
I could list many examples, but I thank you DUer Hortensis, for a very good start.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)
moriah
(8,312 posts)I don't even know who they are to join in with the "defend or pile on" reaction, but I certainly read your OP as suggesting that. It certainly didn't say the email you received came from anyone else.
Not trying to be mean, just the truth. Text isn't as clear as speech. There are known issues.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)moriah
(8,312 posts)But I had to admit I, too, read what you wrote as suggesting it'd been sent by the organization.
Again, I don't know who they are, if they're a MN area group that would certainly explain why I'm unfamiliar with them.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)knowingly or not. You are right, of course, about the effect of allegation.
Speaking of allegations and politics, I read the thread as asking if anyone else had received emails or other messages like this. At least that was its interest to me because it goes without saying that "Our Revolution" opposes and wants to depose all party prominents, and that would of course include Franken.
Btw, email is the biggest and most effective spreader of false information and subversive messages there is. It's seldom mentioned in coverage of social media because it's occult, hidden in private messages between acquaintances, but it spreads exponentially, an electronic wildfire that can cover much of the nation in a day or two.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)It’s very clever.
My friends write me about Al Franken all the time.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)with board of directors, budget, private meetings, agenda, etc.
Asking what they're doing is not asking what you are doing. Many people who say they align with "Our Revolution" do so idealistically. Yes, they are responsible for what they support, but that doesn't mean they all understand what that is.
Btw, speaking of understanding, did you ever ask yourself WHY Bernie Sanders has such antipathy toward the Democratic Party and Democrats that he's spent 50 passionate years mostly ignoring what conservatives have done? Don't look for rational reasons or noble-sounding official reasons for that one. The official reasons pasted on top do all require villifying Democrats of course, and both official reasons and hidden passions leave little time or energy for looking right.
Sanders fits a type characterized by that kind of antipathy to liberals and their liberal party wherever they're found on this planet, and that type has been studied. Another prize characteristic is an overweaning righteousness that makes it not just unnecessary but usually impossible to question their own motivations and actions.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Yes, now, if there were only some way to figure out what a visibly public organization were up to?
Hmmmmm.....
Like, gee, it would be cool if there were, like, a network of interconnected computers and routers that allowed organizations to post news, information and communication about themselves.
But, until then, we'll just have to rely on the tried and true method of figuring it out by discussing an email we can't see, from a person we don't know, as described by some other person we don't know.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)But maybe read what I said and wonder if you should go read yourself to learn who the various political players are and where they're really coming from? Start with political personality, because we all do.
JonLP24
(29,427 posts)I've followed him since I followed politics he goes after them all the time. As far as his statement that private money corrupts both parties is a true statement but he has always said it is worse on the Republican side but he has caucused and worked with Dems his entire career. His policies historically have been very close to my own.
I don't know why I got sucked into this thread.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)are doing is so astonishingly destructive that he has to speak up against them. But by far most of his political energy for decades has been expended against Democrats.
Where would we be today if Bernie Sanders had been committed to defeating Republicans in 2015 and 2016? His behaviors then, and now, were a continuation of those over his entire career in DC.
After the past two years, it may be late, but I still think it's important for people to finally look at him, to evaluate him by his actions, not by his official statements. We are each of us responsible for what people do with the power we give them.
And this comes from someone who once hoped she could vote for the person who stepped forward when Elizabeth Warren decided not to. That was before my own scrutiny.
JonLP24
(29,427 posts)The three same topics, Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, and Tony Rezko were used by Hillary Clinton then later John McCain which all three turned out to be non issues but it was still material she used.
As far as running against her in a primary it happens every election unless there is an incumbent.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)any of this was a major factor is no more than the hostile wingish nonsense it was blown ineffectually into then and insults both candidates.
Your gathering of these names and belief in their pivotal importance in our history seems strange to be still with you at this date. Is there some medium I could follow this line of thought back in and connect it to what's being published today? It started with the anti-Hillary left, of course, but with whom?
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Showing Bernie doing exactly what you just said he doesn't do? He's been a vocal opponent of Republicans for many years and a constant thorn in their sides.
This kind of historical revisionism that tries to paint him as anti-Dem is ridiculous and collapses after even the briefest of research.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)almost completely unknown outside Vermont. He was inoccasionally pointed out in political media for something, but usually just because he was the one with an I for "Independent" by his name. That was his biggest distinction. .
BUT, he was of course known to his Democratic colleagues in congress, every single one of whom (@250) refused to endorse him when he said he was running for president and asked for their support.
Imagine... Imo, we all need to take very close clear-eyed looks at the people who present themselves to us and ask for our support. He does not meet my requirements on a variety of fronts, but you might just ask yourself is this a doer, or just someone who's good on the stump? Not exactly an Elizabeth Warren surely?
In the past, he's voted very consistently with the Democratic caucus, done no real harm in his position as senator that I've ever read about (notably in spite of all his decades of complaints about how corrupt the Democrats he votes with are (!) ), and I suggest the senate is a good place for him if he runs once more and the people of Vermont choose to reelect him.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)He was indeed very low profile, largely as a result of that I. Despite that he fought for things that matter unceasingly, despite never really expecting any more prominent role or position of power. Now after decades of integrity and effort he has risen to national attention, and not by self promotion and arrogance, but by again fighting for what he believes and at least having people outside Vermont actually getting to hear his message. He may never run again, he may not win if he does, but as long as he's making Americans think about how better their lives could be if they keep fighting, then I think he'll consider his career well spent. Personally though I hope he gets the chance to make his vision a reality, I think people deserve it.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)how you reconcile behaviors I can't go into at length here but will only mention his attempt to put aside the primary vote (democracy itself!) and get the superdelegates to appoint him the candidate.
I don't want to hear it. It is not Sanders who appalls me. He'd be nothing and pose no danger to anyone by himself.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)While millions of us happily support him and his work. 
moriah
(8,312 posts)... "articles" claiming Tweeden has a book deal (sure enough, they linked a post to someone posting a Tweet and half of us asking for sourcing as their "source" ) by tracing back the first Tweets about the rumor to certain troll accounts...
.... email doesn't get logged into the search engines to trace development of rumors.
KPN
(16,479 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)his goal of taking over the Democratic Party. When they thought they were riding high, "revolutionaries" right here gloated over how they were going to purge the Democratic Party of its current leadership, and some did use that word. Since then every prominent name in the party has been strongly attacked by this organization and its offshoots, and by followers right here on this board.
But back to "Our Revolution," it's a struggle for power, not for cooperation. And they could't have it without taking out the mainstream, mainly liberal Democratic leadership. That's just the way it is. They are and always will be only one among a number of minority factions in the party, most of whom disagree with them, and their only path to power would be to smash their way to control.
And they can't do that without weakening the support of those who vote for their leaders, which is why too many Our Revolution types were unhappy and angry after all the Democratic victories on November 7 -- instead of being happy, as they would have been if I was wrong. And I would be extremely happy to be wrong on that, instead of shocked and appalled.
In these days of existential threats from the right, hoping and working for fewer Democrats to be elected to office, because then the few numbers of capital-P Progressives gain power in comparison, isn't just counterproductive to the progressive goals they claim, it's dangerously destructive of them.
KPN
(16,479 posts)Nothing wrong with that.
You may be wrong about "minority factions" in the party. I personally think you are particularly if you include former D's who are now I's. At any rate, I don't think any particular group is going to "smash their way to control" within the organization, unless you mean that running against more centrist, neoliberal candidates in primaries and pointing out the areas where the D Party has and continues to come up short is "smashing their way". I don't see it that way at all.
I hope you can accept that I take exception to and disagree with your last paragraph. I don't see Our Revolution as "hoping and working for fewer Democrats to be elected to office" at all, especially for the reason you stated. In fact, I see it as the exact opposite. I think we will have more Ds holding office if they run on Our Revolutions positions and values.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)ideology stated is that it does not admit that our positions and values are virtually the same. In fact, they always have been ours. They are liberal goals and most very old.
The totally unnecessary ideological battle against the Democratic Party, including all the claimed differences used as excuses for "revolution," instead of union is exactly the problem.
It's not that Democrats couldn't use some shaking up. Every organization needs that. But that's not and never has been the reason for the genuine hostility and refusal to become one that characterizes those who refuse to cooperate and compromise a bit to achieve common goals.
The tea partiers are the right wing's version of the left's "revolutionary" ideologues. They were a much bigger movement, so more scrutinized, and became famous for preferring to lose everything rather than compromise.
A huge lesson there for those who will look, but that pretty much rules out most. Personal insight is not a strong point of ideologues on either side. But for those who are capable, examining why their movement thinks it must be opposition instead of unity and cooperation would be a huge step forward.
You might ask yourself, Jon, how supposedly noble goals dwindled on this forum for an entire year to a far-left version of repeal-and-replace the ACA, using the right wing's arguments for the repeal part. And don't asked me to prove that one, a year's posts by the thousands on this subject are available for your own review.
KPN
(16,479 posts)positions and values being virtually the same. We've had this discussion before just recently.
How does seeing a difference and wanting to see change make them "ideologues"? How does that make them the dividers as opposed to or any more than those who refuse to see or, as you put it, "admit" a difference?
This issue is about candidates for party nominations. What's wrong with groups within the Democratic Party supporting candidates who they perceive as fitting their interests best, even if that includes perceiving a need for change within the party? Why do you have a problem with that? As I see it, that's inconsistent and seems at odds with your concern about wanting control.
George II
(67,782 posts)moriah
(8,312 posts)... because at least at first glance, it seemed to be a suggestion that some official email had come directly from the group.
The problem that happens with any form of electronic communications is that it's hard to read tone or grasp all context, where even with just the same words often the body language, tone of voice, or even the OP's own internal context in this case of having the email in front of them, probably thinking it would be obvious it wasn't an official communique or the post would have been a statement instead of a question.... we would understand more in person.
Voltaire2
(15,346 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Voltaire2
(15,346 posts)Or are you instead going to debate the meaning of a sarcastic colloquial expression?
George II
(67,782 posts)Demsrule86
(71,077 posts)Democratic Underground. The GOP made this shit up- entirely to get Franken but some want to trash Democrats. We barely won before...we could lose the seat.
LenaBaby61
(6,991 posts)Do you live in Minnesota?
Control-Z
(15,686 posts)It's the same damn message as Sanders group.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)yardwork
(65,857 posts)Voltaire2
(15,346 posts)
riverwalker
(8,694 posts)I like Swanson and Otto, but to suddenly become a Senator, it will take a year just to learn the basics of DC, we don’t have the luxury of time.
Voltaire2
(15,346 posts)We cannot attack Republicans for their abusive sexual behavior and then pretend that our guys are just being unfairly accused without looking like total hypocrites.
Franken has yet to deny any of the allegations. He has instead apologized for anything he "might have done", which is not quite the same as admitting guilt. The count is now up to 5 women. I was willing to believe the first one had political rat-fuckery as a motive, I am not going to walk down the Alex Jones road of conspiracy idiocy with multiple accusers.
JonLP24
(29,427 posts)But after the first one I said to myself if there is more than it is a problem.
Demit
(11,238 posts)She's the conservative radio host who accused Al Franken of "stalking." Her definition of stalking: Franken calling her several times because he disagreed with how she was discussing a policy issue on the radio.
Demsrule86
(71,077 posts)GOP trickster...mostly because some want to believe ill of Democrts.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)I think I t may be time for him to rethink attempting to run again for that seat and say say early enough on that the party can field a strong candidate in that seat.
At this moment the best dream for the GOP is him to stay in, run again, and be damaged enough that they take the seat. I know it’s a blue state, but as a candidate at this point he is weakened. It’s just a matter of how all this plays out to see how weakened he is.
No need for him to step aside and resign now however. He can keep being a strong player for our side the rest of his term. Then after all this has blown over come back into the arena.
Demsrule86
(71,077 posts)Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)But we have to put the first priority on keeping that seat with a D next to the listing, and nothing else comes before that.
Demsrule86
(71,077 posts)up their attacks if we don't.
FarPoint
(13,877 posts)Oh for crying out loud! You don't throw in the towel...for free. .
Stop baiting and shaming with this line of thinking...I support Senator Franken with my last breath......I do not support Trial by Media...
pangaia
(24,324 posts)
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)use/abuse any pictures, out of context statements, anything they can find or create.
Rs will also back any "D" type groups & spoilers if it can cause division during the vote season. They're very good at what they do, spend plenty of money and hire the best media business to assist them.
They are not afraid to play dirty.
oasis
(52,103 posts)
He already stated he intends to rebuild whatever trust he may have lost.
Obviously he is staying put.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)Didn't the DNC just purge some progressives,
or do I have that wrong?
SharonClark
(10,427 posts)left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)When Tom Perez recently reorganized the DNC.
emulatorloo
(45,728 posts)Especially smears of Democrats and Tom Perez
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)We've had enough anonymous sources
You can sanitize your "friend's" name out of it.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)I think that there's a hit job out on Franken.
moriah
(8,312 posts)... is making me have this reaction... seriously, I probably ought to Google.... but.... and I promise I mean no offense ny this question....
---
.... are you trolling us? To be clear, I mean making a thread and responding to demonstrate a point or a pattern of DU behavior you've seen and want to highlight, not in the mean/maliciuous way?
If this organization really is scum, then it's different. I don't know. But you've posted an anonymous allegation against J Random Group, then when asked for sourcing, complained of being bullied or feeling people are being too defensive and that's gotta mean something....
Are you trying to make a point about anonymous accusations?
If so... damm good job!
yardwork
(65,857 posts)moriah
(8,312 posts)... not the negative sense.
If anything, you were getting compared to the person who has been posting quite apt historical quotes after Trump tweets, not bridge-keepers, by my misinterpretation of your potential motivation. I promise you that. I know you aren't malicious here.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)I'm reporting something real that I'm observing in the real world. The fact that it sounds unbelievable is a marker for how messed up our country is right now. People are literally brainwashed.
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)The photo is only mildly objectionable. The butt patting in a non-coercive setting only slightly more so. The forced kiss is a bullshit lie. We have far too many people conceding the right wing false equivalency by even calling this sexual harassment. It's not.
None of that changes the fact that the OP is just more centrist triangulation.
delisen
(6,827 posts)It is quite possible to listen to behavioral charges against an officeholder, be highly respectful of those charging, and weigh the situation.
If we respond otherwise we are working against building a framework for dealing ethically and ultimately weakening the rule of law.
Please remember everyone that beyond an ethics committee investigation, the Senate has a censure power.
If we continue to immediately call for resignation of the officeholder, we open up our system to blackmail in the future.
So what we do now is important and we must be the voice of reason-there is no other.
Politically no suggestion that Senator Franken should resign should be made without the same suggestion being made that Donald Trump should resign.
We are living in a global authoritarian age and it is making us more authoritarian.
Let's ask ourselves which do we want more-that behavior described by Franken accusers cease on the part of lawmakers, or that we immediately denounce the accused and pressure him/her out of office without a hearing.
The latter may reinforce our sense of moral superiority and offer up a whipping boy for the fact that we have a man in the Oval Office who has bragged about abusing woman and is actively working to take away rights,
Personally I want the behaviors to stop. I want to champion behavioral standards for all serving in government.
I want to hear the reports of women, or men, who have complaints. I want to have ethical guidelines for standards of behavior and a framework for sanctions when those stands are violated.
solara
(3,883 posts)Totally agree.
"I want to hear the reports of women, or men, who have complaints. I want to have ethical guidelines for standards of behavior and a framework for sanctions when those stands are violated." In all facets of our society.
solara
(3,883 posts)None of Franken's actions can be conflated with the actions of Moore, or PINO trump or Rose or Weinstein or Halperin or Conyers or Cosby and to continue to do so is cynically and dangerously creating a False Equivalency, which is a known RW ploy.
Franken didn't force himself on anyone, nor did he threaten anyone, or coerce them or force anyone to watch him masturbate, or drug anyone, or solicit sexual favors from children. His behavior was not "serial" in any way.
There are valid questions about the photo in question and although he honors a women's right to be believed, he has not admitted to the "groping" accusations and he has also not pointed his finger at his accusers or called them liars. He has asked for a thorough inquiry by the Ethics Committee. And he has apologized if his behavior has caused anyone any pain.
How can we win in 2018 if we keep falling for the sick tricks of the RW machine?
yardwork
(65,857 posts)solara
(3,883 posts)FRANKEN SHOULD RESIGN AND BE REPLACED BY KEITH ELLISON
https://now.justicedemocrats.com/petition/resign-franken
Give me air
yardwork
(65,857 posts)solara
(3,883 posts)Posting thoughts as innocent seeming as "Should Franken step down?" or "Could this be true?" "Should Franken be replaced by Ellison?" just adds to the confusion and doubt and validates a 'mob-like' consciousness. When questions like those are asked, it pretty much presupposes that the person in question is guilty. 100% behind Franken
I am not down with doing that at all
yardwork
(65,857 posts)solara
(3,883 posts)several times you posted just the JusticeDemocrats site, no qualifiers. Nothing but the their petition to replace Franken with Ellison.
Like that was your comment. That was your answer. And it sure didn't seem like you were agreeing with me.
So again I say, if that is what you are proposing we are definitely NOT on the same page.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)I think that you'll see that I'm in complete agreement with you, and I'm pissed off. It looks like there is a coordinated hit job on Franken coming from the Jill Stein sector, teamed up (as usual) with the right wing Republicans.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)you got busted, went to Google, found a petition NOT FROM OUR REVOLUTION and with only 7000 signers and think you vindicated your ss'ing attempt to triangulate leftist Democrats out of influence in the party.
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)Know where I can find a made up story about the "disloyal left" where I could refight the primary but act like it's about something that just happened? 
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)and Our Revolution© is on board with endorsing/supporting Republican and Green Party candidates. Those are facts.
These organizations do not represent the left. They are opportunistic entities that represent themselves.
Cuthbert Allgood
(5,217 posts)Franken is a progressive. Every. Single. Sanders support I know loves Franken. If there is some vast Our Revolution conspiracy, it certainly wouldn't go after Franken.
And, yeah, your reluctance to post the email makes me very unlikely to have the pass the smell test. You can redact the private stuff.
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)yardwork
(65,857 posts)I'm being honest and transparent. I received an email from an old friend who is deeply involved in the Our Revolution branch of politics. (He wrote in Bernie in the general election, for example.) He doesn't care about sexual harassment. He likes some of the things Trump says and does. He's opposed to the Black Lives Matter movement. He's opposed to the gay rights movement. He doesn't like immigrants. He hates Hillary.
Now all of a sudden he's very upset about Al Franken and says he has to be replaced by a woman. My correspondent is way more concerned about Franken than he is about Trump or Roy Moore.
All this makes me wonder what's going on.
JonLP24
(29,427 posts)I'm very confused by what is going on with this thread.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)JonLP24
(29,427 posts)He doesn't care about sexual harassment. He likes some of the things Trump says and does. He's opposed to the Black Lives Matter movement. He's opposed to the gay rights movement. He doesn't like immigrants. He hates Hillary.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)I've known him a long time. I'm having to reassess if he was ever as progressive as he claimed.
SharonClark
(10,427 posts)Demsrule86
(71,077 posts)righty scum.
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)Anyone who hates gays, blacks, and immigrants missed the Southern Democratic party’s demise by 50 years.
melman
(7,681 posts)Cuthbert Allgood
(5,217 posts)As such, I would stop using this person as representative of Our Revolution.
OnDoutside
(20,729 posts)There's an old saying, running with the hare and hunting with the hounds. Seems apt for this thread.
You've managed to put every bogus triangulating lie about "the left" in the description of your "friend"
yardwork
(65,857 posts)And I bet you know people with the exact same set of beliefs.
That's what we're up against. I wish I was making this up.
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)Don't like BLM, who only defend Kaepernick's free speech and not what he says, who oppose sanctuary cities, who claim that a woman with disparately less power is capable of consent?
Well yes I do.
Not one of them is a leftist.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)And so you decided to attribute whatever was in it to an entire group?
yardwork
(65,857 posts)Yeah, it's enough to raise my antennae. So I'm asking the question.
Our Revolution is trying to primary and replace a number of Democrats they deem to be insufficiently committed to their goals. Is Franken one of them?
njhoneybadger
(3,911 posts)yardwork
(65,857 posts)njhoneybadger
(3,911 posts)As are a lot of Americans
That sounds like a real person that sends real emails. It really really does!
pangaia
(24,324 posts)
Eh, I'm off to a Nutcracker dress rehearsal.
Ya know, dancing snowflakes, toy soldiers, sugary fairies, stuff like that..
SharonClark
(10,427 posts)samnsara
(18,444 posts)...Me Me Me!!! 'here we are now entertain us'!
David__77
(23,916 posts)Sorry. I cannot post them.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)yardwork
(65,857 posts)David__77
(23,916 posts)I think there are people across the political spectrum who have different views on this subject.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(123,674 posts)And they're insulting Keith Ellison by putting his name on this nonsense, which I doubt very much that he would agree with. If for some reason Franken did leave the Senate, Ellison would be one of the likely replacements, and he is also a good progressive. Chances are his House seat would be filled by a Democrat, too. Just another bunch of "progressives" who place more value on feeling good about themselves for their ideological purity than about the vital need to keep an effective liberal in the Senate. (I like Ellison but I don't think he could just pick up where Franken left off.)
Demsrule86
(71,077 posts)This is Cent's group (Young Turks)...formed for the express purpose of taking out sitting Democrats and putting in 'progressives'...sure. And Cent takes money from Republicans too.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)...like you did.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)I made no assertion in my OP. I'm asking a question.
And I just edited my OP to add a link that gives even more context.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)... to replace Al Franken with one of their own. "
You didn't provide any evidence, since you claim it's a private email. But the email doesn't seem to provide any evidence either, which is why you apparently raised the question here.
yardwork
(65,857 posts)I asked a question.
aidbo
(2,328 posts)lapucelle
(19,873 posts)and his replacement with Keith Ellison, in addition to supporting "progressive" Republican candidates for office.
https://now.justicedemocrats.com/petition/resign-franken
Justice Democrats© is a non-qualified, unauthorized, unaffiliated PAC founded in January 2017 by Cenk Uygur of The Young [sic] Turks, Kyle Kulinski of Secular Talk, and former leadership from the 2016 BS presidential campaign. The Middle-Aged Turk said in an interview about his new enterprise that if the Democratic Party resists the "need to change", "The Justice Democrats will make fighting them our No. 1 priority."
https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00630665/?tab=about-committee
https://mic.com/articles/166390/cenk-ugyur-bernie-sanders-staffers-team-up-to-take-over-the-democratic-party#.Rie7CRYYZ
Nina Turner of Our Revolution© said in an interview in October that Our Revolution© would have no problem endorsing "progressive" Republicans, so I assume she is on board with Justice Democrats support of Republican candidates Ronan and Brown.
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a13107999/nina-turner-womens-convention/
yardwork
(65,857 posts)This is insidious and evil.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(123,674 posts)lapucelle
(19,873 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(123,674 posts)I was considering getting involved with your organization because I'd love to see more progressive Democrats in state and local as well as federal offices. But then I saw your petition demanding Al Franken step down and I changed my mind - I concluded that you had to be a bunch of ideologically-blinded dingbats who know absolutely nothing about Al Franken. He is one of the most effective Senators Minnesota has ever had at the grassroots level, and he is almost single-handedly responsible for exposing Jeff Sessions' lies about the Russia investigation. He is my Senator and I do not want to lose his representation of ME in the Senate.
By calling for his resignation you are effectively equating his behavior with that of Roy Moore, Harvey Weinstein, Charlie Rose and Donald Trump - predators who committed repeated acts of assault and other crimes, including child molestation in the case of Moore. Franken, in stark contrast, has been accused of butt-patting. Two of the accusers are anonymous; the third claimed he did it at the state fair in front of hundreds of people that included her husband. How credible are those claims? And even if they are true, how does butt-patting equate with child molestation and rape? It doesn't. And then there are the claims made by Leann Tweeden, friend of Sean Hannity. Franken, participating with Tweeden in a typically bawdy USO show, behaved like a dumb frat boy, not like a serial sexual predator. It was wrong; he acknowledged it was wrong and apologized. But you damn fools are buying right into the right wing's typical whataboutism.
So let's throw Al under that Big Righteous Liberal Bus so we so-called progressives can feel good about ourselves for being better than the "other side." And as a result that Big Righteous Liberal Bus is now stalled by Al's body under its wheels - while the GOP's armored Hummer blasts past us, rolling coal and flying a Confederate flag, shotguns strapped to the back window, with Trump and Moore flipping us off as they speed on their way to more raping of the environment and pillaging of the US Treasury.
Forget it. You just lost me, and a whole lot of other liberal Minnesotans.
xxx xxxx
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)I wonder if they bothered to inform Rep. Ellison about their plans and which "progressive" Republican they are planning to run for Keith's congressional seat.
mcar
(44,193 posts)still_one
(98,117 posts)
radical noodle
(9,615 posts)The main thing that Justice Democrats and Our Revolution seem to have in common is their hatred for Democrats, and they're part of the reason why we have Trump now.
still_one
(98,117 posts)and the other vermon trying to roll back any progressive change in the last 70 plus years, and that is bullshit
Demsrule86
(71,077 posts)Voltaire2
(15,346 posts)lets do it by proxy and use a different organization and some random quote from Turner to pretend that the op sort of got it right.
The point of this thread appears to be, in a rather unremarkable 180 from prior pillorying of the left, to take issue with anyone on the left who dares to support to the "social justice" position on the Franken Affair. The point it seems is to bash the left. Facts be damned. A woman's right to not be subjected to ass-grabbery by random men seems lost in the fog of war.
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)Interviewer:
You've said before that Our Revolution is more interested in endorsing candidates based on beliefs, rather than endorsing along party lines. Does that mean Our Revolution could endorse a Republican?
Nina Turner:
Our grassroots affiliate organizations nominate [candidates] up. I can give you real examples — they have nominated Green Party members and we have endorsed Green Party members. But, for the sake of argument, if there is a progressive Republican out there that seeks their endorsement [from] Our Revolution, and they go through the local affiliate, there is a strong possibility that they could be endorsed.
Interviewer:
But it hasn't happened yet that you've endorsed a Republican?
Nina Turner:
Not yet. But listen, any day now. It could happen.
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a13107999/nina-turner-womens-convention/
Voltaire2
(15,346 posts)lapucelle
(19,873 posts)are neither Democrats nor the left.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(123,674 posts)ass-grabbery is not anywhere close to child molestation on the continuum of unacceptable behavior, and that demanding Franken's resignation on the basis of three claims of such (two of which are anonymous) is a short-sighted and foolish example of succumbing to the right-wing's whataboutism.
Demsrule86
(71,077 posts)We need a new term...hmm- perhaps faux progressives would work.
Demsrule86
(71,077 posts)called progressive in Jersey running in a GOP primary because she feels the GOP welcomes her views...hahahah...Nina Turner who hates Democrats runs it...and they are dead to me.
sheshe2
(90,503 posts)I was reading all about this last week and don't really like what I saw.
still_one
(98,117 posts)
R B Garr
(17,539 posts)They can’t win at the ballot box so everyone has to burn. 
George II
(67,782 posts)....two high level Sanders staffers and Ceny Uyger and another that I don't recognize.
Not surprising that Justice Democrats would support republican candidates, Uyger (via TYT) accepted four million dollars from a conservative republican, Buddy Roemer.
George II
(67,782 posts)....if they're coordinating, but the "Justice Democrats" link goes to a petition calling for Franken to be replaced by Ellison (!!!???), and doing so by blatantly lying about what Franken has said about the alleged incidents that came out a week ago.
They say that Franken "admitted to sexually assaulting a female colleague on a 2006 USO Tour". That is categorically false, and seems to be an attempt to mislead those reading that.
It should also be noted that "Justice Democrats" was founded by Cenk Uyger of TYT, who has proven to be no friend of Democrats.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)lapucelle
(19,873 posts)
Demit
(11,238 posts)I'll bet it's meant to be evocative of revolution. You're right, kind of foreboding.
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)will eventually clash over the acquisition of influence and money which are both bound to be limited.
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)Founded by Cenk is not the same as founded by Sanders but I can see how that false equivalency works for some.
George II
(67,782 posts)Kind of minimizes that "false equivalency".
Not really
Do you seriously want to start going through the former Hillary supporters/endorsing groups who have called for his resignation?
This is ridiculous.
George II
(67,782 posts)....the possible connection between Our Revolution and Justice Democrats.
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)By others' thinly-cloaked refighting of the primary.
Try someone else.
George II
(67,782 posts)
Starry Messenger
(32,376 posts)Cenk started it. A lot of these groups seem to harbor a political grudge against anyone who endorsed Clinton. I wouldn't put a little opportunistic piggy-backing onto a seeming scandal past them.
Wwcd
(6,288 posts)Seems they carry the same anti Democratic voice.
JI7
(91,557 posts)R B Garr
(17,539 posts)Well, there it is! They are trying to recall an elected Democrat in Los Angeles, too.
This is outrageous. Thanks for pointing this out. I saw poster bettyellen bring this up that Our Revolution was behind this, and it was the first I had heard of it. Now I see it's to benefit Keith Ellison. This is destructive, phony, and outrageous.
DFW
(57,493 posts)Like they say in Montréal: "ni l'un, ni l'autre."
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)
Where did you read "Our Revolution" in that email?
Or are you intentionally trying to mislead and plant seeds? Strikes me as not unlike Russian interference we already experienced.
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)Our Revolution© is on board with supporting/endorsing Republicans if they are "progressive", and the organization has already supported/endorsed Green Party rivals over Democratic candidates.
Anyone who needs to know "WTF?" should ask Nina. It might take her a while to get back to those who write. There's a Revolution© to be monetized and The Middle-Aged Turk is already busy getting large donations from the "unemployed".
https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/individual-contributions/?two_year_transaction_period=2018&committee_id=C00630665&min_date=01%2F01%2F2017&max_date=12%2F31%2F2018&contributor_employer=NOT+EMPLOYED
KPN
(16,479 posts)My guess is she may have made this comment rhetorically, but I doubt she would find any Republican worthy (at least any that are currently in office or that I am aware of). I think the point she was making was that the whole point of Our Revolution is not to just go along with the current Democratic Party leadership, but actually to change it to better represent all people, particularly the working class. I don't see anything wrong with that personally. But if you have other information, I would appreciate seeing it.
What's with the revolution to be monetized comment? Do you have a problem with progressives raising funds to support candidates who represent their interests best? What is wrong with that? How is that any different from what any other organization does in support of candidates? As for the "unemployed" -- do you understand what that means, who that includes? I wonder.
Look, I understand your concern about the importance of winning in 2018. But a lot of what I see up thread strikes me as striking out at others in an attempt to retain control. I'm okay with seeing more progressive candidates vying for Democratic Party nominations at every level. I see that as a good thing, a positive.
Back to the topic at hand: Where did "Our Revolution" appear in the email that prompted the OP? Looks like a lot of sour grapes/axe-grinding to me.
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)Interviewer:
You've said before that Our Revolution is more interested in endorsing candidates based on beliefs, rather than endorsing along party lines. Does that mean Our Revolution could endorse a Republican?
Nina Turner:
Our grassroots affiliate organizations nominate [candidates] up. I can give you real examples — they have nominated Green Party members and we have endorsed Green Party members. But, for the sake of argument, if there is a progressive Republican out there that seeks their endorsement [from] Our Revolution, and they go through the local affiliate, there is a strong possibility that they could be endorsed.
Interviewer:
But it hasn't happened yet that you've endorsed a Republican?
Nina Turner:
Not yet. But listen, any day now. It could happen.
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a13107999/nina-turner-womens-convention/
KPN
(16,479 posts)In other words, rhetorically speaking.
No comment on my other questions? What's wrong with supporting or raising funds for candidates in primaries who better represent one's interests? What's wrong with that? Especially given the reality of our two party system. It's unrealistic to expect anything else.
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)Justice "Democrats" have already aligned themselves with the Republican Party in Ohio and New Jersey. As long as they're actively working with Republicans in an effort to weaken the Democratic party, they are part of the problem rather than the solution.
As for your other questions:
"What's wrong with supporting or raising funds for candidates in primaries who better represent one's interests? What's wrong with that? Especially given the reality of our two party system."
There's nothing wrong with like-minded Republicans and Republican-leaning unaffiliated voters raising PAC money to elect Republicans candidates.
However, there is something definitely wrong with pseudo "leftists" soliciting money in an effort that will sell out their followers to the other side just so that those cashing the checks will remain relevant and marketable in order to maximize the monetization of their cynical "movements" on backs of naive followers. Self-righteous umbrage in the defense of these players seems a bit misplaced in general and on Democratic Underground in particular.
Wwcd
(6,288 posts) KPN
(16,479 posts)That's disingenuous. Not true.
As for Justice Democrats, I've been unable to find any information re them aligning with the Republican Party in Ohio, New Jersey or anywhere. I would be interested in seeing anything that substantiates your claim however. Perhaps you'll be able to convince me about the "pseudo leftists" bit.
Oh, and speaking of "self-righteous umbrage" ...
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)Here's Nina's interview with The Nation from last June:
Interviewer:
"Will the group be endorsing non-Democrats?"
Nina Turner:
"You know what, yes. We are open to it. And for me, I’ve also heard the senator say this lately too: Let’s put the political affiliation to the side. If there is a Republican or a Libertarian or Green Party person that believes in Medicare for all, then that’s our kind of person."
(I wonder if Nina had Senator Sanders' permission to drag his name into that mess of an interview.)
Here's Nina's Cosmo Interview from last month:
Interviewer:
"You've said before that Our Revolution is more interested in endorsing candidates based on beliefs, rather than endorsing along party lines. Does that mean Our Revolution could endorse a Republican?"
Nina Turner:
Our grassroots affiliate organizations nominate [candidates] up. I can give you real examples — they have nominated Green Party members and we have endorsed Green Party members. But, for the sake of argument, if there is a progressive Republican out there that seeks their endorsement [from] Our Revolution, and they go through the local affiliate, there is a strong possibility that they could be endorsed.
Interviewer:
But it hasn't happened yet that you've endorsed a Republican?
Nina Turner:
"Not yet. But listen, any day now. It could happen."
Our Revolution endorsed Green Party candidates over Democrats this year, including in the NJ gubernatorial race.
http://www.gp.org/our_revolution_endorses_kaper_dale_and_durden
Our Revolution© endorsed several Green Party candidates over Democratic candidates in the 2017 cycle and has publicly stated in major publications that the Our Revolution© is shopping for Republicans to endorse. Because Our Revolution© chose to incorporate as an "unauthorized independent expenditor", the group is exempt from many FEC financial filing regulations.
Here's what the watchdog group The Sunlight Foundation had to say about Nina's enterprise:
"But without releasing the identities of contributors, it’s hard for the public to know whether that really is true. A group that decries the influence of money in politics should know that donor disclosure matters. Even as a 501(c)(4), Our Revolution could set an example for other nonprofits that spend on elections and choose to reveal this crucial information. Without doing that, it’s just another dark money group."
https://sunlightfoundation.com/2016/08/26/bernie-sanderss-new-political-group-wont-have-to-disclose-its-donors/
KPN
(16,479 posts)based on the belief that those candidates best aligned with the group's priorities and values. That's going to happen from time to time. Just like some voters vote for the individual candidate who best reflects the voter's personal interests. So let's go ahead and label the entire organization as anti-Democrat, radical unrealistic twinkies who seek to destroy the Democratic Party. Makes a lot of sense.
This stuff's going to happen. So how are we going to deal with it? How did the party deal/how has the party dealt with it thus far? "A Better Deal: Better Jobs, Better Wages, Better Future" with the center-piece for jobs being tax credits for companies that invest in retraining (again). Now that's going to inspire all those free-thinkers to get on board isn't it?
How about instead we go back to including the goal of full employment back into our platform like the party did for decades up until Bill Clinton 1992? Nah, that's "unrealistic" ... i.e., big money and corporations won't go along.
How about we -- as a party/the DNC -- adopt something like the Center for American Progress' national "jobs guarantee to counter the effects of reduced bargaining power, technical change, globalization, and the Great Recession"? Why don't we/why haven't we done that? Why can't that be a uniting goal instead of the division we see so often playing out here at DU and within the party?
As for the Sunlight Foundation -- I will look to organizations like CAP well ahead of corporate laden groups like SF for inspiration, conscience and guidance thank you.
BTW, I assume as a Democrat you might be interested in CAPs economic plan/jobs proposal. Here's a link:
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2017/05/16/432499/toward-marshall-plan-america/
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)that groups like Our Revolution and Justice Democrats who are actively working to elect Green Party and Republican candidates are not allies of Democrats. They're cynical opportunists.
KPN
(16,479 posts)Haha. Is that what you got from my post? Explains a lot.
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)Having spent 2 years researching American politics, and policies his conclusions strongly resembled Bernie Sanders' political positions, Ronan has spoken out against of the influence of corporate donors in politics. After losing the DNC election he continued his efforts to reform the Democratic Party by working with, notably, the Justice Democrats, and founded Our Voice, an electoral resource for progressive candidates.
Now there's something you don't see every day...a Republican who ran for DNC chair! How much more "ousider" can you get?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Ronan
https://www.facebook.com/Justice-Democrats-For-Sam-Ronan-364115337320502/
https://www.reddit.com/r/justicedemocrats/comments/5s322o/join_justice_democrats_for_sam_ronan_for_a_truly/
KPN
(16,479 posts)He ran in 2016 as D (unopposed in the primary) ... and got clobbered. Which is why he switched to R -- so that he can make another run at it with a better chance of success in 2018 in an extremely gerrymandered district. His positions haven't changed.
Here in SW Oregon, an R ran against DeFazio 3 years ago in the primary by registering as a Democrat -- thinking the same thing.
This might actually be a smart strategy in places like Ohio's 1st district.
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)KPN
(16,479 posts)But gee, talk about cynical ...
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)Many would think cynically of a politician who, after failing in every and any attempt to use one party to further his personal ambitions, suddenly declared himself a member of the opposition party so that he could use it in like manner, all the while trying to foist the move off as some sort of altruistic strategy. It is reasonable to mistrust the motives, sincerity, and integrity of such people.
Cynical can also describe those who are concerned only with their own interests and who typically disregard accepted or appropriate standards in order to achieve them.
When such a person also "exploits circumstances to gain immediate advantage rather than being guided by consistent principles or plans", it is perfectly reasonable to describe him as a "cynical opportunist".
Cynical opportunist/Republican Sam Ronan is the embodiment of the definition.
JHan
(10,173 posts)Demsrule86
(71,077 posts)Democratic presidential candidates so Bernie Sanders can run...won't work. I blocked all of them and am giving to the DNC.
elfin
(6,262 posts)Sounds good, but self indulgent to the point of self destruction in this case.
Probably just the opinion of this old lady who has seen pretty much all in the various transgressions in this area from the 50's on. Fortunately not personally in the truly violent forms.
Disappointed in Al? Yes. Still a fan? Yes.
So stoppit.
mvd
(65,597 posts)If so, however, it would be counterproductive.
lapucelle
(19,873 posts)that Nina & Co. anticipate endorsing.
Wwcd
(6,288 posts)They set out to do to the Dem Party, exactly what the Tea Party did to the Republican Party.
The pattern is obvious & familiar.
Yes, this was discussed early on in 2015/16.
The Kochs funded & created the Tea Party as an "in" to political power, with that in place, they set their sights on the powerful Democratic Party to do the same.
Read the history of the Koch Family & the John Birch Society.
They loathe Democracy & they have been on the mission to destroy & replace it for years.
They fund fringe groups like Stein & the Libertarians to sow division.
What Our Revolution is doing is simply a repeat of how the Tea Party destroyed the Republicans.
Billionares with a purpose to fulfill their father's wish for JBS dominance before they die.
Tea Party & Our Revolution are working for the same goal.
Its not about democracy nor a better future for our society.
This isn't just my opinion, you can read about the John Birch Society, Tea Party.
It's similarity to the path & actions of Our Revolution are all too similar.
Some may not want to hear this, but it is fact.
You don't have to like nor approve.
Understood.
melman
(7,681 posts)Control-Z
(15,686 posts)This is their message:
Oh, hell no.
kcr
(15,522 posts)Even when you point it right out to them. It would be funny if it didn't have horrible consequences.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)For many years we've been told that if we desire a change in how the party is run, we should go grassroots and get people elected who actually agree with us. The implication of course was always that these people didn't exist and it would never happen, so we should just shut up. Instead we're doing EXACTLY what we were told to do, getting people elected who represent our beliefs and interests and shaping the party more to our liking.
Now I'm really curious about why this should be such a problem to you? What exactly are these 'horrible consequences'? This is democracy, people getting representatives elected who actually represent them, and best of all its being done inside our big tent. So what exactly is the problem with this?
kcr
(15,522 posts)Why would helping elect Republicans be a problem for me? Uh. Not sure why that should have to be explained here. But, since you seem to not understand. The GOP platform is conservative, and many members of the GOP have moved far right.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Last I checked we were getting progressives elected. Now I know some point to what Nina Turner said about potentially endorsing Republicans in a 'could it ever happen?' scenario. I can't speak for Nina, but my interpretation of that was that was that if there was a race in a state where the only real contest was between two Republicans (which we know happens in some parts of the south), that she'd consider endorsing a Republican running on a progressive platform (bizarre as that thought is). You'd have to ask Nina about what she meant though, as I'm just speculating.
kcr
(15,522 posts)I don't support getting Republicans elected. And I don't support destroying the Democratic party. That's why I don't support Our Revolution and never will. And nice spin on Nina Turner but totally inaccurate.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)People are getting a little too fond recently of looking for narratives that paint people within the party who they disagree with as some kind of nefarious enemies. Have you considered that perhaps she wants the same things you do, but perhaps just believes a different strategy could work? When did we become a party where people attack each other instead of having conversations?
I can barely even post here any more, because any hint that I might disagree with the popular line of thought and it's an instant alert. If you want DU (and the party in general) to just become an echo chamber, then this is how you go about it.
Nina Turner isn't an enemy. Bernie Sanders isn't an enemy. Our Revolution certainly isn't an enemy. These are good people who probably share about 95% of the same beliefs that anyone else here does. How about we talk instead of jab at each other. It's ok to disagree when we ultimately want the same outcomes. You'll win some, we'll win some, and that's ok.
kcr
(15,522 posts)I just don't care. It's a destructive strategy and I don't support it. I think it's born of a narrow, single-minded focus that doesn't consider or flat out ignores the victims of the destruction it causes. It's proponents also base the premise on false narratives that either both parties are the same, or the differences are so slight that they don't matter. Also likely due to their narrow-minded focus that doesn't take into account the victims of their burn it down strategy.
I want more progressive candidates, too. I'm well aware we both want the same things. I'm just not prepared to accept collateral damage, and I don't believe it's even necessary.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Also assuming that you know exactly what other people's intentions and desires are, and dismissing them before you've even discussed them.
What damage is their strategy supposed to be causing? What victims are they supposedly not caring about? Your language is deeply emotive, but you don't give any actual examples of what it is that makes you so angry. So tell me.
LongTomH
(8,636 posts)May I point out that Our Revolution candidates won in 2016 and 2017; Our Revolution also supported local and state resolutions that won in both years.
If you want to keep the Blue Wave going, expelling Our Revolution members from the party would be counterproductive. (Yes, some of them are independents or Third Party; but, most are still Democrats.)