Post removed

[pbmus]

1. All will be revealed in due time...

[DENVERPOPS]

82. Amen to that

Examine her voting record. There are a whole big bunch of DINO's lurking out there in the shadows.

All the Dems vote for them because of the "D" beside their name, all the Repubs vote for them because they all know truly what they are, and we end up with a DINO.......They all constantly talk a great Democrat line, get elected and then vote their right wing heart......

[Skidmore]

2. Here we go.

The little lady is a mere extension of her man. Incapable of producing or holding a thought of her own. They did that to Hillary too.

[irisblue]

4. Bull pucky. It is called vetting of candidates

Last edited Sun Dec 8, 2019, 06:34 PM - Edit history (1)

I can understand NOT sharing political opinions with your spouse. I didn't with mine.
The actions of The Federalist Society are problematic, and that is an issue for me.

YMMV

[Skidmore]

8. And how is Amy different than you that she

could do the same thing?

[irisblue]

25. I'm not running for POTUS, that is a big difference

I'm not a US Senator with a voting record on Federal Judges.


My vote in 2020 with such a large field is too important to not to do deep dive research. I may be wrong at times, I may be right at times. It's a long time till my state has it's primary.

[Skidmore]

40. In this instance,

you might be wrong.

[irisblue]

46. Always a possibility.

[pnwmom]

10. You don't like the Federalist Society, then don't vote for their members. Amy is NOT one,

and she's not an extension of her husband.

[George II]

14. A few other examples that wouldn't change my mind about supporting them because of a spouse:

James Carville and Mary Matalin
John Avlon and Margaret Hoover

Just because someone is married to a conservative doesn't make that person a conservative.

[a kennedy]

33. can we talk Kelly Ann and George Conway??

or is that not appropriate

[George II]

35. I was going to add them to my post, but George Conway is still a conservative.

[a kennedy]

36. crap......ok,

thanks.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

47. Yes, it's a BIG issue!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[TwilightZone]

50. Her husband isn't running.

She is.

[Lucky Luciano]

76. Married to an extreme conservative is jarring though.

I could never marry an arch conservative woman.

Edit: looks like she does not in fact have such bad judgment. He is not a member of such a terrible group of people.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

90. Yes, but by that standard, apparently Jane Sanders IS running... who knew?!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Jake Stern]

3. Doesn't bother me at all

Just because Hubs is a member doesn't mean she subscribes to their policies.

I thought progressives believed in treating women as their own person and not as an extension of their husband.

[madinmaryland]

17. The point is, that if my wife was a right winger, I would never have married her. Period.

Senator Klobachar’s husband is a right winger. The fact that she condones him and his beliefs does bother me.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

48. Sounds reasonable!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Jake Stern]

51. How strange

I never asked my partner what her political persuasion was when I fell in love with her. I just accept her for who she is. Luckily she is politically the same as me but if she were a Republican then so be it.

I don't base my life around politics - not the food I eat, not the bands I enjoy, not the movies I watch, not the religion I adhere to, and especially not when it comes to the person I love.

[randr]

5. This is not gonna keep me in her camp-nc

[dewsgirl]

13. Yikes. I really like her, but this won't help her.

[OKNancy]

20. read the whole thread.. it's not true

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

53. There's room for 1 more on the Bernie Bandwagon... climb aboard!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Hassin Bin Sober]

63. We're gonna need a bigger bandwagon!

v

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

67. LMFAO!! You said it!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[MustLoveBeagles]

68. It doesn't sound like it's been proven true

Please read posts #7, #16 & #60.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

6. James Carville and Mary Matalin?

Kelly Ann and George Conway?

Couples don't always have the same political views.

[elleng]

44. THANKS!

My husband was repug; my mother surprised I'd marry such.

He did not vote for bush#2; he had some decent inclinations, fortunately. (Then he died, so no chance to test him re: trump.)

[Lucky Luciano]

77. Conways are both conservative.

Carville and Matalin are just political gamers.

[OKNancy]

7. He's not running.. however his books are definitely on the liberal side

Several anti-death penalty books
Here is one: https://www.amazon.com/Legacy-Violence-Lynch-Executions-Minnesota/dp/081663811X

ETA: did a little reading on twitter.. this person who tweeted this tweets constant negative stuff about all candidates except Bernie.

Finding all sorts of stuff about Amy's husband: from the article posted:
In 2018, he was a visiting scholar/research fellow at the Human Rights Center of the University of Minnesota Law School

He also edited Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer's 2016 book, Against the Death Penalty

-------------

I wonder if the tweeter is even correct

[madaboutharry]

9. This shouldn't be an issue.

She and her husband obviously have different political views. They’ve been married for 25 years or so and he apparently hasn’t influenced how she sees the world. There are some things beyond politics.

[judeling]

21. In this case they don't

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bessler

He really isn't on the right at all.

[Hoyt]

11. For someone who is a member of that group, he sure writes a lot about human rights and opposition to

death penalty.

Other than OP, I can’t find any references to his membership in Federalist Society.

Maybe someone can find a citation from some reputable.

[OKNancy]

15. Me either, I did the same

looked at his books etc. Post 7

[Hoyt]

18. Sorry, didn't see your earlier post. While I always check right wing

sources, it’s getting where one really has to dig for the truth even here.

[OKNancy]

19. Yup n/t

[mzmolly]

12. Were is the proof he's a member?

Pardon me if I missed something.

[judeling]

16. He is NOT a nember of The society

He spoke at one of their events

[grantcart]

32. Doesn't matter to the OP, obviously

[StevieM]

22. Even if he was a member, which it appears he is not, that doesn't reflect on her.

It was terrible when people talked about Hillary like she was a byproduct of her husband. The same holds true for Klobuchar. Her husband's beliefs are irrelevant to how we should assess her as a senator and as a candidate.

And I say this as someone who does not care for Amy Klobuchar very much.

[Skidmore]

38. Yup.

Makes you wonder about how progressive parts of thebleft are.

[still_one]

64. I cannot find anything to confirm what this Finkelstein has alleged that he is a member of the

Federalist Society

Because someone speaks to a group doesn’t mean you are a member

If we use that logic, I guess some would say Sanders must be a member of the ultra right Christian University he spoke to

[irisblue]

23. Continuing to do more research on the Senators voting record

https://www.minnpost.com/national/2019/08/on-judicial-nominations-klobuchars-bipartisan-votes-puts-her-out-of-step-with-the-democratic-field/


snip--... "Now running for president, on the campaign trail Klobuchar often frames herself in two ways: as the bipartisan senator who can get things done and as a “proven progressive.” But Klobuchar’s votes alongside Republicans are not an aberration ⁠— they’re representative of her record as a whole on judicial appointments. Apart from Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado, Klobuchar has voted with Republicans to confirm many of President Donald Trump’s judicial appointments, more than the other Senate Democrats running for president"



snip--" For the 115th Congressional session (2017-18), Klobuchar voted 64 percent of the time for judges nominated by Trump. Booker, Warren, Gillibrand, Harris, and Sanders all voted for the nominees 46 to 51 percent of the time.

Klobuchar is the only Senate Democrat running for president that voted to confirm Stras. She was also the only Senate Democrat running to vote with Republicans to confirm Charles Barnes Goodwin, who was rated as not qualified by the American Bar Association. (Five of her Democratic colleagues also voted yes.)



snip--"Trump has leaned heavily on the Federalist Society, a powerful conservative judicial activist group, to select judicial nominees. Its Executive Vice President, Leonard Leo, worked as an advisor to the president to devise a list of court nominees."



The article is much too long to quote here. Yes I picked separate paragraphs to C&P.

I do not live in Minnesota, she is not my Senator. I was favorably impressed with her questioning of Kavanaugh.

[aidbo]

24. I've Already ruled Klobuchar out, but that is a bad look for sure.

[brooklynite]

31. SO a conservative spouse is a dealbreaker, but hiring a homophobic antisemite is ok?

[aidbo]

45. Reading comprehension must not be your strong suit.

If you were to glance back at my original comment, you would see that I wrote, “I’ve already ruled Klobuchar out, but...” So, no the conservative spouse was not the deal breaker.

[brooklynite]

56. Then everything starting with "but..." was unnecessary

See, I would have written: “I’ve already ruled Sanders out AND his hiring of homophobes for his commas team reinforces that decision.

https://t.co/LtkQbb7qeq

[Joinfortmill]

26. Yikes!

Not likely to be nominee.

[bucolic_frolic]

27. This whole thread needs extreme fact checking

We are going to be constantly blitzed with disinformation to sew divisions and dissent. Is Amy being Hillaried here? Is this Amy's emails in another form? That is what they did in 2016 ... it wasn't anything major about HRC, because there was nothing major, it was just a drip-drip of uneasiness. Once they sew doubt in the minds of the masses, the masses are much more willing to believe the bigger lie at the proper time (for them).

Do not waver. Do not let disinformation pollute your mind and your will. To me, this needs checking. To accept the rumor is toxic. What's the old line, from a Sparks album? "Rumors spread like tumors, too too fast and too too true." So don't let it happen.

My thought is this is not very relevant, or even a lie with a grain of truth, and confirmation of just how much Trumpies Campaign fears a Biden-Klobuchar ticket. Look at that idea this way: 1/2 of the Obama team, his VP in fact, and someone who can deliver Trump's fertile pickings of 2016 - the midwest - into the Democratic column. Are we being duped here?

[irisblue]

29. I'm perfectly willing to continue to tell DU my research

I am willing to read and discuss what you learn.

[bucolic_frolic]

34. I didn't ask to be entered in a research contest

Controversies should not be accepted without fact checking or at face value is all I'm saying.

I didn't throw it in your lap, so don't throw it in mine.

[irisblue]

52. Still doing my fact checking, and I did not "throw it in your lap"

I asked for your input.

[Lexee]

93. You stated it as fact the man was a member of extreme RW org. Now you are saying you are

checking to see if it is true. Leaving up the headline he is for fact a member of this group?

[TwilightZone]

54. It's your assertion.

It's up to you to provide proof of your claim. If you can't, I would suggest that you self-delete this thread.

[MustLoveBeagles]

75. You're right

Reading this thread is surreal. Shouldn't people make sure this is even true before they judge?

[mcar]

37. This is not true

[Hav]

42. And even if it was true,

discredting or smearing someone for the actions/memberships of her spouse just seems incredibly despicable.
Same shit was done to Hillary. But it's just one of those things that is more likely to be done to women than the reverse.

[elleng]

39. Her HUSBAND's membership may be a problem for you,

but not for me; SHE is HERSELF.

[Scruffy1]

41. Personally, I like her.

But I do hope she doesn't get the nomination. Everybody in Minneapolis knew her father (or at least his name) who was a well known and loved columnist for the Star Tribune. That gave her the name recognition for elective offices. Her stint as county attorney was unremarkable, but in the Senate races she stays on the fence and offends nobody to get the rural vote. Bottom line it's time for a progressive candidate for President of the USA and I don't think she has the chops. Nice person does not equate with the job for our next president. We need someone who can kick ass and take names. Hell, my cat could beat Trump. Why do you think the media creating a false close election? His few supporters have lost their fire and won't even bother to vote if it looks like he will lose. One thing I've learned in life is never be nice to an asshole because they will see it as approval. If you don't fight back the public will see you as weak.

[MRDAWG]

43. No way Kloubuchhar should be President. We don't............

want a Federalist sleeping in the White House.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

57. It's pretty close to disqualifying... but then, so are some of AK's policy positions.

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[pnwmom]

89. All because of a false tweet about her husband? It's so easy for us to be manipulated. nt

[Aussie105]

49. Do people ever learn?

A classic example of being led by the nose to a conclusion someone is aiming for!

The process:

Throw a 'fact' out there. This leads to inferences. The inferences lead to a conclusion of distrust, shock, horror, and eventually - a change in opinion and behaviour!

(Could it be the whole aim of the 'fact' poster is to get that end result?)

FACTOID:
'Sen Klobauchrs' husband is a member of the Federalist Society'

INFERENCE:
She must be too! Two faced so-and-so!

CONCLUSION:
I hate her, would never vote for her if my life depended on it!

JUST one SECOND!
Unwind the process, check the 'factoid', if it is wrong, unsupported opinion or unjustifiable or heavily slanted, unwind the inference in your mind, delete the hasty conclusion, call the original poster a twat for misleading people.

HONESTLY . . I have relatives in the US who couldn't vote for Hillary because Benghazi, because pizza slave ring, because eMail server, because 'bleaching' emails, because her president husband got a free BJ and she still stood by him.

. . . . and they still couldn't vote for her, even after the debunking.

Don't be stupid like my relatives!

And it will only get worse. Disinformation avalanche coming!

Cue a 'true' story that Biden keeps an underground bunker full of <sex slaves / porn films / drug den> (*) in 5 .. 4 .. 3 .. 2 ..

(*) Delete whichever you like least.

[Hav]

59. No, they don't learn

Many just read a headline of a topic and spew out what's in their heard without gathering more info from the article or other sources.

[betsuni]

79. This is what makes me really nervous. Should be automatic to check everything out

before even thinking about it. Still not.

[BeyondGeography]

55. Interesting body language in that photo

He looks nice btw.

[emmaverybo]

58. Let's not do this.

[still_one]

60. He has spoken before them. I cannot find anything that indicates he is a member except

Finkelstein’s allegations

[Aussie105]

62. Just that.

No proof.

But critical thinking skills? Sorry America, they don't teach that in school, you need to develop your own.

[still_one]

66. Also if you look at Finkelstein, it appears not only he is a Sanders' supporter, but also casts

dispersions on other Democratic candidates


Something definitely doesn’t smell right about this

[Hav]

61. Has this been verified?

Some random dude on Twitter claims something and it's treated as gospel here. Others are now saying that random dude is full of shit and that Klobuchar's husband is not a member. Not that this would have said anything about Amy Klobuchar nor would that have disqualified her as some here already indicated.
Would be kind of embarrassing if all this turns out to be complete garbage.

[Aussie105]

65. Not embarrassing at all.

Nice to see that some on DU go 'wait a minute' and check facts.

Then call it garbage, hogwash, disinformation.

It's the learning of critical thinking skills we see in action here. It's a process worth pursuing.

I wager that over the coming months you will get plenty of opportunities to fine hone your critical thinking skills. Good luck!

[still_one]

69. I incorrectly said it appears his Twitter account was canceled. It isnt

Something very strange is going on here with this Finkelstein

[MustLoveBeagles]

72. How interesting

I'm getting a strong whiff of bullshit with this story.

[still_one]

73. Something weird is going on

[still_one]

80. I'm wrong about his Twitter account being cancelled. His tweets seem critical of all the leading

Democratic candidates except one, and that is Sanders, so that tells me the bias this guy has

and that he isn’t a particularly honest person

[Cha]

70. So he's not a member?

[SidDithers]

71. Prove it...

not that it matters. Certain DUers have already taken the ball and are running with it.

Sid

[Aussie105]

81. Yes, seriously.

Yes, they did.

It's called a 'knee jerk' reaction. Back your wagon train up a bit if you are prone to this, the disinformation campaign relies on it heavily.

But . . . spreading unsubstantiated info about a candidate or their spouse to negatively affect their political position is like . . . defamation? Legally actionable?

[betsuni]

74. A speech! Omg, he gave a speech! That is, like, totally disqualifying.

Was it a PAID SPEECH?

Speaking topic: Execution Methods and Deciding Implementation of the Death Penalty.

[AncientGeezer]

78. An April tweet...with ZERO sourcing

from a tweeter that says....."Samuel D. Finkelstein II
‏ @CANCEL_SAM
Dec 7

Samuel D. Finkelstein II Retweeted Lis Smith

Pete’s campaign has spent $600k on private mercenaries.

Imagine if Warren hired Blackwater for half a million dollars—that would be like this."

Please.

[Aussie105]

83. Samuel D. Finkelstein II

Whoever he is in real life, all I can say is . . . . he isn't very good at whatever he thinks he is trying to do.

Perhaps he needs to go to Russia and learn from the experts? (Assuming he isn't operating from there already, of course.)

[zentrum]

84. This is heart-stopping.

The fiends behind Kavanugh and the conservative take-over of our courts, in general.

WTF?

[madville]

85. I didn't know she was still in the race

Is this going to take her from 2% down to 1%?

[Lexee]

86. Reading thru the thread, do I have it right? Sanders supporter trashing a Democratic candidate

with lies?

I understand the man is big with human rights and anti death penalty. Doesn't sound far right to me.

[still_one]

87. Yup

[appalachiablue]

88. This is something, if true. 'The Fascist Society' as some call it, for reason.

Whoa

[pnwmom]

91. But it's not true. n/t

[Drunken Irishman]

92. That settles it. I will never vote for Amy Klobuchar's husband for president.

[Gothmog]

94. I do not believe that this man is a member of the Federalist Society