Just listened to Stephanie Miller, a real progressive.

[watoos]

She just said the exact same things I have been saying.

She doesn't give a shit if Amy Klobuchar eats salad with a comb or beats her staff.
She doesn't care if Bernie doesn't release his taxes.
She doesn't care what Kamala did as A.G.
She doesn't care if Tulsi met with Assad.

She cares about fighting "for" our candidates.

I expect the negativity from Republicans and from the M%M, I don't expect the negativity here.

Let the bashing begin, have at me, and Stephanie, you do know who her dad was?

[LexVegas]

1. ...

[LexVegas]

15. ...

[mucifer]

2. She has said that many times. Then later in the show she will complain about Bernie. I still love

Stephanie Miller tho and listen to her all the time. But, I wish she would calm down about Bernie.

[Shell_Seas]

3. I didn't know who her dad was, but I just looked it up...

Interesting bit of trivia there.

[whathehell]

4. Who says she's a "true progressive"?

I never thought so.
I've never been overly impressed with her -- She's never seemed all that bright to me.

[watoos]

5. With all due respect,

I think you just made her point. Her point was we shouldn't bash our candidates or have purity tests for them.

I don't think you are saying that Democrats have to be bright but some people may take it that way.

I agree with you actually that Stephanie can't hold a candle to Rachel Maddow's intellect. Some people are turned off by Rachel being too cerebral. I think we need bright and not so bright people in our party to win.

My only quality that I am looking at when I decide who to vote for in the primary is he/she needs to be tough as nails. Policy means nothing if we lose.

[whathehell]

6. I really doubt that..

since she:s a talk show host/ entertainer, not a politician or a candidate of any kind.
If her point, as you've expressed it, is that Democrats should have no standards of character, or behavior, aka "purity tests", I disagree with her completely.

[Power 2 the People]

7. +1

[rogue emissary]

11. Stephanie Miller agrees with you.

[Botany]

13. I knew that Stephanie would love this thread.

Rachel Maddow

B.A. Stanford
PhD Oxford Rhodes Scholar


Stephanie Miller

B.A. Theater USC

[oasis]

8. Lumping Tulsi's Assad controversy together with Klobuchar's salad/comb

nothingburger, says all I need to know.

[Wounded Bear]

9. Save it for the general...

that kind of shit is what we should be debating about in the primaries, well except maybe for the comb thing. Else, what are primaries for?

[TCJ70]

10. I think all four of those things matter...

...not in a “you suck for supporting this candidate because...” way but in a “I’d rather not support a candidate for that reason” way.

[Malikshah]

12. And y'all made the show!

Self awareness is key here, folks. Step away and breathe.

If folks will stop gnawing on each others femurs we can all move forward and succeed.

[ronnykmarshall]

19. I haven't logged in since the 2016 election.

I had to check the thread out. I see not much has changed.

[tinrobot]

17. I agree about the comb thing, not everyting else.

Candidates should release taxes.

Past policies absolutely are fair game, including what Kamla did as AG and who Gabbard met with.

We absolutely need to vet our candidates.

[brooklynite]

18. I don't propose to live in an imaginary world of only good news...

If our candidates have flaws, I'd like to know in advance to make decisions about 1) whether they're serious and 2) whether the candidate can overcome them.

[WeekiWater]

20. I do care about those things.

So should you. It’s not eating our own. It’s vetting.