OT: Democratic Primary Thread

[Knickfan1982]

Minority voters aren't important.

[edit for clarification] in the general election

The question was why they didn't receive more traction. That's past tense not future tense so I assumed the discussion was about her as a Presidential candidate. As a VP candidate she's not as useful as other potential VPs.

I'm sorry, I misread the context. You're right. Mea culpa, mea culpa.

[edit] But that probably just goes to demonstrate the point that maybe minority voters aren't that important in a GE. Eg, if winning rust states is the key, etc.

It depends. He doesn't necessarily need to win the Rust Belt per say. He needs to win every state Hillary won and pick up at least 38 more electoral college votes. These are the states he could possibly put into play along with the electoral college votes they were worth in the last election because I'll operate under the assumption that's what they are worth this upcoming election)

Wisconsin 10
Michigan 16
North Carolina 15
South Carolina 9
Arizona 11
Pennsylvania 20

Lets say he picks Stacey Abrams as his VP. Maybe she won't help him enough to flip her home state of Georgia but maybe she helps him in South Carolina and North Carolina. As of March 2nd, polls only have Biden behind Trump by 4% there. As of March 1st Biden is beating Trump in North Carolina (although within the margin of error). Biden is already currently leading in Michigan and having a Black Female VP should improve turnout there. Adding NC and Michigan alone would put Biden with 263 of the 270 votes he'd need to win the election.

Going for someone like Klobouchar wouldn't move the needle in either of the Carolina's so Biden would be hoping they'd boost his chances in places like Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin and Michigan by increasing turnout among women and white centrist voters. Its workable I guess but maybe as a Bernie/Warren supporter and huge fan of AOC maybe I am a little biased. I feel Biden play towards the middle is doing nothing more than nibbling at the edges. He's trying to get voters who are sure to vote when we have a large untapped numbers of infrequent voters waiting to be inspired to turn out. Klobouchar doesn't help Biden do that.

[HarthorneWingo]

Cuomo’s going to be the Democratic nominee.

[j4remi]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

The latest Harvard CAPS-Harris Poll finds Biden getting 55 percent support, versus 45 percent for Trump. Biden has 96 percent support from Democrats, while Trump has 89 percent support from Republicans. Independents break for Biden by a 54 to 46 percent margin.

Interesting

They break almost perfectly with the confidence in the economy numbers (55/45). I think the numbers will keep improving for Biden as more people are touched by this pandemic and economy. The fact that we need to rely on the economy dragging and a completely botched pandemic to win is scary though. It's been sad watching Trump fish for ways to flip the narrative:

- It's a hoax, the media is exaggerating
- Call it the China Virus, it's all China's fault.
- The poor response is actually Obama's fault
- The governor's are exaggerating and hiding supplies in warehouses

He'll fish for something Republicans can latch onto, but I don't think it will work in this case. Most of us are tristate heads, we're ahead of the rest of the country in feeling how bad this gets and it's still going to get worse for us.

[j4remi]

Cuomo’s going to be the Democratic nominee.

It's annoying watching the deification of the guy as if the IDC didn't exist until a Sex and the City actress' campaign forced Cuomo to disband it and move left on a number of common sense issues. We could do worse than him I guess, but we had better options than him or Biden all over the debate stage if we're concerned with quality policies and leadership. But at the end of the day it's a popularity contest and if a link to Obama or the halo effect of being NY's leader during a tragedy is what it takes to dump Trump then I guess it is what it is.

[Clyde_Style]

Cuomo’s going to be the Democratic nominee.

It's annoying watching the deification of the guy as if the IDC didn't exist until a Sex and the City actress' campaign forced Cuomo to disband it and move left on a number of common sense issues. We could do worse than him I guess, but we had better options than him or Biden all over the debate stage if we're concerned with quality policies and leadership. But at the end of the day it's a popularity contest and if a link to Obama or the halo effect of being NY's leader during a tragedy is what it takes to dump Trump then I guess it is what it is.

The same gave Rudy some kind of credibility once and he turned out to be a complete scoundrel, though Giuliani is probably a fairly extreme character study in moral decay. But it is a good point in general. On the other hand, as we're finding out the hard way, crisis response and management really is one of the key capabilities we do need from a president. I'm not even sure if Cuomo's initial response was great, but his ongoing management is pretty good.

One thing I've taken away from this whole mess is that Obama actually did leave behind a decent infrastructure for dealing with pandemics, but Trump dismantled that just like he's done with pretty much every aspect of the government that can be beneficial to the citizenry. The GOP is simply too profit driven to be relied upon to invest in protecting the public and I do think pretty much any Democrat will do a better job on that level.

It does bring us to the question of health care and coverage too and that's obviously a policy issue I know you prefer Bernie for. I think Warren would have been good too for that. But this crisis should move the needle towards a national conversation on universal coverage. I sure hope so.

[j4remi]

The same gave Rudy some kind of credibility once and he turned out to be a complete scoundrel, though Giuliani is probably a fairly extreme character study in moral decay. But it is a good point in general. On the other hand, as we're finding out the hard way, crisis response and management really is one of the key capabilities we do need from a president. I'm not even sure if Cuomo's initial response was great, but his ongoing management is pretty good.

One thing I've taken away from this whole mess is that Obama actually did leave behind a decent infrastructure for dealing with pandemics, but Trump dismantled that just like he's done with pretty much every aspect of the government that can be beneficial to the citizenry. The GOP is simply too profit driven to be relied upon to invest in protecting the public and I do think pretty much any Democrat will do a better job on that level.

It does bring us to the question of health care and coverage too and that's obviously a policy issue I know you prefer Bernie for. I think Warren would have been good too for that. But this crisis should move the needle towards a national conversation on universal coverage. I sure hope so.

I had half a mind to bring up Rudy and thought the same, he's such an extreme example that it might actually distract people from the general idea. Agreed about management coming to the forefront in this tragedy and I legitimately think Cuomo's initial response was trash but is glossed over because he's still done better than a vast majority of governors so far. That's me speaking as someone who was having to take the bus to the train to a medical library in NYC...Research was warning us but I was still stuck in the damned commute, surrounded by a lot of people that were none the wiser. So my frustration with even Cuomo and Newsome types is of a special type (also Newsome kinda beat Cuomo to punch on every major decision but not by much).

I think it's CRUCIAL to point out that Trump and the GOP Congress really sapped our government of necessary protections and resources to exacerbate this whole thing. The Conservative line of thought tends to be "look how bad government is at doing this stuff" but it's self-fulfilling when they constantly cut budgets, pull resources and sabotage programs (intentional or not). I've seen some conservatives point to restrictions and bureaucracy as slowing down response to this whole mess...that's not what happened and we've got an entire February worth of Trump quotes while Congress people sold their stocks to prove it.

The saddest thing here is that I think the economic impacts and layoffs will be what changes the conversation. I think realizing the ominous realities of having employer tied health insurance will have a bigger impact than the logistical errors that a nationalized system could have avoided (even with us now being able to point out a country like Spain nationalizing their entire system to help with response). I'm mostly curious to see how the discussion evolves throughout this mess. I wish Biden's camp would take this opportunity to pivot on the topic but he's basically expressed the opposite.

[HarthorneWingo]

Cuomo’s going to be the Democratic nominee.

It's annoying watching the deification of the guy as if the IDC didn't exist until a Sex and the City actress' campaign forced Cuomo to disband it and move left on a number of common sense issues. We could do worse than him I guess, but we had better options than him or Biden all over the debate stage if we're concerned with quality policies and leadership. But at the end of the day it's a popularity contest and if a link to Obama or the halo effect of being NY's leader during a tragedy is what it takes to dump Trump then I guess it is what it is.

I know. But this is what the machine wants. That Moreland Commission is a problem for him and Trump could exploit that. They just won’t except Bernie. But if they steal all of his ideas, I guess I’d be cool with that.

[Slamm Goodbody]

Cuomo’s going to be the Democratic nominee.

It's annoying watching the deification of the guy as if the IDC didn't exist until a Sex and the City actress' campaign forced Cuomo to disband it and move left on a number of common sense issues. We could do worse than him I guess, but we had better options than him or Biden all over the debate stage if we're concerned with quality policies and leadership. But at the end of the day it's a popularity contest and if a link to Obama or the halo effect of being NY's leader during a tragedy is what it takes to dump Trump then I guess it is what it is.

I don't really think that's fair. Cuomo worked with the GOP Senate but the IDC wasn't something Cuomo concocted. It was created by a bunch of political opportunists that saw the ability to make more money and influence policy by siding with the GOP in a divided Senate. When the IDC turncoats got voted out Cuomo pivoted to the new reality. He has shown his ability to get what he wants done in divided government and now that it's a solid Dem majority he's been able to achieve progressive priorities that were unachievable back then.

I have a lot of respect for Cuomo's ability to govern a state that has a huge amount of competing special interests and regional biases through compromise. There is more NY than just NYC - upstate and the suburbs have different priorities and you need to make deals or you'll end up galvanizing the opposition. Divided government produced marriage equality, the tax cap, and gun reform legislation. Now with a Dem majority we're getting more strong policies that have been liberal priorities for ages and he's working to advance those as well: bail reform, tenant protections, etc. I think the complete picture of his governance on balance has been progressive but sensible.

Remember what government was like with Spitzer trying to railroad everything through and then with Patterson who had absolutely no ruling mandate, dealt with a huge budget gap from the recession that resulted in all the states taxes and fees getting juiced to high heaven, and left the entire government bogged down in inaction. This is a state that couldn't pass a budget on time for decades until Cuomo was able to corral the herd. He isn't perfect - he's very obsessed with his image and optics, petty in having to always look like the first among equals, and the Moreland Commission issue did not reflect well on him - but he's been able to enact a lot of social programs twinned with investments in housing and infrastructure and a balanced budget that have really moved the state forward in my opinion.

Honestly Cuomo would make a very good presidential candidate now that the field is narrowed to Biden and Bernie but that's a pipe dream. Biden is a TERRIBLE candidate and is going to be exposed in the general when this dies down. We all remember him as Obama's boy and I know he is a good person but as a politician he has shown the knack for being on the wrong side of history in the Senate and then in the war room. I love Bernie but Cuomo plays better on a national stage - there is a huge segment of the older generation that can't see past Cold War biases when Bernie starts talking about Cuba's system not being all bad or his trip to the Soviet Union.

[HarthorneWingo]

If we could get a progressive as Cuomo s VP, that could get people enthused again.

[j4remi]

I don't really think that's fair. Cuomo worked with the GOP Senate but the IDC wasn't something Cuomo concocted. It was created by a bunch of political opportunists that saw the ability to make more money and influence policy by siding with the GOP in a divided Senate. When the IDC turncoats got voted out Cuomo pivoted to the new reality. He has shown his ability to get what he wants done in divided government and now that it's a solid Dem majority he's been able to achieve progressive priorities that were unachievable back then.

I have a lot of respect for Cuomo's ability to govern a state that has a huge amount of competing special interests and regional biases through compromise. There is more NY than just NYC - upstate and the suburbs have different priorities and you need to make deals or you'll end up galvanizing the opposition. Divided government produced marriage equality, the tax cap, and gun reform legislation. Now with a Dem majority we're getting more strong policies that have been liberal priorities for ages and he's working to advance those as well: bail reform, tenant protections, etc. I think the complete picture of his governance on balance has been progressive but sensible.

Remember what government was like with Spitzer trying to railroad everything through and then with Patterson who had absolutely no ruling mandate, dealt with a huge budget gap from the recession that resulted in all the states taxes and fees getting juiced to high heaven, and left the entire government bogged down in inaction. This is a state that couldn't pass a budget on time for decades until Cuomo was able to corral the herd. He isn't perfect - he's very obsessed with his image and optics, petty in having to always look like the first among equals, and the Moreland Commission issue did not reflect well on him - but he's been able to enact a lot of social programs twinned with investments in housing and infrastructure and a balanced budget that have really moved the state forward in my opinion.

Honestly Cuomo would make a very good presidential candidate now that the field is narrowed to Biden and Bernie but that's a pipe dream. Biden is a TERRIBLE candidate and is going to be exposed in the general when this dies down. We all remember him as Obama's boy and I know he is a good person but as a politician he has shown the knack for being on the wrong side of history in the Senate and then in the war room. I love Bernie but Cuomo plays better on a national stage - there is a huge segment of the older generation that can't see past Cold War biases when Bernie starts talking about Cuba's system not being all bad or his trip to the Soviet Union.

The IDC wasn't something Cuomo concocted but he pushed that faction to buddy up with the Republicans and it certainly appears to have been strategic (allowing him to use that faction to block policies his own constituents wanted but that he didn't prioritize). Here's an article about that:
https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2016/05/another-cuomo-noninterference-story-falls-apart-049022

It's also worth noting, at least from the progressive viewpoint, the Cuomo pre-Zephyr Teachout result and post-Nixon primarying him next is two very different governors...he made some serious moves to cut off Nixon from getting to Teachout numbers. As far as the progressive strategies and goals go, Cuomo and the IDC held us back pretty heavily when we could be leading the way on progressive legislation.

I do think he'd be better than Biden in a general against Trump. I think both guys are ripe to pull left on some issues because they're pretty opportunistic. I'd just also keep a healthy skepticism about their sincerity, especially Cuomo specifically for the IDC example. He encouraged that faction to get where it did and then used that as an excuse to get less done that his blue state would have wanted.

[Slamm Goodbody]

I don't really think that's fair. Cuomo worked with the GOP Senate but the IDC wasn't something Cuomo concocted. It was created by a bunch of political opportunists that saw the ability to make more money and influence policy by siding with the GOP in a divided Senate. When the IDC turncoats got voted out Cuomo pivoted to the new reality. He has shown his ability to get what he wants done in divided government and now that it's a solid Dem majority he's been able to achieve progressive priorities that were unachievable back then.

I have a lot of respect for Cuomo's ability to govern a state that has a huge amount of competing special interests and regional biases through compromise. There is more NY than just NYC - upstate and the suburbs have different priorities and you need to make deals or you'll end up galvanizing the opposition. Divided government produced marriage equality, the tax cap, and gun reform legislation. Now with a Dem majority we're getting more strong policies that have been liberal priorities for ages and he's working to advance those as well: bail reform, tenant protections, etc. I think the complete picture of his governance on balance has been progressive but sensible.

Remember what government was like with Spitzer trying to railroad everything through and then with Patterson who had absolutely no ruling mandate, dealt with a huge budget gap from the recession that resulted in all the states taxes and fees getting juiced to high heaven, and left the entire government bogged down in inaction. This is a state that couldn't pass a budget on time for decades until Cuomo was able to corral the herd. He isn't perfect - he's very obsessed with his image and optics, petty in having to always look like the first among equals, and the Moreland Commission issue did not reflect well on him - but he's been able to enact a lot of social programs twinned with investments in housing and infrastructure and a balanced budget that have really moved the state forward in my opinion.

Honestly Cuomo would make a very good presidential candidate now that the field is narrowed to Biden and Bernie but that's a pipe dream. Biden is a TERRIBLE candidate and is going to be exposed in the general when this dies down. We all remember him as Obama's boy and I know he is a good person but as a politician he has shown the knack for being on the wrong side of history in the Senate and then in the war room. I love Bernie but Cuomo plays better on a national stage - there is a huge segment of the older generation that can't see past Cold War biases when Bernie starts talking about Cuba's system not being all bad or his trip to the Soviet Union.

The IDC wasn't something Cuomo concocted but he pushed that faction to buddy up with the Republicans and it certainly appears to have been strategic (allowing him to use that faction to block policies his own constituents wanted but that he didn't prioritize). Here's an article about that:
https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2016/05/another-cuomo-noninterference-story-falls-apart-049022

It's also worth noting, at least from the progressive viewpoint, the Cuomo pre-Zephyr Teachout result and post-Nixon primarying him next is two very different governors...he made some serious moves to cut off Nixon from getting to Teachout numbers. As far as the progressive strategies and goals go, Cuomo and the IDC held us back pretty heavily when we could be leading the way on progressive legislation.

I do think he'd be better than Biden in a general against Trump. I think both guys are ripe to pull left on some issues because they're pretty opportunistic. I'd just also keep a healthy skepticism about their sincerity, especially Cuomo specifically for the IDC example. He encouraged that faction to get where it did and then used that as an excuse to get less done that his blue state would have wanted.

The IDC was toxic to the state Democratic party from the moment it was created since its express purpose was to deny the state Democratic party control of both houses of the legislature. It was created for its members to enrich themselves and gain outsized power in Albany where the party line rules and the seat at the head of the table has all the power. Not only that, the IDC essentially used the state party for their label and campaign finance, then dumped them to get boosts in pay, chairmanships, and function as the fulcrum on controversial issues. The IDC was just an extension of what Monserrate and Espada did in 2009 when they saw that they could have more power and money by using the Republicans in the Senate to control debate and legislation.

It was a fait accompli that anyone that declared IDC would be shunned by the mainline Dems and they'd be forced into the GOP coalition. Cuomo took advantage of that reality to push the IDC to focus on issues he cared about and thought they could get through the GOP's diminished majority: stop and frisk (passed), campaign finance reform (failed), minimum wage (passed), all progressive policies. When the coalition fell apart he pivoted away - that's smart politics to me and shows someone who can work with whatever cards he's dealt to keep moving forward.

No argument from me that when the state Dems took control of the Senate and after the Teachout protest that Cuomo shored up support from the left flank. He is nothing if not a politician, but I wouldn't say the shift was that dramatic. Once you have a liberal majority in both houses you move legislation that supermajority allows for. There are issues he's gone a lot further left on (e.g. marijuana legalization) more recently but at his core he's been increasing investment in housing, minimum wage, etc. since he was elected.

Cuomo is still a statewide politician though and it was the NYC focus and power base that led to Pataki's election and divided government until Spitzer. I think it's smart politics to look like you're working for the entire state and not just the City on things like upstate economic development and the tax cap (whether or not its effective is an open question but you can put the concept on a postcard).

[Knickfan1982]

If we could get a progressive as Cuomo s VP, that could get people enthused again.

Cuomo is about as progressive as Biden. Being left of Trump does not equal progressive.

[j4remi]

The IDC was toxic to the state Democratic party from the moment it was created since its express purpose was to deny the state Democratic party control of both houses of the legislature. It was created for its members to enrich themselves and gain outsized power in Albany where the party line rules and the seat at the head of the table has all the power. Not only that, the IDC essentially used the state party for their label and campaign finance, then dumped them to get boosts in pay, chairmanships, and function as the fulcrum on controversial issues. The IDC was just an extension of what Monserrate and Espada did in 2009 when they saw that they could have more power and money by using the Republicans in the Senate to control debate and legislation.

It was a fait accompli that anyone that declared IDC would be shunned by the mainline Dems and they'd be forced into the GOP coalition. Cuomo took advantage of that reality to push the IDC to focus on issues he cared about and thought they could get through the GOP's diminished majority: stop and frisk (passed), campaign finance reform (failed), minimum wage (passed), all progressive policies. When the coalition fell apart he pivoted away - that's smart politics to me and shows someone who can work with whatever cards he's dealt to keep moving forward.

No argument from me that when the state Dems took control of the Senate and after the Teachout protest that Cuomo shored up support from the left flank. He is nothing if not a politician, but I wouldn't say the shift was that dramatic. Once you have a liberal majority in both houses you move legislation that supermajority allows for. There are issues he's gone a lot further left on (e.g. marijuana legalization) more recently but at his core he's been increasing investment in housing, minimum wage, etc. since he was elected.

Cuomo is still a statewide politician though and it was the NYC focus and power base that led to Pataki's election and divided government until Spitzer. I think it's smart politics to look like you're working for the entire state and not just the City on things like upstate economic development and the tax cap (whether or not its effective is an open question but you can put the concept on a postcard).

Agree to disagree on how dramatic the shift was. I think Cuomo is good at politicking and branding, his results are mostly crumbs (this is definitely opinion based). I'll give you my best example of what I mean as supporting evidence, it's a long story but if we're talking about substituting Cuomo in as president, I think it's worth a read:
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/23/nyregion/governor-andrew-cuomo-and-the-short-life-of-the-moreland-commission.html

Here's an abridged explanation from my guy Sam Seder on the Majority Report five years ago:

Watch on YouTube

I'll fully admit that between this and stories of bully/threatening tactics to command endorsements have painted my view of how he's handled other issues after. From using the IDC for cover and hiding how connected he was with their moves to the drama over the Tapan Zee opening being rushed; the guy has always appeared to put image over everything in my book.

We could debate the rationale for why he was pushing some Democrats to fraternize with Republicans or why he hit his own commission with some road blocks. But his behavior to me has always been sketchy, the results haven't differentiated NY state from any of the other strong blue states (which is how I personally measure leadership from the big state governors) and a lot of his tonal shifts came about not with the shift in State Congressional make-up but just as a result of his fears that Cynthia Nixon would catch momentum like Teachout did. The Zephyr Teachout result was a shocker and to avoid another close race he talked big on the MTA, marijuana legalization and disbanding the IDC..but those were all reactions to Nixon campaign proposals not a reshaped state Congress imo

[j4remi]

If we could get a progressive as Cuomo s VP, that could get people enthused again.

Cuomo is about as progressive as Biden. Being left of Trump does not equal progressive.

He's a lot better at faking it than Biden is though. It's sad what progressives have to choose between at this point. I think my challenge now is in both being honest about these guys and their records while also acknowledging that they would be head and shoulders improvements over Trump for four more years. I'm just looking for the best way to establish both...basically, we've just set the bar sooooo low it's wild.

Watch on YouTube

[Clyde_Style]

If we could get a progressive as Cuomo s VP, that could get people enthused again.

Cuomo is about as progressive as Biden. Being left of Trump does not equal progressive.

He's a lot better at faking it than Biden is though. It's sad what progressives have to choose between at this point. I think my challenge now is in both being honest about these guys and their records while also acknowledging that they would be head and shoulders improvements over Trump for four more years. I'm just looking for the best way to establish both...basically, we've just set the bar sooooo low it's wild.

Watch on YouTube

That's fair.

I never wanted anyone to slobber over any of these guys, just support whomever is going up against Trump and the GOP which represent an existential threat I believe we can't survive for another term.

Anyway, our current situation will push Biden to grapple with the health care situation. I think many of the laid off who would have normally said Obamacare was sufficient will now be more vocal about real changes that could push the platform hard left on this issue before November.

[HarthorneWingo]

The IDC was toxic to the state Democratic party from the moment it was created since its express purpose was to deny the state Democratic party control of both houses of the legislature. It was created for its members to enrich themselves and gain outsized power in Albany where the party line rules and the seat at the head of the table has all the power. Not only that, the IDC essentially used the state party for their label and campaign finance, then dumped them to get boosts in pay, chairmanships, and function as the fulcrum on controversial issues. The IDC was just an extension of what Monserrate and Espada did in 2009 when they saw that they could have more power and money by using the Republicans in the Senate to control debate and legislation.

It was a fait accompli that anyone that declared IDC would be shunned by the mainline Dems and they'd be forced into the GOP coalition. Cuomo took advantage of that reality to push the IDC to focus on issues he cared about and thought they could get through the GOP's diminished majority: stop and frisk (passed), campaign finance reform (failed), minimum wage (passed), all progressive policies. When the coalition fell apart he pivoted away - that's smart politics to me and shows someone who can work with whatever cards he's dealt to keep moving forward.

No argument from me that when the state Dems took control of the Senate and after the Teachout protest that Cuomo shored up support from the left flank. He is nothing if not a politician, but I wouldn't say the shift was that dramatic. Once you have a liberal majority in both houses you move legislation that supermajority allows for. There are issues he's gone a lot further left on (e.g. marijuana legalization) more recently but at his core he's been increasing investment in housing, minimum wage, etc. since he was elected.

Cuomo is still a statewide politician though and it was the NYC focus and power base that led to Pataki's election and divided government until Spitzer. I think it's smart politics to look like you're working for the entire state and not just the City on things like upstate economic development and the tax cap (whether or not its effective is an open question but you can put the concept on a postcard).

Agree to disagree on how dramatic the shift was. I think Cuomo is good at politicking and branding, his results are mostly crumbs (this is definitely opinion based). I'll give you my best example of what I mean as supporting evidence, it's a long story but if we're talking about substituting Cuomo in as president, I think it's worth a read:
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/23/nyregion/governor-andrew-cuomo-and-the-short-life-of-the-moreland-commission.html

Here's an abridged explanation from my guy Sam Seder on the Majority Report five years ago:

Watch on YouTube

I'll fully admit that between this and stories of bully/threatening tactics to command endorsements have painted my view of how he's handled other issues after. From using the IDC for cover and hiding how connected he was with their moves to the drama over the Tapan Zee opening being rushed; the guy has always appeared to put image over everything in my book.

We could debate the rationale for why he was pushing some Democrats to fraternize with Republicans or why he hit his own commission with some road blocks. But his behavior to me has always been sketchy, the results haven't differentiated NY state from any of the other strong blue states (which is how I personally measure leadership from the big state governors) and a lot of his tonal shifts came about not with the shift in State Congressional make-up but just as a result of his fears that Cynthia Nixon would catch momentum like Teachout did. The Zephyr Teachout result was a shocker and to avoid another close race he talked big on the MTA, marijuana legalization and disbanding the IDC..but those were all reactions to Nixon campaign proposals not a reshaped state Congress imo

remi, you're a badass. Agree completely.

[HarthorneWingo]

If we could get a progressive as Cuomo s VP, that could get people enthused again.

Cuomo is about as progressive as Biden. Being left of Trump does not equal progressive.

He called for legalizing weed. Biden hasn't. That's a start in the right direction. Anyhow, I was talking about getting a progressive VP in there to promote all of Bernie's policies which are needed to get us through these times.

[Slamm Goodbody]

Hey we can agree to disagree and I appreciate that we can have a conversation without it devolving to a **** show. I don't think you're wrong in your opinion but I also don't think politics gets done by being the most aggressive on the most left wing issues. I lived in Albany for a long time and have lived in NYC and Long Island as well so I think I have a decent perspective on the big picture. Being upstate in the Capitol where this gets a lot more coverage than the NYC media helped color some of the pandering for me - it is what an effective statewide official has to do to keep power upstate and in the suburbs. I'm as liberal as the day is long but I think incremental change is a lot more likely to produce a positive outcome in a state like this on most issues. NY is inherently ungovernable with the way it is structured so to see a leader that's able to harness that and get things accomplished that I support is really commendable.

A good story (the very short version) from a friend of mine that used to work down at the Capitol: Cuomo invited a bunch of the legislators down to the governor's mansion on the fence about the tax cap and got them all bombed while he backslapped the hell out of them. Then out of nowhere he drops a bunch of four letter expletives that if they didn't pass his tax cap he was going to personally campaign against each and every no vote turns around and leaves. Don't be fooled by the human side he's flashing during COVID. This isn't a guy that should give you the warm and fuzzies - he's more of an LBJ that wants to swing his dick around and do what has to be done to get his agenda passed. I like that kind of approach, personally.

[GONYK]

Interesting exchange here

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[j4remi]

Hey we can agree to disagree and I appreciate that we can have a conversation without it devolving to a **** show. I don't think you're wrong in your opinion but I also don't think politics gets done by being the most aggressive on the most left wing issues. I lived in Albany for a long time and have lived in NYC and Long Island as well so I think I have a decent perspective on the big picture. Being upstate in the Capitol where this gets a lot more coverage than the NYC media helped color some of the pandering for me - it is what an effective statewide official has to do to keep power upstate and in the suburbs. I'm as liberal as the day is long but I think incremental change is a lot more likely to produce a positive outcome in a state like this on most issues. NY is inherently ungovernable with the way it is structured so to see a leader that's able to harness that and get things accomplished that I support is really commendable.

Right on fam, I think it's good to get the different viewpoints and real discussions on the differing philosophies as we move further left. The media coverage is all competitive (and I mean damn near literally, it always keys back to a campaign or a poll), that lends itself to all-sides creating bad faith arguments and attack type crap.

The one thing I do want to clarify though, and one that I feel a lot of the broader Bernie support can identify with to one degree or another (but it varies admittedly), is that I'm not opposed to incremental changes and compromises. But that incremental change has to pass two tests for me to consider it acceptable. There has to be a measurable impact and it has to be strong enough to withstand attempts to repeal it.

The ACA is good example of strong incremental change to me. It gave millions healthcare, came within a Lieberman of having a Public Option and the Medicare expansion made it difficult for the GOP to dismantle as well as created a path for M4A to even be in the discussion. On the other end of the spectrum would be something like DACA which was easily killed or the Garland nomination which there just didn't seem to be the political will from anyone on the Democrats side to put much effort into (honestly insane when we're talking a Supreme Court nomination).

Somewhere in between you'd Dodd-Frank, a bill that had impact while it lasted but also left work arounds and eventually got killed. That needed further action and movement to make it meaningful long term. I'm not mad at people who call it a good start nor people who say it was weak. The Iran deal is another example in this section. I think it was a pretty brilliant strategy and a great step forward that only comes apart in the extraordinary circumstance of a Trump presidency. So I give that a ton of leeway and hope we're able to emulate it when trust is restored.

To sum all that up; I'm cool with incremental change, but it still has to be a change we can actually build on and we have to actually have the political will power to build on it for that strategy to work long term. I think you can sell that to a lot of people on the left too, but they'll all have different ranges of what is and is not acceptable compromise. Plus I think the more extreme demands create a better negotiating stance (M4A has turned the formerly removed for Public Option into a realistic compromise option for any Democrat that wins even for the more conservative likes of Manchin and Sinema).

A good story (the very short version) from a friend of mine that used to work down at the Capitol: Cuomo invited a bunch of the legislators down to the governor's mansion on the fence about the tax cap and got them all bombed while he backslapped the hell out of them. Then out of nowhere he drops a bunch of four letter expletives that if they didn't pass his tax cap he was going to personally campaign against each and every no vote turns around and leaves. Don't be fooled by the human side he's flashing during COVID. This isn't a guy that should give you the warm and fuzzies - he's more of an LBJ that wants to swing his dick around and do what has to be done to get his agenda passed. I like that kind of approach, personally.

Here's the thing about this story. There have been versions of that story that involve activist types and people fighting for working people right down to the threats. And you know what, I'd probably not mind that in and of itself; just who he is. But combine that with shelving a corruption commission HE put together when it got close to his allies and I'm concerned what those tactics look like unchecked. The implication that he may have been trying to weaponize that commission is disqualifying if true imo.