As we talk strategy on today of all days, let’s keep in mind Trump and those around him cheated.
Seems like the Democrats should enlist the help of Chinese hackers.
Well, it doesn’t work on Republicans. If Democrats see evidence of shenanigans on the part of their candidate, it changes how they view that candidate, and not in a positive way. If Republicans see the same thing about their candidate, it increases their support for the candidate.
100% correct. Run Beto run!
Yep. This is a good point:
Millennials are now the largest voting-age generation in the country, the biggest chunk of the U.S. labor force, the dominant taste-makers in our popular culture. They are not the caricature that has emerged online, painting them as woke avocado-eaters who tweet about intersectionality and Lena Dunham’s woebegone rescue dog. Yes, millennials are hardwired into the Internet and spend a lot of time on their phones. But many millennials are about to turn 40. They are Republicans and Democrats. They have kids, they live in the suburbs, and they listen to dad rock as much as they listen to Beyoncé. They are black and brown and white. They fight our endless wars, they belong to labor unions, they’re saddled with student-loan debt so crippling that an entire generation has to think twice before buying a sensible hybrid at CarMax, let alone a whole house like their parents. And they firmly believe that the vocabulary of politics is completely detached from their experience, which is now the lived reality of the American majority. It’s why Democrats in 2020 need to think carefully before nominating a standard-bearer who even comes close to approaching the same age as Trump (72).
This conflicts with my Amy Klobuchar theory, and ironically millennial’s are as prone to identity politics as anyone (that includes white people by the way.) Sebastian Kurz, the 32 year old Chancellor in Austria is very popular with young people despite being decidedly right wing. This does point toward Beto as being the strongest candidate to energize the millennia vote, but as the article points out he’s going to face some structural challenges in the primaries, namely can he appeal to African-American women in the South? As a cohort they tend to be conservative, and Beto is unabashedly progressive. (I can’t find any information on the results, but during the campaign Beta struggled with the Hispanic vote, and that will probably happen again in 2020.)
Got a while yet, but still hoping we don’t end up with Biden, Sanders or even Warren. Time for the next generation to step up.
Oh yay.
Texas has a huge number of people working in oil and gas. These donations were from individuals, not from companies. How in the world would any campaign be able to scrub for an individual’s employer? And why would they? The employers of these individual contributors are meaningless when it comes to swaying a candidate’s policy positions. The problem arises when companies funnel larger sums through PACs - these have demonstrable influence on policy.
Just because Jane Doe, the floorhand or Joe Schmoe the front desk security at a ConcoPhillips building gave money to Beto, that is an issue?
Those $2700 donations didn’t come from the front desk guy. Probably the $200+ donations didn’t, either. This is the reality of money in politics.
Also, too, as a former exec, I recall being pressured to contribute money to the ‘right’ candidates. It certainly happens.
Didn’t have time this morning to comment further, but I’m primarily concerned with the potential for internecine warfare between ‘liberals and progressives.’
The other part is that Beto did sign a pledge not to take any money from the fossil fuel industry - and despite the amount being minuscule compared to the total he raised - he did break that pledge (as detailed in the piece and explained by Scott, the ‘large’ contributions came from execs). If this country is to move aggressively in combating climate change then the ongoing dance and courtship with the industry will make it far more difficult (and yes I understand as a Texan, politically he’s boxed in.)
People make cartloads of money in the oil business, and this purity testing behavior is silly.
He’s basically running around some ideas without spelling them out - neither should oil & gas employees be allowed to donate to Democratic candidates (effectively this is his argument, as he links a proposal from a Democrat to limit contributions of oil & gas employees), but also that Democratic candidates must test every contribution and reject any that come from people working in the O&G industry.
I wouldn’t call it a broken pledge, though. He didn’t take money from the industry, he took it from individuals. Most people are employees of some industry, and if that counts as an industry donation, then Dems can’t take any money except from public employees, academics and the unemployed. And if oil execs want to give personal money to leftist candidates, I’m all for that.
I’m not purity testing, I’m not against Beto, and I don’t think he broke the pledge. That aside, my behavior is silly, so you got me there.
The article breaks this down.
O’Rourke received a total of $429,759 from 2,724 donors who work in the oil and gas industry. This total was 0.62 percent percent of his $69.2 million fundraising haul as of Oct. 17. The average donation was $158, and the median donation was $50.
Donation Analysis
- O’Rourke received $324,650 from 524 “large” donations of over $200, amounting to 75.5 percent of the total.
- He got $105,109 from 2,200 “small” donations of $200 and under, amounting to 24.5 percent of the total.
- 92 donations were $1,000 or more, adding up to $173,039, or 40.3 percent of the total.
- 33 were maximum donations of $2,700, adding up to $96,400, or 22.4 percent of the total.
Donor Analysis
- 1,024 individuals in the oil and gas industry donated to O’Rourke.
- The average of total donations from individuals was $420, and the median total was $163. (Many contributors donated multiple times.)
- Donors included 24 executives, who gave a combined total of $35,125.
- $395,866, or 92.1 percent, came from donors living in Texas.
There’s also a handy comparison chart for those who want to check on their own favorite candidate.
But please, let’s argue about who is the most progressive candidate. The one who took .62% of his donations from O&G or the one who took .25% of his donations from O&G. That will definitely get us into the White House.
When you run for senate, you run to represent that state. It’s the local people that need to support you. And Texas is a big oil and gas state, so it’s not surprising that he gets some money from oil and gas.
Local industry matters. I’d love to see the shame chart done for the financial industry. I bet you would see Joe Biden, Kirsten Gillibrand and Corey Booker really high on that chart simple because of the location.
Anyway, even if we cut out oil as a fuel source, isn’t it also used in plastics and other building material? Isn’t that the point of how awesome oil is, that it is so useful.
Natural Gas has been a driving factor in killing off coal plants. So, let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water just yet.
I didn’t post this to argue that Beto is or isn’t the most progressive candidate, the primary purpose was to demonstrate how even now we’re starting to see the same divide we saw in 2016 between Sanders and HRC. FWIW, I despise purity tests.
The only other issue I had really was from reading the piece quickly this morning it appeared to me like Beta broke that fossil fuel pledge; I’ll read the piece again, but that sounds like it could be a stretch to characterize it as such.
((That said, if climate change is an existential threat to life on earth and human civilization, expanding the use of fossil fuels goes counter to the goal of drastically reducing CO2 emissions. (And natural gas, though orders of magnitude better than coal is still a fossil fuel.) This doesn’t mean I wouldn’t support Beta or any other Democrat who runs, but for me it is a concern.))
If someone was senator from Texas, and didn’t represent the interests of oil and gas companies, and their employees, to the degree that he refused to even accept money from anyone in the industry, then he’d be a bad Senator.
Those industries, whether you like it or not, are a major part of Texas. A senator from Texas can’t just tell them to piss off, because that means he’s telling his constituent to piss off.
I agree, wholeheartedly. Clinton had a path through that mess which she didn’t take, and I can only hope the Democrats have since learned.
I get that. And let’s just stipulate he didn’t break the pledge.
But, let’s say that he did. In my mind, if oil and gas industry is an important constituency to a politician, even liberal ones, IMO it would be better to not take the pledge and sell the idea that natural gas/fracking/ what have you is still important because yada yada, etc.
Yeah that’s my main worry here.
Eh, seems like signing that pledge was dumb.
Beto is a rookie, for the most part. I don’t have the same expectations of him as I would Bernie, Hillary or a Warren. He’s going to navigate and make mistakes. Individuals in various industries are fine,