Steve Bullock, governor of Montana, entered the Democratic primaries late, and to most people he is a complete unknown.
At NPE Action, we have been watching Steve Bullock with admiration, because he has been a stand-up guy for public schools in his state.
He has been governor of the state since 2012.
He beat a pro-privatization billionaire in 2016.
Montana is a red state. Bullock is a pro-public school Democrat.
His children attend public schools.
He graduated from Helena High School. His mother was a school board member; his father was a teacher and administrator.
Bullock has frozen tuition at state colleges for four years to keep college affordable.
He has expanded Medicaid, with bipartisan support.
Montana has two charter schools, and they are both run by school districts.
Bullock has said clearly that choice diverts money from public schools.
He is pro-union.
He vetoed a voucher bill (“Education Savings Account”).
In 2016, he ran against a pro-voucher, pro-charter candidate, and Bullock won. As he likes to point out, he won in a state that Trump won easily. He won by four points in a state where Trump won by 21 points.
Bullock connects with people.
He understands that Montana is a sprawling state that is largely rural. Its public schools are important to their communities. He doesn’t see any reason to have “choice” of charters or religious schools.
He has picked one of the most important issues in American politics–the malign influence of Big Money in elections–and is determined, if elected, to overturn Citizens United, which lets rich people buy elections.
I don’t know if he has much of a chance in the national elections, given the high profiles of other candidates, but I like his commonsense approach to issues, the way he translates them into terms that everyday people can understand.
And I like his support for students, public schools, and public colleges.
Maybe he will break through, or maybe he will be a good running mate.
I hope that he has a chance to talk about the need for strong public schools on a national platform.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Thank you, Diane, for these analyses!
LikeLike
I think Montana would lose if he won.
LikeLike
Surprisingly, I agree with you, Diane. I could get behind Bullock and I hope he stays in the primary at least long enough to keep his message in the public hearing.
Another candidate who (perhaps justifiably) doesn’t have a prayer but also needs to stay in the primary to get her message heard is Marianne Williamson. This Intercept article says it well: https://theintercept.com/2019/08/05/marianne-williamson-2020-presidential-campaign/?comments=1#comments
Also, if you read the comments to that article, “Benito Mussolini’s” comment is spot on: “Ms. Williamson is the modern equivalent of the court jester – the only person certifiably kooky enough that they are allowed to tell the truth and get away with it. Some of the ‘serious’ candidates may tell the truth – but only when they are about to announce their withdrawal from the nomination race. (Unless they announce they are supporting another candidate, in which case they are still in pandering mode).”
BTW, “Benito” is a regular satiric commenter somewhat in the vein of of Stephen Colbert’s old extremist right-winger persona. His comments alone are often worth reading The Intercept, even though it’s become substantially more neoliberal in recent months. You have to be careful how you take his posts, though.
LikeLike
Thanks, D77. Interesting link to,an interesting site.
LikeLike
Oh, goody! Great to know he has the Good Whiner Seal of Approval!
LikeLike
Sounds good.
LikeLike
It’s a miracle that any politician is an unabashed supporter of public schools. Great. He’s not a supporter of Medicare for all, he’s for bolstering and improving the ACA and Medicare.
LikeLike
Biden has said that his health care plan would allow people to buy into a government plan. A public option was part of Obama’s plan too until the insurance lobby obliterated it. The health care lobby would most likely rise up once again and try to crush it. We would wind up with the same mess we have today.
LikeLike
When Republicans like George Will and Meghan McCain recommend Dems elect Biden, it raises a red flag.
LikeLike
“A public option was part of Obama’s plan too until the insurance lobby obliterated it.”
Well, not exactly. The “public option” was already off the table even as Obama was supposedly promoting it because of closed door meetings with the insurance companies. I’d hardly say that they were the ones who “obliterated it”, as Obama was hardly an unwilling victim.
LikeLike
Obama was a corporatist as is Biden. That is one reason they got along so well. Income inequality gap will most likely continue to widen under Biden.
LikeLike
” I’d hardly say that they were the ones who “obliterated it”, as Obama was hardly an unwilling victim.”
Source, please. I know I am sometimes naive, but I thought getting ACA required a lot of compromise. I seriously doubt anyone could have done better.
LikeLike
The public option was supported by the majority of Democrats. Unfortunately, back then Obama needed 60 votes for the legislation and Republicans had 40 votes and (along with Joe Lieberman, who had to LEAVE the Democratic party because it was too moderate), they prevented any public option from being a part of it.
Remember, Lieberman left the Democrats and became independent because he was far to the right of Democrats. He endorsed John McCain and Sarah Palin. And he almost single handedly was able to block a public option along with supposedly “moderate” Republicans like Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. If anything proves how different the Democrats are from the Republicans it is that the most moderate Republicans are more right wing that Joe Lieberman, who was too conservative for the Democratic Party and left it.
The saddest thing about this is that had HRC won, we would have a left leaning Supreme Court that would have already repealed Citizens United and thus the insurance company who owned the entire Republican party and only one or two Democrats would have no power anymore and we’d already have a far more progressive country than under Obama. Instead we will suffer for decades with a right wing Supreme Court enables the far right corporatist agenda.
Blaming Obama for not having the public option is like blaming for Bernie for the fact that we have no gun control in this country. We need to fight the real enemies of democracy, not manufactured ones that the far right want is to fight so they can grab even more power than they already have, just like we saw with the far right Supreme Court.
LikeLike
http://beyondchron.org/did-obama-kill-the-public-option-in-july/
““Several hospital lobbyists involved in the White House deals,” he wrote, “said it was understood as a condition of their support that the final legislation would not include a government-run health plan [my emphasis].” Kirkpatrick went on to quote one of the industry lobbyists, Chip Kahn, who said: “We have an agreement with the White House that I’m very confident will be seen all the way through conference.”
I don’t remember that New York Times article, which no traditional media ever picked up on. Like most liberal bloggers, I was in Pittsburgh on August 13th for Netroots Nation. As happens at those four-day conferences, we were too overwhelmed to be reading the news – but White House adviser Valerie Jarrett was there to assure us the President is on our side.
On March 15th, Ed Shultz of MSNBC had the Times’ David Kirkpatrick on his show – who confirmed that Obama’s backroom deal with the hospital and pharmaceutical industries last July included an agreement to kill the public option.
Others have written that Obama knew the public option is popular with his base, so he didn’t want to be the one to kill it. He tried to make Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid the fall guy, but Reid wouldn’t budge. Ultimately, the honor went to Joe Lieberman – who progressives despise already, and would proudly take the blame.
In other words, while Obama was still saying in September that he supports the public option (which kept us hopeful) – the President knew all along that it would never make it in the final bill. He never said he’d fight to include the public option, and repeatedly said he was “open” to other ways to achieve the same goal. But little did we know, the fix was in.”
Plenty of links in the article to back it up.
It’s amazing, NYCPSP, how often your Democrats can lie to your face, get caught doing it, and yet STILL you defend them as if such a thing were unthinkable.
LikeLike
I don’t understand, Dienne. We did get a public option–ACA. Are you talking about single payer as the only option? No private insurance?
LikeLike
dienne77,
I posted “The public option was supported by the majority of Democrats. ” Nothing in this entire article contradicts this. I don’t understand why you keep feeling the need to mischaracterize the entire Democratic party based on a position that only some Democrats had at some point in the past. I don’t doubt that some politicians were doing the pharmaceutical companies’ doing, but others were trying to get the best bill they thought would pass.
I’m sure the public option was less appealing to some Democrats but not because they were selling out to corporate interests but because they believed that having a system where insurance companies could cherry pick some patients while leaving only the most expensive to public insurance might be problematic.
It is just like there are actually some people who think some union members would revolt and absolutely refuse to vote for Bernie Sanders because he has guaranteed that if they elect them they will have to give up their union-provided health insurance and accept medicare as their only option. Do you honestly believe that every union member would happily give up their health insurance because Bernie says they should? Or would that scare them into voting for Trump?
It is possible to have differences of opinion without selling out. I was saying back in 2009 that I wanted Obama to fight for a public option and if he didn’t get it, then it was better not to have any kind of public health insurance than to have one without a public option.
But it turns out I was wrong. It turns out that this country needed to have Obamacare with all its flaws to make people reject the right wing propaganda that scared them away from any kind of “government controlled health insurance”.
Sometimes you need to go halfway there to get further down the road. That’s something that you seem to reject because I don’t think you trust democracy. Democracy involves making compromises. You can’t demand that every union member embrace giving up their hard fought for health care benefits because you tell them you are smarter than them and you know what is best for them. You have to convince them and it involves fighting a hard battle against foes who will lie and distort and have unlimited funds to do both.
I never understand why you are so focused on attacking the Democrats while you give a pass to Trump and the Republicans who are the real problems. The Democrats are not your enemy. There are some more conservative Democrats and there are many who are fighting the hard battle to educate the public while being attacked from both sides because nothing they do is good enough.
AOC understands this. She never tries to demonize “the Democrats” the way you do when you pretend they are some monolithic group who are all as co-opted as their most conservative members. She understands who the real enemy of progressives is and understands that the way to fight for better policies is not to give far right Republicans a pass and put all the blame on Democrats.
Politics are just as complicated as journalism is. As you just showed when you cited the supposedly right wing NY Times as your source for your comment.
LikeLike
As VP might help with PA, MIchigan, Florida, and Wisconsin.
LikeLike
Bullock’s religion has been identified as Catholic. Given his views which align with the majority of Catholics, in favor of public schools, of equal rights, of a person’s right to make decisions about birth control,… he is ideally placed to expose the conservative Catholicism which drives the authoritarian Republican agenda.
Leonard Leo, spearheading the Federalist Society, is credited with stacking the courts with conservative judges (Leo reportedly received $120,000 from the Catholic Association). The views of Paul Weyrich who created the framework for the religious right and for the Koch’s agenda represent a small, minority voice in the Catholic Church but, a huge influence on the power structure that is robbing Americans of their democracy.
Without the clarity that the “moral majority”, a term coined by Weyrich, is instead an isolated sect pushing patriarchy and noxious political and social policy, the people lose their rights without understanding why. Bullock should take up the mantle to expose the source the theft.
LikeLike
He sounds good, especially for public education. One caveat – my opinion – as educators we should not be a one item entity for support. There are many good ideas worth considering which Democrats have proposed. I LOVE the Washington man who focuses on climate change but I have always loved Bernie and Elizabeth Warren too.
Of course we are concerned about what is happening TO our public schools but for me as educators our scope of concern should not be exclusive.
LikeLike
I agree. Democrats need to focus on capturing the Whitehouse and Senate, if possible with Moscow Mitch out as well. I want elected officials who are able to see and if possible reverse the dangerous policies of the current administration including education, but not just in education.
In case you have not heard, Trump went off script in his address this AM dealing with the mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton. Near the very end of his teleprompted speech, he mistakenly refered to Toledo, not Dayton. Perhaps the teleprompter failed or it was programmed to allow him to finish the speech.
LikeLike
Frankly public education (which is overwhelmingly a state and local issue, both in terms of dollars spent and policy decisions) is quite low on my list of interests and concerns for this primary and the 2020 presidential election. And I’d hazard to say I’m more interested in public education than most voters.
LikeLike
Deleted my first response because I’m sure it would be taken the wrong way, but yes, I’m with you here as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What’s a greater problem than privatization?
LikeLike
I could agree with Gordon. But first, the costs of privatization must be weighed- it will destroy Main Street and concentrate the wealth of hedge funds and tech tyrants. It will decimate the middle class and unions, increasing income inequality. It will rob citizens of local democracy. The primary route that women us to gain financial independence will be eliminated,….
LikeLike
I must disagree that education is an isolated issue. It’s not. If a political candidate is likely to privatize public education, he or she is also likely to safeguard private health insurance and private prisons, privatize Social Security and Medicare, and protect private creditors’ student and other loans at exorbitant interest rates. He or she will likely only rely on free market principals to mitigate greenhouse gases. Once politicians let billionaires, their foundations, and Third Way and other rightwing think [sic] tanks posing as “left leaning” influence them on education, free market ideology comes to dominate their every policy. Mass incarceration and deportation follow. Wall Street gets bailed out. Tech monopolies run amok, unregulated. The Green New Deal gets belittled. “Run from the left and govern from the right” is the neoliberal way, so if you sniff a whiff of free market capitalism on any one policy, expect a candidate if elected to let it dominate everything.
There’s only one candidate for president who stands firm on every issue as a social democrat, and is honest enough not to change his mind once in office. There’s only one who all the billionaires loathe and fear. There’s only one candidate calling for a moratorium on all federal charter school funding. Most of the ideas the Democratic presidential candidates are touting today were originally his ‘radical’ ideas. There’s only one.
LikeLike
Exactly, LCT. It’s all connected.
LikeLike
That’s why there’s no such thing as moderates, but only wolves in sheep’s clothes.
LikeLike
LCT –
You make an irrefutable case FOR Bernie and therefore for the American people, and AGAINST the corporate-funded Center for American Progress.
LikeLike
“There’s only one candidate for president who stands firm on every issue as a social democrat, and is honest enough not to change his mind once in office. There’s only one who all the billionaires loathe and fear.”
I am all for praising Bernie for his good points, but there is no reason to do so in terms that somehow make it seem that other candidates are untrustworthy.
First of all, Bernie Sanders DID change his mind on charters less than 3 months ago and his position was not “firm” and that was a GOOD thing. Bernie supported some of those ed reform bills in the past just like he did not support gun control in the past.
“not changing your mind” is not something that is always a good thing. I am certainly grateful Bernie changed his mind on charters and on gun control and ed reform and I am sure other issues over the last decades.
And that is okay. Candidates are allowed to evolve. I am going to vote for candidates who RIGHT NOW espouse the positions I support and not try to smear them as dishonest poseurs because they only took that position 3 months ago. You don’t hold it against Bernie that not long ago he worked hard to elect a DFER Democrat who would have made Virginia the charter-friendly state that California is. Neither do I. But it is not fair to other worthy candidates to make statements as if the billionaires want them to be President. The billionaires probably fear Elizabeth Warren just as much as Bernie as she is incredibly knowledgeable about those issues.
If a candidate is a good candidate, they can be praised on their own merits. There is no need to gratuitously smear other candidates as untrustworthy. It is much better to simply point out where the policies that other candidates have are not as progressive as the policies another candidate has. And that’s how we should all vote. Not based on a false claim that one candidate never changes his mind but another one is someone whose positions you should not trust. Look at what policies they support and decide which ones are most important to you.
I bet you there are many supporters of Bernie Sanders who don’t actually want to give up their personal health insurance and trade it in for Medicare for all. They can support Bernie without having to think every single position he takes is the superior and absolutely right one. And the same goes for other candidates too. You can prefer Elizabeth Warren without loving her ed reform positions or prefer Booker or Harris for other reasons. No candidate – including Bernie – is “perfect” and we all should choose the candidate who comes closest to our own views on what is most important to us. But in the end, any one of the Democratic candidates in the primary will bring us significantly close to a progressive future than another 4 years of Republican rule.
LikeLike
“significantly closer to a progressive future”- without Bernie, when would the discussion have begun?
LikeLike
Vote your heart. That’s democracy. But you and I both know there’s only one (maybe two) truly progressive candidate — you knew who I was talking about without my having mentioned his name — and unless he is out of the running, in the primaries he has my full throated support and volunteerism. If he wins the nomination, he will have an army of grassroots volunteers like me. We must fight Trump and Trumpism fire with fire, not with compromises. Please give voting for Senator Sanders your full consideration.
LikeLike
Bernie is one of my top 2 candidates. But if he wins the nomination and the election and has to make some compromises in his policy proposals to get them passed, that doesn’t make him a liar. That doesn’t mean he no longer supports those policies that he campaigned on.
If Bernie decides not to force union members to give up their health insurance in the exact manner he has campaigned that they would have to do so, because by allowing them to keep their health insurance he can get something accomplished that is better than we have now, that doesn’t make Bernie a liar or a sell-out. It makes him a person who is trying to get the best done while understanding that we are not a dictatorship and politics involves compromises. And compromising is not always evil or corrupt or selling out. It is part of living in a democracy.
Bernie compromised when he worked as hard as he could to elect a candidate who planned to turn Virginia into a pro-charter state just like California.
Bernie compromised on that issue — as we both assume that Bernie did not personally want to do all he could to turn Virginia into a pro-charter California and destroy public education in Virginia — because he believed that compromise was worth it to achieve something else.
That is how politics works in a democracy. Bernie, if he wins, will have to make some compromises as LBJ and Truman and FDR did. But those Presidents still had progressive achievements.
One person can insist that Bernie’s willingness to sell out public education in Virginia was worth it, and another person could mischaracterize that action as proof that Bernie is a sell-out who should never be trusted. Politicians have to make compromises. When we start to mischaracterize every compromise as some proof that the politician isn’t to be trusted on any issue, we are doing exactly as the far right wants us to do and helping them win.
“If a political candidate is likely to privatize public education, he or she is also likely to safeguard private health insurance and private prisons, privatize Social Security and Medicare….”
I doubt very much Tom Periello, the DFER’s politician of the month who was a favorite of ed reformers, was likely to support privatizing social security and medicare. And clearly Bernie Sanders did not think so. If you really believe Sanders has such terrible judgement not to realize all these evils that DFER favorite Tom Perriello secretly supported, then why are you even supporting him?
Perriello was also the former CEO of the Center for American Progress Action fund, fyi.
I actually like many of Perriello positions even if I despise his pro-charter positions. I can certainly understand why Bernie decided to compromise by working so hard for him even if I would have preferred that Bernie remain neutral as he did when he refused to support Cynthia Nixon over Andrew Cuomo.
But compromise is part of politics and there is nothing inherently corrupt about a politician who understands that.
LikeLike
“But compromise is part of politics and there is nothing inherently corrupt about a politician who understands that.”
Exactly.
LikeLike
Corruption is an organization that carves out a niche, purportedly on the left, where it sells policy advocacy funded by rich interests like those of the tech tyrants.
Corruption is writing a treatise titled “Corruption Consultants” that names ALEC as the evil architect of privatization and provides, as example, private prisons but, omits privatized education.
Corruption is an organization that positions itself as the voice of the left, while its management has vested interest in getting enacted the bi-partisan legislation desired by rich clients. That management owns/ed bi-partisan, for-profit lobby shops and influence peddling firms.
Corruption is partnering with AEI to promote what hedge funds and the tech industry want, at the expense of Main Street.
The survival of democracy and Main Street is in jeopardy. Selling them out is not compromise. It’s betrayal. And, Stacy Abrams should be ashamed to be on CAP’s board.
LikeLike
Okay, that’s enough. Stop repeating the Republican talking point about being forced to give up health insurance. And the thing about helping elect DFER candidates. Over and over and over. That’s enough already. Medicare for All means that everyone has health insurance. Just stop.
LikeLike
Stop repeating Republican talking points that imply voters should distrust all the Democrats except one. Stop implying that candidates who have fought for progressive ideas their entire lives are not “honest enough” if they are not Bernie.
Stop saying “there’s no such thing as moderates, but only wolves in sheep’s clothes.” Wolves? Give me a break. There are moderates who are far more supportive of public education than the guy Bernie campaigned for who was carrying the water for ed reformers.
By the way, one thing I liked about Bernie in the debate is he DEFENDED the fact that union members would absolutely be giving up their union provided health insurance in exchange for Medicare for all. He explained why — as did Bill de Blasio — that was a perfectly good policy. He did not simply pretend that anyone who brought that up was a liar and a tool of CAP. Bernie understood that you should defend your policies and explain why they are better, instead of attacking everyone with different policies and implying they are in politics only to do the bidding of the richest donors and would happily sell out every progressive idea. You stop it. My characterization of Bernie was the exact opposite of what you do to other candidates. I never lied and said Bernie campaigned hard to elect a DFER Dem because some rich guy ordered him to.
The point was about COMPROMISE which every good politician does in a democracy. You got so upset because I said Bernie compromised, too, but to you that is so evil that you’d rather demand I shut up and pretend that Bernie is somehow superior to all other politicians because everyone but Bernie will sell you out. Stop it. You attack other politicians’ characters and I never attack Bernie’s character. I make it clear that what Bernie does is simply be an intelligent leader who understands he is not the dictator who can demand that all his policies be enacted exactly as he insists is the absolute right way to do it while everyone else’s idea is corrupt and selling out. Bernie understands he has to convince voters and the way to do that is not to lie to them and tell them that every candidate who supports a different kind of public health plan that keeps union health care plans intact are actually just tools of billionaires.
LikeLike
Thank you. “My way or the highway” signals dictatorship whether it be right or left.
LikeLike
You cannot win at the Olympics if you tell yourself “Making the top 10 is my goal. I just want to play nice, and I just want to participate.” You make compromise only if your original plan is about to fail. Bernie will compromise when it’s needed but he cannot start with a meek (hence necessarily complicated) proposal for healthcare. Nobody understands Obamacare.
Those who start with compromise, even if they win the presidency, will be run over by the billionaires.
LikeLike
“Those who start with compromise, even if they win the presidency, will be run over by the billionaires.”
I doubt anyone would disagree with you. We want to hear and know what each candidate will fight for. What I can do without is the demonization of everyone who does not agree with someone elses’s choice as less than pure.
LikeLike
We are in a crisis. Wealth inequality is destroying the lives of millions of Americans. They are my students. They are the parents of my students. I see it. I just got home from a Bernie Sanders town hall in Northridge about the housing crisis where multiple homeless people including students, veterans, and people with masters degrees pleaded for help, people who just couldn’t afford the rent increases when corporations bought the apartment buildings they once called home. This crisis did not happen overnight. It didn’t start when Trump took office. Politically in Washington, there has been a bipartisan effort to appease the redlining banking industry, the price gouging pharmaceutical industry, the military industry, etc etc etc. It was as if liberals just gave up some time decades ago.
I don’t think Trump got elected because America is sexist or racist. It’s not. I don’t think Trump got elected because his opponent wasn’t as charming as he is. He’s not. I think Trump got elected because conditions have become so ‘deplorable’ that Americans rejected the bipartisan status quo. So, thinking about 2020, it’s imperative that we have a candidate who challenges the status quo. More importantly, thinking beyond 2020, it’s imperative that we elect an agent of change so that in 2024 or 2028, another Trump can’t take over the Republican Party again after another four to eight years of bipartisan incrementalism during a crisis. Wall Street Democrats exist, they are running for president, and win or lose in 2020 they are an albatross around the party’s neck.
Now, I am not calling anyone a liar. (I’m not saying “lock her up” either.) I am not saying Bernie is perfect; he’s not even really a socialist. Socialists wish he was more progressive, as a matter of fact. I am saying that he is by far the best candidate. He and the other Justice Democrats like AOC refuse big money from billionaires and the big industries mentioned above. It doesn’t make him a god; it makes him better, not ordinary, not mainstream, and not part of the status quo that made Americans so angry they elected a bigoted tyrant baby in 2016.
LikeLike
And one more thing: You’re right, Bernie can’t fix every problem by himself with a snap of his fingers. He knows that. He’s said so. He said so this afternoon in Northridge. Starting the day after the election, after he wins, he needs all of us to help him get as much done as possible as quickly as possible. The solution to the crisis is us. Not Bernie. Us.
LikeLike
Make that two more things: I really appreciate this discussion because it gives me a chance to sharpen the expression of my views. Thank you. Go Bernie!
LikeLike
LeftCoastTeacher,
There are many reasons to vote for Bernie Sanders that you explained very well.
There are also many reasons to vote for Elizabeth Warren or another candidate.
No one has the magical solution for ending wealth inequality. Bill de Blasio ran a city that is much larger than many states and tried to do something about that and nothing he did was good enough for his loudest critics. (And he did a whole lot of good things that white voters dismiss but African-Americans and Latinx voters know was important.)
You talk about how sorry you feel for the families in your schools, but there is a disdain for how African-Americans — who suffer more from poverty than whites — support Biden or Hillary Clinton, and you dismiss their candidates and with your refusal to support them in the general allow a truly horrible Republican Party to take over. I’m sorry but you cannot have refused to vote for the Democrat against Trump and tell me that you did it for the families who are suffering in your schools. And I suspect had HRC won, she would have surprised you much as “typical Democratic pol” LBJ did so much more for working Americans with his Great Society programs than “outsider” Jimmy Carter ever did.
I don’t understand why you dismiss all the very good progressive things that were achieved by the regular old Democratic politicians you seem to despise who worked through the system to achieve them.
I love Bernie’s ideas, but I might decide that Elizabeth Warren is more likely to do the hard work to make more progressive legislation happen. That doesn’t mean that I would not wholeheartedly support Bernie if he is the nominee, but it does mean that I may decide another candidate is more likely to get done what needs to be done and support them in the primary. I think JFK was charismatic and talked a good game, but it was LBJ who was the one who would do the hard work of getting legislation that helps working Americans passed.
All the mischaracterizations of other Democratic politicians you repeat here are the same types of mischaracterizations that were made about Jimmy Carter. Do you think Carter was a tool of corporations and that’s why he supported privatization? Your attacks mirror exactly the kind of attacks that right makes on any politician that gets money from “the union”. Like you, those far right attacks insist that if a candidate accepts any money from a union or pro-union organization, that candidate’s positions are only what the union allows.
Just look at Diane Ravitch’s recent post about the NPE ranking the candidates on education issues. If you only focus on “donors”, you’d want to defeat Gillibrand – who gets a D on donors — and elect Gabbard. You would be certain that Beto O’Rourke, who gets an A because he gets no money from those ed reform donors, would be a great choice. But Gellibrand actually has As in terms of the positions she takes and things she fights for — strongly pro-public schools — while Gabbard and O’Rourke are rabidly pro-charter! It frustrates me when progressives use “donors” to smear candidates when who their donors are is far less important than what they actually support.
And Gillibrand supports public education much more than Beto O’Rourke and Gabbard do, and whether she has “worse” donors than they do is irrelevant.
But you make some very good points and I appreciate your thoughtful comments.
And I wholly embrace your desire to fight hard for Bernie in the primary — supporting Bernie is an excellent choice and your reasons are sound. I just hope you understand that Bernie is not the only valid choice and if African-American voters decide to support a different candidate, that choice is just as valid. All right thinking people should come together behind whoever wins the primary. If you don’t, you are not helping anyone but Trump and the far right. And that applies to all voters whose first choice candidate doesn’t win the primary.
LikeLike
Because of compromise, the U.S. got to the point where 33 years from now the richest 10% are projected to own 100% of American wealth. In an interview after Hillary’s loss, CAP’s president said, the party was going to start being a party of opposition. I was incredulous when I read the interview for two reasons. First, she spoke as though she did the party’s strategic planning and secondly, I asked myself who appointed her to decide to abdicate the role of an opposition party.
I won’t sign up to support someone who has sold me and my fellow Americans into slavery because they have a Dem. by their name. If it’s a CAP candidate that wins a primary I will vote for the louse, feel abject despair and, wonder what options my poor fellow subjects have in American oligarchy.
LikeLike
There’s something far worse than oligarchy: psycho dictatorship. Keep that in mind.
LikeLike
I like Bullock too. He’s liberal without sounding loony liberal or overly wonkish. The average Joe and Jane can relate to him. That’s the kind of candidate we need to win.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agree . As a western governor Bullock is highly electable.
LikeLike
We need to hear more about Tom Steyer. He’s not the villainthropist that Gates and Arnold are. He could make some good points in the campaign. Then, throw his support to Bernie.
LikeLike
My fear is America testing as a third world country. Good grief. It’s God damn money and all the big shots. Man, I’m pissed. So over Trump supporters. I hear Steve is great at bringing folks together. Yeah uh help!
LikeLike