Arthur Camins insists that voters should stand by their principles in the 2020 elections.
https://www.dailykos.com/story/2019/9/6/1883805/-Fight-for-First-Principles
In 2020, let’s elect people who don’t temper and undermine first principles like high-quality universal education and health care, with a soul- and hope-crushing, “But let’s be realistic about what’s achievable.” Don’t start with the workaround. Start with the energizing principles and fight for them.
Since this is an education blog, we will keep track of where candidates stand on “high-quality universal education.”
We will listen to what they say about charters and vouchers and what they don’t say. We will assume that some will attempt to deceive us by denouncing only “for-profit” charters. Only one state allows for-profit charters—Arizona—yet many states have nonprofit charters operated by for-profit EMOs.
What about corporate charter chains that take over what were once public schools? What about Gulen charters, part of a shadowy network that imports Turkish teachers and relies on corporate boards led by Turkish men?
We will also pay close attention to whether candidates express their views about the reign of high-stakes testing imposed by No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, and Every Student Succeeds Act. The billions expended on testing have enriched the corporations that sell them, but harm children and the quality of education.
We will be watching, and NPE Action is maintaining a score card on the candidates.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I looked at the NPE Action 2020 report for Cory Booker. I am not sure who is doing the research but congrats especially on the timelines that reveal histories, and his case, a long one of non-support for public education. The multiple ratings of F for Booker are clearly warranted.
Arthur is exactly right, timid goals will never repair the enormous damage to school and society from the private war on all things public and on the living standards of the 99%, or on the imminent threat to the environment. Democrats gained 40 seats in ’18 in House of Rep with many “centrist” Dems promising and now doing too little. The American electorate is ready for more, not less, which the creature Trump manipulates to his sordid advantage.
Fight for Principle
Fight for principle
Vote for wise
Not the winceable
“Compromise”
Indeed, SDP!
From my perspective, the only candidate that is supporting an equitable education is Bernie with his groundbreaking Marshall Plan. He is the only candidate that explicitly expounds on what his plan means.
By the way Bernie was on Dr. Oz yesterday. Oz reviewed his health records and stated that Bernie is a healthy older individual. He has never had a major health issue, and he was an athlete in high school. His only health concern was that he sometimes gets acid reflux, especially when he eats dinner at 9:30 at night on the campaign trail. His mind is sharp, if fact, much sharper than the debates show. He showed he has both wisdom and experience on his side.
On the NPE Action Report 2020, is it my imagination, or did Warren get a serious downgrade in rating?
Feel the Bern
“His only health concern was that he sometimes gets acid reflux, especially when he eats dinner at 9:30 at night on the campaign trail. ”
Yeah, last meal needs to be at 6pm.
“Nearly Every State (48 and Puerto Rico) vs. Big Tech” (Huffpo) Texas’ attorney general leads the campaign.
With justice, there will be bleed over from that campaign to ed tech which is driven by “morally elastic, rich people…the world’s least socially conscious individuals”. One of the faces of ed tech, Gates-funded SETDA.
Morally elastic is a great term that describes a lot of people in Washington, D.C. and many billionaires.
Morally Elastic
Bungee billionaires
Stretch the truth
Stretch the principles
Strrrretch, forsooth
One of the most interesting things with the very important NPE Action Project is that although the “Donor grade” is listed first, it often has very little to do with a candidate’s position.
John Delaney, Tulsi Gabbard, Beto O’Rourke have A for Donors but F for charters. Amy Klobuchar has a B for Donors but also a B for charters.
Kamala Harris has an F for Donors and a C for charters. Elizabeth Warren has A for donors but C for charters. Joe Biden has an A for donors and a B- for charters. Who would have thought that Biden was better than Warren on charters?
I think politics would be much better off if we simply judged the candidates on the policies they supported. Are Beto O’Rourke and Tulsi Gabbard and John Delaney demonstrating some great admirable independence that we should admire because they go against their donors’ wishes and support charters? Does that mean they have more integrity than Klobuchar, who gets a B from donors and a B in her position on charters, because she just does what her donors want?
The important thing is where candidates’ stand. Not their donors. I don’t oppose Corey Booker because he gets money from the people who support charters. I oppose him because he votes to support charters. I am wary of Joe Biden because of the positions he takes. The fact that he, like rabid pro-charter supporter John Delaney both get A grades because of their donors is irrelevant.
I know the right wing would put up a chart like this but the donations would be a grade based on how much money the candidate received from teachers’ unions. The idea is to convince voters that the candidates only listen to the unions and do anything the union tells them to do. And that would be just as wrong. I don’t care if unions donate to a candidate. I care about what positions the candidate takes. Often the positions will be what the union wants, but that does not mean that the candidate takes his or her marching orders from the union.
Candidates should be judged on their records. Certainly that record may often correspond to donations, but not always.
Democratic Governors like Tim Kaine and Terry McAuliffe were strong supporters of public education. They proved it with their actions. Whether they received more money from privatizers than some of the charter supporting progressives who also ran for Governor is irrelevant.
I dont believe electability is a issue. All the top Ds can beat Trump. Biden, Bernie, Liz, Kamala, … even Pete.
Yup. Worked well in 2016. Always stick with a winning strategy!
I am confused.
There are plenty of people who are insisting that Biden has the best chance of defeating Trump. Doug Little is saying that voters should support whoever they prefer in the primary and not worry about whether that candidate can or cannot beat Trump because any of them can. Isn’t that the best idea? To vote for the primary candidate you prefer instead of voting for the one who supposedly can “beat Trump”?
Of course, those who do not mind a Trump victory and still believe he is no worse than a typical Democrat would be encouraging voters whose first choice candidate — be it Bernie, Biden, Warren or Kamala – does not win the primary should absolutely sit out the election to prove a point. We saw how that worked out last time. Always stick with a winning strategy! And telling people that they should feel free to sit out the election or vote 3rd party if their preferred candidate doesn’t win the primary because Trump is no worse than the nominee was really a winning strategy. As long as you are good with Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and perhaps one more far right justice you can feel like you are “winning!”
The point is that EVERY D is polling well ahead of Trump, particularly the top 3 Biden, Bernie, Warren. All 3 are ahead of Trump IN TEXAS!!! There is no reason to believe ANY frontrunners are better or worse at defeating Trump.
NYC’s mindset is fixed, data won’t change it. She believes that it was not the campaign’s errors e.g. Bloomberg cross over votes instead of rust belt state votes nor, the mealy mouthed Dem. positions like no defense of Social Security, that contributed to the presidential loss (and, 1,000 legislative seats turned over in Obama’s 8 years). The cause was Fox’s assassination of the Clinton reputation and DINO’s (who she believes were actually a segment of Democrats) who badmouthed Hillary.
Speaking of principles or lack thereof-
Mercedes Schneider reports about ALEC’s gift to Arizona- legislator, Sen. Farnsworth. He supported charter schools in the Senate and is retiring this year with $14 mil. from the sale of his charter schools.
From People’s Action- The files of GOP operative, Hofeller, show his gerrymandering research includes map overlays of black voting age population, which refutes claims by the Republican Party that race was not a factor.
But, we can expect the Federalist Society’s (Leonard Leo) judges to ignore gerrymandering’s intent and outcomes.
Self development
Arthur Camins: Fight for First Principles | Diane Ravitch's blog