117th Congress: DEMS IN DISARRAY!!!111!!

[dxmnkd316]

The problem with the Dem Senators is that they don't properly divide the work along the areas where they are most competent.

You need the technocrats to evaluate the problem and come up with a solution
you need the lawyers with great staffs write the bill
you need the cheerleaders to sell the bill to the public
you need negotiators to sell the bill to the other politicians
you need a whip who knows where the bodies are buried
you need the bulldogs to get dirty and conduct oversight

The Dems have a mix of technocrats and Legacy admissions. The latter of which are useless, or maybe they have some value in negotiations. Whatever.

The olds with the biggest budgets should be hiring amazing staffs to write the bills, and spend their own time negotiating and whipping votes. The rest should all be under 60, or better yet, 50. Let the younger legs and minds drive the public facing fights.

The Dems have never built a team. They just got a bunch of legacy hires, people who outlived their opponents, and a few young competent fill ins. They haven't spent more than five minutes in the last 30 years finding the people they need to build a team.

The House seems to have done just fine with that but they have a great leader and a huge bench to pull from. I don't care if it's the DNC or a select group of senators and house leadership, but they need to be grooming people for each of those positions within the senate and selling those people to the public.

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

I can't figure it. It doesn't make sense to me. The ERA Movement was 50 years ago. Yet, they're still doing what their husbands would want them to do. I have a sister like that. I don't get it.

Not all of them were part of it or agreed with it, based on how they were raised/brainwashed and how much education they were allowed to receive. You can go back even further to the suffrage movement and you'll find plenty of female opposition to giving women the right to vote.

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

It creeped me out 20 years ago when my church, very rural Michigan, started a "Men of Grace" committee that was essentially "a woman's place is pregnant and barefoot in the kitchen," as described above.

Funny thing was some of the "very religious" men certainly didn't act that way when not around their wives.

Typical "conservatives" though.

Any male-exclusive church group is your cue to avoid like the plague. It's like going to the bar with your male friends, except it's worse because they will parrot demeaning crap with a straight face and no liquid courage, then couch it in some cherry-picked quotes from a 2000 year-old book of moral fairytales written in dead languages by cranky, undersexed, xenophobic old men, then further translated into current languages by other cranky, undersexed, xenophobic old men.

At least when you and your bros act like boors at the bar and get 86'd, you're all just acting out your basal male id with the aid of alcohol. That's what we inherited from our ape ancestors, and I'd like to think that most of us were raised better (which is what differentiates us from animals). The problem is that the Abrahamic religions attempt to put a patina of phony, constructed, patriarchal "societal mores" around that id to force it everyone, then place the onus on women to stay sober, dress conservatively, keep their legs closed, and most importantly, never think or live for themselves. Meanwhile, men who break the rules usually get a pass because "boys will be boys".

[unofan]

I don't think it had anything to do with what people were saying, or not saying. What sunk him was the photo.

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertai...-women/545954/

Ah yes, the photo. Where he's not actually touching the boobies, which are under clothing and a ****ing flak jacket, while taking part in a USO tour which are, by definition, bawdy events to "rally" the troops.

The only people that photo ****ed off were people looking for a reason to ****can a Democratic senator out of politics.

[unofan]

I like Gillibrand too.

For ****** sake, why?

[Handyman]

Not all of them were part of it or agreed with it, based on how they were raised/brainwashed and how much education they were allowed to receive. You can go back even further to the suffrage movement and you'll find plenty of female opposition to giving women the right to vote.

Proof

[psych]

For ****** sake, why?

Because she’s a good Senator.

[dxmnkd316]

Because she’s a good Senator.

There are like five good Democratic Senators. She's not one of them.

Brown
Klobuchar
Sanders
Duckworth
Warren

i could hear arguments for a few more. Gilibrand isn't even in the top twenty.

[Handyman]

There are more than 5...but yeah she is is not close.

[psych]

I mean, she may not even be in the top 20 and I still think she’s a good Senator. This is still a subjective, right? I’d put Booker on your list for potential top 5. Murphy. Merkley. Markey. Apparently anyone with an M in their last name.

[Handyman]

Murphy for sure would make my list...Booker I am hit or miss on but that is cause of his being in the pocket of Big Pharma. Merkley is a very good team player as is Markey.

KG is better than Sinema and Manchin...so she has that at least.

(yes a lot of this is subjective)

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Tina smith is certainly a good and perfunctory senator. By no means would I encourage a primary - my point was I think al was great, Tina does exactly what she should.

i don’t have to love my reps, just do your job. But I love when I can love them.

KG is really in bottom 5, even if she does her job most of the time.

[Kepler]

Any male-exclusive church group is your cue to avoid like the plague. It's like going to the bar with your male friends, except it's worse because they will parrot demeaning crap with a straight face and no liquid courage, then couch it in some cherry-picked quotes from a 2000 year-old book of moral fairytales written in dead languages by cranky, undersexed, xenophobic old men, then further translated into current languages by other cranky, undersexed, xenophobic old men.

At least when you and your bros act like boors at the bar and get 86'd, you're all just acting out your basal male id with the aid of alcohol. That's what we inherited from our ape ancestors, and I'd like to think that most of us were raised better (which is what differentiates us from animals). The problem is that the Abrahamic religions attempt to put a patina of phony, constructed, patriarchal "societal mores" around that id to force it everyone, then place the onus on women to stay sober, dress conservatively, keep their legs closed, and most importantly, never think or live for themselves. Meanwhile, men who break the rules usually get a pass because "boys will be boys".

I can't add anything to this post except my admiration. It's perfect.

[psych]

Murphy for sure would make my list...Booker I am hit or miss on but that is cause of his being in the pocket of Big Pharma. Merkley is a very good team player as is Markey.

KG is better than Sinema and Manchin...so she has that at least.

(yes a lot of this is subjective)

Booker lives in New Jersey. I think his support for, or at least not open rebellion against the pharmaceutical industry is self-preservation, although I can’t say I know the intricacies of New Jersey politics.
Team player is important. Definitely not end-all be-all, but important. From the little I know of Markey and Merkley, they go beyond just team player. AOC liked Markey enough to endorse him, and that resonates some with me.
Unless Sinema swerves left over the next few years, she’ll stay my least favorite Senator. I rarely want a sitting Democratic Senator to be primaried, but she needs to go, and Feinstein needs to retire or get primaried herself. California and Hawaii should have the most liberal Senators, and Feinstein isn’t it.

[Kepler]

Apparently anyone with an M in their last name.

Ahem. "Manchin."

Wyden is good. Maybe a W counts as an M with a different orientation.