To the supporters of Kirsten Gillibrand:

[Chasstev365]

Last edited Tue Jan 2, 2018, 09:07 PM - Edit history (2)

Before the Al Franken calculated political move, I really like her!

If she is the 2020 nominee, I will support her over ANY Republican nominee.

However, it's going to take a long time to get over what she did to Al and the Democratic Party.

Does she and/or Chuck Schumer have any remorse?????

[dchill]

1. It's Kirsten Gillibrand. And yes, they're sorry...

that so many people saw through their craven political maneuver.

[marylandblue]

2. She might, but Schumer doesn't

He was always a political schemer, and a very good one. That's how he got where he is today. It will be a crowded field in 2020, so it's going it be a tough fight for everyone.

[JackInGreen]

3. I wish that were true

Unfortunately we already know that no matter who's in it if the party decides on one first we can see the others destroyed by 'friends'.

[marylandblue]

5. 2020 will be different

The Clintons dominated Democratic politics for years. With them on the sidelines and the base leading rather than following now, it will be a free for all.

[JackInGreen]

6. I hope your right

I just can't hear "This time, it'll be different" without hearing every abuser ever

[marylandblue]

7. Someday soon I'll make an OP about why we are entering a new political era

and it will be dominated by Democrats for the first time since Carter.

[StevieM]

45. No they didn't. There were always a lot of different Democrats and they all did whatever

they wanted to. And Hillary was never really that dominant in Democratic politics. John Kerry didn't even give her a prominent speaking slot at the 2004 Democratic Convention. And she was totally sidelined from politics when she was Secretary of State.

Anyone who wanted to run for president in 2008 or 2016 could and did.

It has always been a free for all. 2020 will be the same.

It is up to the voters--the base--to pick the direction of the party, just like it has always been.

[marylandblue]

46. I think more people wanted to run than actually did

But they felt they couldn't beat Clinton. Obama took the chance and won. Sanders took the chance and came close. Biden wishes he did. I'm predicting we'll have 15 to 20 candidates. When was the last time that happened?

[StevieM]

47. If they felt they couldn't beat her it was because they were looking at the poll numbers.

Nobody gave her those poll numbers on a silver platter--she earned them.

Biden was polling in single digits for years. He didn't want to suffer an embarrassing loss as a sitting VP. Maybe that would have changed, had he entered the race. But it didn't look that way.

I agree that we will have a good 20 candidates. There are a lot of factors that are leading more people to run then in the past. It wasn't HRC's fault that 20 people didn't run in 2000 or 2004.

[marylandblue]

48. You make it sound like being a good political infighter is a bad thing

Few get to the highest levels of politics without it. Don't buy Republican talking points. She's ambitious, she planned things out well in advance, she lined up donors and supporters early, she knew what she was doing. Other people who run for president do these things and nobody blinks an eye. She just did them better. But because Hillary Clinton did them, it must be an accusation, not a complement.

[GulfCoast66]

36. Bull fucking shit.

Or, so said the person whose candidate lost

Voters have always chosen our candidates and always will. If a person who spends years and decades working for the party and its candidates defeats a Johnny come lately, it is not the party who decides.

On second thought, it is the party. Because the party is me. And you. And all those who vote. And contribute.

This bullshit about some mysterious ‘party’ or ‘establishment’ making all the decisions needs to end. It is the language of the disgruntled.

[all american girl]

51. So people going out to vote is the party deciding? I really get mad when I see this

You are taking our vote, voice, away. We voted for her, in large numbers. She had our support. The DNC didn't do that, we did, by voting. Please stop with this...everyone has a chance...all I have to say is 2008.

[TexasProgresive]

4. I really didn't know who she was

She certainly has name recognition with me and it is negative. Yes, I will support and vote for her in the general but I won't do it with a smile.

[NurseJackie]

8. I do not support her and I'm losing friends because of it. Oh well.

[democratisphere]

9. You have an ally. Friends need to wakeup and find candidates that support ALL Democrats,

including the Democrats that are under siege!

[Demsrule86]

20. I don't support her in a primary either...general...any Dem. I never thought she could win.

First of all she comes from New York...we need someone that can attract the rust belt.

[lunamagica]

23. Yeah, that's the sad part, Jackie. But I can't support her for anything after not only

after Franken, but after this, which shows what an opportunistic hypocrite she is:





Some say Hillary should primary her. I doubt it will happen, but I'd love it if it did!

[Wwcd]

37. Same shit Nina pulled. Used the Clintons for "Media & Money"

Sounds familiar.

Ego & greed's a nasty thing & it always & eventually reveals "who they are"

Never fails.

[cwydro]

50. Spot on. nt

[sinkingfeeling]

25. I won't support her bid for president since she doesn't believe in due process

nor honesty.

[LWolf]

10. I can't answer your question,

because I don't really know. To be honest, I'm lukewarm on Gillenbrand; the disgusting attacks simply prompt me to shove back.

I also don't see, to me, a valid reason for remorse.

[yardwork]

11. Your post would have a lot more credibility if you got her name right.

You've mangled both her first and last names. Not just misspelled - you've gotten her names wrong.

I see that a lot here and it really undermines the credibility of the posts.

[likesmountains 52]

13. Check the profile...

[Chasstev365]

16. ?

[Chasstev365]

17. Whose profile?

[Chasstev365]

18. Wow: Just looked: Your profile is SO impressive!

Stay classy!

[likesmountains 52]

19. Just sayin...you've had 4 posts hidden in the last 90 days..

Could indicate confusion...

[Chasstev365]

15. I will fix it! Thank you for the kind way you pointed it out!

[yardwork]

21. Thank you for fixing it.

I pretty much agree with your OP.

[mcar]

12. What about the other 20 senators who did the same?

Why just her? I am struggling to understand the denigration of one Democrat, when many others had the same stance. It makes no sense.

[brer cat]

14. +++

Who knew she was such an effective Pied Piper that the other Senators were powerless to resist her call?

[Wwcd]

29. K & R Thank you for posting that.

Did she promise them cookies?
Wtf, they are all adults.

[Egnever]

27. Oh for fucks sake because she was the ring leader

Do you.really expect everyone to list all 35 of them every time?

This insipid bullshit but why her is fucking maddening.

She was the fucking point person so she gets the majority of the heat. What is difficult to understand about that.

She stood in front of the cameras and spewed her zero tolerance nonsense. Claiming her moral superiority which has been shown to be nothing more than grandstanding.

There are multiple clips of her supporting folks with far more serious behavior than franken was even ever accused of forget guilty of.

She a fucking opportunist of the worst sort. Willing to knife anyone in the back if it suits her.

Thankfully she showed who she is before getting further.

That said my first letter went to Chuck.

[mcar]

30. She started it, mom!

So all us 20+ others had no choice but to go along.

She's the ringleader!!!! We're innocent,I tells ya!

[Wwcd]

31. So the others need not be named because there are just too many of them?

No.
I hold every damn one of them accountable.
Not the "ring leader"

[Egnever]

35. Oh good lord

Like I said first letter went to Chuck. They didn't end there.

Thing is Chuck was bright enough to stay off the stage. I will give him that .

[Drahthaardogs]

58. Doubt it.

Just saying...

[LanternWaste]

49. I've little doubt you're compelled to allege her a ringleader lacking any objective evidence to supp

I've little doubt you're compelled to allege her a ringleader lacking any objective evidence to support the premise. But to be honest, that's a failing most people seem to have... speaking in bumper stickers, long live the narrative, etc. Those alternative facts serve you well...

[oberliner]

22. In theory, everyone on DU is a supporter of Kirsten Gillibrand

"Support Democrats" is one of the tenets of this board.

[CentralMass]

56. That includes Al Franken..

[LexVegas]

24. ...

[applegrove]

26. We have guests. Do you like cocktail sausages? How 'bout a gin gimlet?

[Wwcd]

28. Does Bernie Sanders or K Ellison have any remorse? NOPE!

Haven't heard a word of remorse from any of the others either.

Neither Gillibrand nor Schumer's request would have had any clout, had the others not piled on the the bus, wagging their fingers in unison.

[mcar]

32. Only Gillibrand needs to show remorse

Cause she started it!!11

[Wwcd]

34. Ya mom!, she started it an..ann..and me & the others got swindled into joining in!

She twisted our arms way behind our backs & made us wag our fingers at old Al.
Kirsten m.a.d.e. us do it!!
She's the ring leader!!
😭

[Renew Deal]

54. Who did she sexually harass?

[ProudLib72]

38. Why did everyone pile on the bus?

Was it the bandwagon appeal in conjunction with the MeToo movement being high profile, or was there more to the story? And then there were the senators who came out later to say they were sorry. Were they sorry Franken was leaving or that he did not have due process (or that they had betrayed their constituents)?

There was a lot of weirdness with this episode.

[Wwcd]

40. Yes there were a lot of wtf's, and we were correct in our wondering wtf was going on.

Wonder what the conversation was that made them all join hands in unity.

We deserve an answer from EVERY ONE OF THEM.

Didn't they ALL hear their constituents shouting at them to look at Roger Stone & FOX.
They ALL owe us an explanation.

[GulfCoast66]

39. They were obviously tricked, I tell you.

By the tricky bitchy woman, don’t you know. And their progressive bonifides are still pure as the wind blown snow. Because the tricky woman.

Too bad this is needed

[Wwcd]

41. pure, pure, pure. Yup. They got tricked!!

[riverwalker]

42. Both are dead to me

We have a wide and deep bench of seriously fantastic people. Time for new blood.

[IluvPitties]

43. We have a lot of talent in our party.

Not worried about her becoming the Nominee.

[brooklynite]

44. I'm not a "supporter" of Gillibrand, but I agree with her actions...

Before I respond, will you concur that Franken did not deny all the charges against him?

[Renew Deal]

52. Franken apologized for doing whatever he did to a bunch of people

And it’s Gillibrand’s fault for noticing?

Maybe you should seek an apology from Franken for running for office with this in his background.

[mcar]

57. Her fault and only her fault

She is one powerful woman, isn't she? She's the "ringleader," who uses her evil wiles to get all these other senators to do her bidding -- against their will, of course, the poor dears.

[samnsara]

53. there are a few ppl that i will support if they are the Dem nominee, but...

..I will not campaign for them. She may be one.

[delisen]

55. I don't agree with how Franken was pressured out but

I believe Gillebrand was honorable in her intentions. Due to her work on sexual harassment she is well aware of the flaws in investigations of sexual harassment in workplaces and and probably of flaws in the senate's handling of claims.

Whether women will will be treated as workers in the workplace or as sex objects is a human rights issue. It affects not just women but also the well-being of dependent children.

I think overall the way Franken was treated is very wronged must not be repeated.

However I am not against Gillebrand in terms of her running for president.

[dansolo]

61. Except she did the exact opposite

So instead of ensuring that sexual harassment claims are investigated thoroughly, she just declared him guilty and demanded he resign. How is that supposed to be helping women? If she was sincere in her intentions, she would have made sure that the process was handled out in the open. But instead, she only made it more difficult for accusations to be formally heard. Remember, this can work both ways. I can easily imagine a scenario where an accuser comes forward, the accused vehemently denies anything, and their party chooses to forego any investigation. We have now set the precedent that Ethics investigations are optional based on the presumption of party leaders.

[Trumpocalypse]

59. Stop the cult of personality.

Franken was one Senator. Him leaving the senate didn't do anything to the democratic party. Gillibrand is one senator and she didn't push Franken out. Many other Senators, including Sanders and Warren, called for Franken's resignation. But in the end it was his decision to resign. So let's stop beating our chests in self-righteous indignation over one Senator.

[brooklynite]

60. I suppose its asking to much for you to show the evidence of a "calculated political move"?