Tue Mar 2, 2021, 07:51 PM
superpatriotman (6,100 posts)
White House withdraws Neera Tanden nomination : Breaking
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/02/politics/neera-tanden-nomination-pulled/index.html
The White House is pulling the nomination of Neera Tanden to lead the Office of Management and Budget, according to an administration official.
The former Clinton campaign aide and president of the left-leaning think tank Center for American Progress came under fire during the confirmation process for past critical comments of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. The Washington Post first reported the White House's decision.
|
171 replies, 8031 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
superpatriotman | Mar 2021 | OP |
Post removed | Mar 2021 | #1 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #4 | |
jorgevlorgan | Mar 2021 | #7 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #9 | |
jorgevlorgan | Mar 2021 | #10 | |
fishwax | Mar 2021 | #15 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #18 | |
fishwax | Mar 2021 | #20 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #23 | |
fishwax | Mar 2021 | #48 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #49 | |
Cha | Mar 2021 | #85 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #16 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #19 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #24 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #27 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #33 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #35 | |
dsc | Mar 2021 | #71 | |
rogue emissary | Mar 2021 | #117 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #129 | |
rogue emissary | Mar 2021 | #139 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #164 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #128 | |
dsc | Mar 2021 | #130 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #133 | |
dsc | Mar 2021 | #136 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #137 | |
dsc | Mar 2021 | #138 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #143 | |
jcgoldie | Mar 2021 | #132 | |
rogue emissary | Mar 2021 | #141 | |
jcgoldie | Mar 2021 | #149 | |
rogue emissary | Mar 2021 | #151 | |
jcgoldie | Mar 2021 | #152 | |
rogue emissary | Mar 2021 | #158 | |
jcgoldie | Mar 2021 | #160 | |
rogue emissary | Mar 2021 | #162 | |
jcgoldie | Mar 2021 | #168 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #153 | |
rogue emissary | Mar 2021 | #159 | |
jcgoldie | Mar 2021 | #167 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #170 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #144 | |
Hassin Bin Sober | Mar 2021 | #42 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #45 | |
Nixie | Mar 2021 | #52 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #57 | |
JI7 | Mar 2021 | #73 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #76 | |
Nixie | Mar 2021 | #147 | |
Post removed | Mar 2021 | #56 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #127 | |
Cuthbert Allgood | Mar 2021 | #134 | |
seaglass | Mar 2021 | #31 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #36 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #37 | |
seaglass | Mar 2021 | #38 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #44 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #51 | |
rogue emissary | Mar 2021 | #113 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #115 | |
jcgoldie | Mar 2021 | #131 | |
Laelth | Mar 2021 | #2 | |
marmar | Mar 2021 | #3 | |
mobeau69 | Mar 2021 | #28 | |
liskddksil | Mar 2021 | #5 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #6 | |
liskddksil | Mar 2021 | #8 | |
marmar | Mar 2021 | #11 | |
jorgevlorgan | Mar 2021 | #14 | |
kcr | Mar 2021 | #26 | |
seaglass | Mar 2021 | #32 | |
Skittles | Mar 2021 | #54 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #58 | |
JI7 | Mar 2021 | #82 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #70 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #72 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #77 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #78 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #79 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #80 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #81 | |
Cha | Mar 2021 | #86 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #87 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #89 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #92 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #94 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #96 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #98 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #101 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #102 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #105 | |
Cha | Mar 2021 | #106 | |
Cha | Mar 2021 | #104 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #109 | |
Cha | Mar 2021 | #122 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #110 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #111 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #114 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #116 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #119 | |
Cha | Mar 2021 | #124 | |
Cha | Mar 2021 | #123 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #145 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #146 | |
Cuthbert Allgood | Mar 2021 | #135 | |
Hassin Bin Sober | Mar 2021 | #142 | |
Hassin Bin Sober | Mar 2021 | #148 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #154 | |
Autumn | Mar 2021 | #165 | |
Midwestern Democrat | Mar 2021 | #171 | |
Skittles | Mar 2021 | #83 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #84 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #88 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #90 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #95 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #99 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #107 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #112 | |
radius777 | Mar 2021 | #91 | |
wellst0nev0ter | Mar 2021 | #93 | |
radius777 | Mar 2021 | #103 | |
Cha | Mar 2021 | #125 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #97 | |
Cha | Mar 2021 | #120 | |
Skittles | Mar 2021 | #163 | |
BradAllison | Mar 2021 | #150 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #155 | |
BradAllison | Mar 2021 | #156 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #157 | |
Deminpenn | Mar 2021 | #47 | |
onecaliberal | Mar 2021 | #12 | |
dsc | Mar 2021 | #13 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #21 | |
sheshe2 | Mar 2021 | #34 | |
uponit7771 | Mar 2021 | #60 | |
JI7 | Mar 2021 | #75 | |
Biophilic | Mar 2021 | #17 | |
bdamomma | Mar 2021 | #22 | |
mobeau69 | Mar 2021 | #30 | |
Kaleva | Mar 2021 | #25 | |
Hortensis | Mar 2021 | #40 | |
BlueCheeseAgain | Mar 2021 | #29 | |
bdamomma | Mar 2021 | #41 | |
Hortensis | Mar 2021 | #46 | |
uponit7771 | Mar 2021 | #61 | |
niyad | Mar 2021 | #66 | |
BannonsLiver | Mar 2021 | #39 | |
JI7 | Mar 2021 | #74 | |
Cha | Mar 2021 | #121 | |
gratuitous | Mar 2021 | #43 | |
Nasruddin | Mar 2021 | #59 | |
uponit7771 | Mar 2021 | #62 | |
Deminpenn | Mar 2021 | #50 | |
BigmanPigman | Mar 2021 | #53 | |
iluvtennis | Mar 2021 | #55 | |
mahina | Mar 2021 | #63 | |
Hulk | Mar 2021 | #64 | |
quakerboy | Mar 2021 | #65 | |
PatrickforB | Mar 2021 | #67 | |
Calista241 | Mar 2021 | #68 | |
usaf-vet | Mar 2021 | #69 | |
tritsofme | Mar 2021 | #108 | |
radius777 | Mar 2021 | #100 | |
LizBeth | Mar 2021 | #118 | |
Hassin Bin Sober | Mar 2021 | #140 | |
Cha | Mar 2021 | #161 | |
AZProgressive | Mar 2021 | #166 | |
Cha | Mar 2021 | #169 | |
Hortensis | Mar 2021 | #126 |
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Post removed
Response to Post removed (Reply #1)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 07:57 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
4. Manchin was not the only one. Sanders started it with his scold and demand for apology.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #4)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 07:59 PM
jorgevlorgan (7,464 posts)
7. Manchin lead the charge on the dem side
But I'm disappointed with Sanders, also.
|
Response to jorgevlorgan (Reply #7)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:00 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
9. Sanders started the charge on the Dems side at the committee hearing.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #9)
jorgevlorgan This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #4)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:05 PM
fishwax (29,057 posts)
15. it's not as though the tweets weren't going to come up at the hearing w/o Sanders mentioning them
He did not speak out against her nomination. He would have helped shepherd her nomination through the committee. To blame him for this is silly.
|
Response to fishwax (Reply #15)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:09 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
18. Looking over those glasses, and scolding her. Yes, he could have said any number of things to
dismiss what he knew was coming as irrelevant. Instead he demanded an apology on record after making it clear she was "mean".
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #18)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:10 PM
fishwax (29,057 posts)
20. I don't see anything wrong with him addressing the tweets
![]() On edit: it was going to come up. He gave her the opportunity to respond to it and to frame it to her benefit at the outset of the hearing. It's the kind of thing one does to shepherd a risky nomination through for an ally. |
Response to fishwax (Reply #20)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:13 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
23. Right, he was simply the victim. There was no "two sides of the story" in this scenario, for sure.
Just be scolded and bow that head and apologize to the man.
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #23)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 09:13 PM
fishwax (29,057 posts)
48. he wasn't the one intervjewing for a job
![]() You seem pretty intent on criticizing him. I don't think the divisiveness is productive, so I'm gonna duck outta this subthread now. Have a njce night. |
Response to fishwax (Reply #48)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 09:14 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
49. Yes, I found it offensive once again as I watched that finger wagged at a woman demanding apology.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #49)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:33 AM
Cha (286,453 posts)
85. Brava! We know whaat happened..
no defense.
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #4)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:07 PM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
16. Sanders would have voted for her, because he supports Biden. Manchin would never vote for her.
Response to Autumn (Reply #16)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:09 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
19. I do not know that to be true. Regardless, he started the tone.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #19)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:13 PM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
24. Regardless, Bernie supports the Democratic agenda that Biden wants. Manchin is kneecapping him.
Fuck the tone, I watch the actions.
|
Response to Autumn (Reply #24)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:16 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
27. Sanders was the very one that kneecapped Tanden. Manchin just kicked her while she was down.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #27)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:31 PM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
33. So? He still said he would vote for you. You can blame Manchin, who said he wouldn't vote for her.
You really should pay attention. But yeah I know. Bernie!!!!
![]() https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/19/politics/joe-manchin-neera-tanden-confirmation-biden/index.html |
Response to Autumn (Reply #33)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 11:01 PM
dsc (51,779 posts)
71. I don't think he did say he would vote for her
he didn't say he wouldn't either but I don't recall him saying he would. That said Manchin deserves the lion's share of the blame here, as I do think Sanders wouldn't have tanked her by himself like Manchin did.
|
Response to dsc (Reply #71)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:21 AM
rogue emissary (3,039 posts)
117. From the article
Not all Democrats have made their positions clear either. Sanders, the chairman of the Budget Committee, would not say if he backs Tanden Friday. "I will be talking to Ms. Tanden early next week," he told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room" following Manchin's announcement. |
Response to rogue emissary (Reply #117)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 10:55 AM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
129. From another article
Three White House sources said that Sanders would have been a yes vote on Tanden if the White House had been able to find a Republican vote to replace JOE MANCHIN, the Democrat from West Virginia who started all of this by publicly opposing her Feb. 19.
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2021/03/03/the-three-factions-set-to-face-off-over-tandens-replacement-491970 |
Response to Autumn (Reply #129)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 12:29 PM
rogue emissary (3,039 posts)
139. "would have been"
So he still hasn't officially said he would have supported her. Now that's the leadership you can believe in.
|
Response to rogue emissary (Reply #139)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 05:30 PM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
164. "she dropped out". Know who else didn't officially endorse her? Your Democrat, Joe Manchin.
He has not endorsed her officially or privately. Come to think of it a lot of other Dems didn't endorse Tanden. Officially. What Manchin has said PUBLICLY is that he would not vote for her. Now that's leadership by the guy who unofficially controls the Democratic party by holding a party switch over their heads.
![]() The guy you are giving a pass to so you can pound on Bernie. |
Response to dsc (Reply #71)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 10:52 AM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
128. You are wrong. White House sources said that Bernie said he would vote for her
Three White House sources said that Sanders would have been a yes vote on Tanden if the White House had been able to find a Republican vote to replace JOE MANCHIN, the Democrat from West Virginia who started all of this by publicly opposing her Feb. 19.
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2021/03/03/the-three-factions-set-to-face-off-over-tandens-replacement-491970 |
Response to Autumn (Reply #128)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 11:15 AM
dsc (51,779 posts)
130. It was said after, though not by him publicly
he most certainly didn't publicly support her.
|
Response to dsc (Reply #130)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 11:21 AM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
133. Let it go. You're wrong. Bernie said he would vote for her, he supports Biden's agenda. Manchin
doesn't. Bernie didn't need to publicly support her. His job was to vote for her. There were not enough votes to confirm her, there would never have been enough votes.
|
Response to Autumn (Reply #133)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 11:51 AM
dsc (51,779 posts)
136. No I am not wrong
HE DIDN'T SAY I WILL VOTE FOR HER, that is what I typed. and that is 100 percent true. He didn't say the words in any public place at any time. After the fact, the White House NOT HIM, said he would have voted for her IF THEY COULD GET THE LAST VOTE ON THEIR OWN.
|
Response to dsc (Reply #136)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 12:01 PM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
137. HE doesn't have to say he would vote for her in public. HE TOLD THE WHITE HOUSE
Here you are yelling at me because he didn't tell you.
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Response to Autumn (Reply #137)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 12:13 PM
dsc (51,779 posts)
138. please stop lying about what I said
I never, not once, said it was his job or he had to say anything. I said he didn't say something. AND HE DIDN'T. You are calling me a liar based on what I NEVER SAID.
|
Response to dsc (Reply #138)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:05 PM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
143. I NEVER SAID you said it was his job. You are accusing me of lying about what you posted.
![]() THIS IS WHAT I SAID. I asked a question, This was exactly what I said. NOTHING about you in that sentence. Why isn't it Macnchins job to get votes for her? HE doesn't have to say he would vote for her in public. HE TOLD THE WHITE HOUSE
Here you are yelling at me because he didn't tell you. . He would not have changed Manchins mind. Manchin hates Bernie as much as "some Dems" hate him. Why isn't it Manchins job to get votes for her? Manchin according to most, is a real DEMOCRAT, BERNIE ISN'T and WE ARE LUCKY TO HAVE HIM!!! It was said after, though not by him publicly
he most certainly didn't publicly support her. HE DIDN'T SAY I WILL VOTE FOR HER, that is what I typed. and that is 100 percent true. He didn't say the words in any public place at any time. After the fact, the White House NOT HIM, said he would have voted for her IF THEY COULD GET THE LAST VOTE ON THEIR OWN.
He did say something to the White House. I even gave you the link |
Response to jcgoldie (Reply #132)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 12:32 PM
rogue emissary (3,039 posts)
141. Where in this article does it quote him or his staff on the record?
Response to rogue emissary (Reply #141)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:21 PM
jcgoldie (10,521 posts)
149. Oh I see the game now
I guess the other 48 democrats in the senate were quoted in print articles that they would vote yes?
|
Response to jcgoldie (Reply #149)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:43 PM
rogue emissary (3,039 posts)
151. Do you mean the game where you can't quote him or his staff saying he'd vote for her?
Well 48 of them didn't ask or demand an apology from Tanden. Manchin and Sanders were the only ones that had an issue with her tweets. Also, 49 of them aren't the budget committee chair. So are you advocating for Sanders to lose his committee chairmanship so he can be just one of the other 48 Senators?
I'm perfectly happy to judge him as just one of the other 49 Senators that aren't the budget committee chair. |
Response to rogue emissary (Reply #151)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:49 PM
jcgoldie (10,521 posts)
152. No
The game of blaming Bernie Sanders for Joe Manchin’s hatchet job on Tanden. I suppose CNN had no source for writing an article including headline that Sanders planned to vote for her. A lot of disingenuous Bernie bashing in this thread. I’ve always been lukewarm on Sanders since 2016 when I felt he stayed in too long and cost Hillary some votes more than likely. Nonetheless he’s a solid unwavering progressive voice in the senate and holding him responsible for this is ridiculous.
|
Response to jcgoldie (Reply #152)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 03:26 PM
rogue emissary (3,039 posts)
158. Let me be clear, I blame them both for tanking Tanden's nomination.
The only reason I posted about Sanders is people were lying when they asserted that Sanders said he'd vote for her. If any of the Manchin defenders for example started to spread the lie that Manchin had changed his mind and would vote for her. I'd post that's a lie as well.
I read every article posted so far and they all talk about probably and would. None of the articles quotes a source on the record saying Sanders told them he'd vote for Tanden. Hell, before yesterday I would've said Sanders would vote for her. Simple because I thought he supported women and minorities. His silent act speaks volumes of his leadership and support of Biden's agenda. He's the committee chair that oversees the confirmation and the vote. Now I know it isn't the chair's sole responsibility but he does bear some blame. He should have never brought up the tweets, allowing the Republicans to run with a bipartisan opposition line. He should have realized Manchin is no friend. The confirmation should have been about Biden's policies. |
Response to rogue emissary (Reply #158)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 04:18 PM
jcgoldie (10,521 posts)
160. "people were lying"
That includes newsweek?
Your argument is that because there isn't a direct quote, Newsweek has no source for their article which they titled "Bernie Sanders Will Vote for Neera Tanden Despite Battling With Her Over Tweets". |
Response to jcgoldie (Reply #160)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 05:08 PM
rogue emissary (3,039 posts)
162. Yes, that includes their trash article which is more click bait than an article.
Headline
Bernie Sanders Will Vote for Neera Tanden Despite Battling With Her Over Tweets
the only sentence that references or talks about what Sanders will do. Bernie Sanders is expected to vote to confirm Neera Tanden,
That's the only sentence that references what he'll do. It's not attributed to a friend, Senator, confidant, wife, advisers, driver, his son, grandchild, staff, or Sanders himself. It doesn't even state that the sentence is from a source. Again I thought he would vote for her, but I wouldn't take that opinion and state it as fact. The article ends with. Newsweek reached out to Sanders for further comment but did not hear back before publication. Which the article didn't even quote him for any comment or statement.
It should never have been used to suggest Sanders had said he'll vote for Tanden. People saw the headline and reposted it here to try to prove Lizbeth wrong. People were reading into the article that Sanders stated he'd vote for Tanden. Just like the CNN, and Politico articles. They reported people's opinions of what Sanders would do. I had and still don't have any proof that he would vote for her. Every time he was asked he refused to say including just last night. |
Response to rogue emissary (Reply #162)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 08:11 PM
jcgoldie (10,521 posts)
168. Bullshit
I dont have any evidence at least 45 other senators would have voted for her but I guess it doesn’t suit the narrative to seek out that proof. Bernie hatchet job is what this entire thread is I knew better than wade into that bullshit but occasionally the sheer dishonesty of it drags me in. Sorry for that.
|
Response to rogue emissary (Reply #151)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 03:05 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
153. +1. It truly amazes me the insistence to vilify Manchin and the exoneration or Sanders. It is what
it is. Personally, I see both as being petty and unprofessional.
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #153)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 03:28 PM
rogue emissary (3,039 posts)
159. Exactly, they both held Tanden to a level they didn't for many of Donny's nominees.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #153)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 08:06 PM
jcgoldie (10,521 posts)
167. Whats petty
Is using manchin’s bluedog bullshit to try to score points on Sanders then disregarding all evidence to the contrary of your self serving argument.
|
Response to jcgoldie (Reply #167)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 09:04 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
170. No one in the thread absolved Manchin's role except the people that want to wipe out Sanders role.
Response to jcgoldie (Reply #132)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:07 PM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
144. I posted that link. But Bernie never said it PUBLICLY.
![]() |
Response to LizBeth (Reply #27)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:39 PM
Hassin Bin Sober (25,621 posts)
42. Kind of ironic the "real democrat" Manchin harpooned her nomination.
Response to Hassin Bin Sober (Reply #42)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:49 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
45. Sanders harpooned it, Manchin joined in.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #45)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 09:34 PM
Nixie (16,648 posts)
52. Exactly, and they know that.
Sanders gave Manchin a perfect excuse. That questioning about mean tweets was so ridiculous.
|
Response to Nixie (Reply #52)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 11:23 PM
JI7 (87,932 posts)
73. The man as chairman made it about mean tweets instead of issues
Response to JI7 (Reply #73)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 11:39 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
76. This. He started the ball rolling then sit back and let others do. Now we see his signature is not
even on this rejecti0on of Tanden. That, is gaslighting. I am simply having no more gaslighting after the last four years.
|
Response to JI7 (Reply #73)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:01 PM
Nixie (16,648 posts)
147. Yes, and it was a pathetic display
of hypocrisy.
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #45)
Post removed
Response to Hassin Bin Sober (Reply #42)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 10:25 AM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
127. A friend said this morning, razor thin margins in the senate means we need to be prepared to
let things go, and this nomination is one of them.... So
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #27)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 11:33 AM
Cuthbert Allgood (4,473 posts)
134. First of all, as pointed out below, you're not correct. But, how is this different
than Republicans and their "unity." She was HORRIBLE to Sanders on Twitter. Yet, through that, he has said and made it clear he would be a yes vote. And after her inappropriate statements, it's now Sanders that kneecapped her. She did it to herself. And Manchin is an asshole for not supporting Biden's nominees. Like Sanders did. You know, the guy you want to vilify here.
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #19)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:29 PM
seaglass (8,157 posts)
31. Yep.
At 6:25p, minutes before the WH pulled Neera Tanden’s nomination, Bernie Sanders would not say to @wolfblitzer
if he supported her nomination. “I will make that decision when the vote takes place.” Link to tweet ?s=20 |
Response to seaglass (Reply #31)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:34 PM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
37. Why would he vote for her if Manchin and no Republicans would cross over to vote for her?
It was a wait and see. Manchins no vote would have killed her nomination and Bernie was covering his base, as Democrats do.
|
Response to Autumn (Reply #37)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:36 PM
seaglass (8,157 posts)
38. Make up your mind. You just posted that he would have voted for her.
![]() |
Response to seaglass (Reply #38)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:42 PM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
44. Which part of Manchin said he would not vote for her, Republicans would not cross over to vote for
her do you not understand? Bernie could have wasted his capital and voted for her and she still would not have been nominated. Senators can do math, everyone knew there were not the votes for her and it was a very long shot that any Republican would cross over. Had one done so Bernie would have voted yes, he, unlike Manchin, supports Biden's agenda.
|
Response to seaglass (Reply #31)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 09:25 PM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
51. He should have announced she was withdrawing her nomination and there would be no vote? Or lied?
Bernie knows better than to do that.
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #19)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:16 AM
rogue emissary (3,039 posts)
113. The last I saw he refused to say if he'd vote for her.
There's a Newsweek article that says he'd probably vote for her. Of course, it doesn't actually reference him saying he will. In fact, at the end of the article, it notes they reached out to his office and didn't get a response.
|
Response to rogue emissary (Reply #113)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:17 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
115. Right. Thank you.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #19)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 11:18 AM
jcgoldie (10,521 posts)
131. He said it was true
Sanders already said he would vote for her
|
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 07:55 PM
Laelth (32,014 posts)
2. Depressing. n/t
-Laelth
|
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 07:57 PM
marmar (75,801 posts)
3. According to CNN she requested that her name be withdrawn. Still depressing.
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 07:58 PM
liskddksil (2,753 posts)
5. Neera Tanden's Exit brought to you by the following white men
1. Joe Manchin (enough said)
2. Cal Cunningham who couldn't keep it in the pants and almost cost us the Senate altogether this year 3. Mike Bloomberg who cost us a seat in 2016 by endorsing Pat Toomey. |
Response to liskddksil (Reply #5)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 07:59 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
6. Sanders was first to step up and call out her out with his scold. Why are we forgetting Sanders
part in this?
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #6)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:00 PM
liskddksil (2,753 posts)
8. Because Sanders would have voted for her and didn't cost us vital Senate races nt
Response to liskddksil (Reply #8)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:15 PM
kcr (15,243 posts)
26. Glad he would have voted for her, but he didn't need to say anything
He still deserves to be criticized for that.
|
Response to liskddksil (Reply #8)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:30 PM
seaglass (8,157 posts)
32. Really? He didn't seem as sure as you are.
Link to tweet ?s=20 |
Response to LizBeth (Reply #6)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 09:38 PM
Skittles (149,481 posts)
54. Sanders' part in a lot of things is forgotten
yup
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #6)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 10:51 PM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
70. Always find a way to blame Bernie
Nope, Manchin and those who support him own this
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #70)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 11:11 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
72. Sanders was the first to scold a grown woman on being mean to him, on record.
Why are you blaming me, my unwillingness to gaslight?
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #72)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 12:14 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
77. Sanders didn't out and out announce he won't vote for her
Your guy Manchin did.
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #77)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 12:22 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
78. That's the line you are standing on?
Response to LizBeth (Reply #78)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 12:25 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
79. Why are you caping for Manchin anyway?
We're supposed to be putting pressure on him, not giving him cover.
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #79)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 12:32 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
80. All about gaslighting. Pretending Sanders didn't start it all and certainly had his part in this and
you stating because I refuse to rewrite history, I am a fan of Manchin.
The realty is a woman was scolded for being mean to Sanders and Manchin was pissed because his daughter was called out for raising epi pen 400%. Stating fact should be encouraged not attacked. Gaslighting and rewriting history is huge in social media time and I think we all have a part in that. |
Response to LizBeth (Reply #80)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 12:44 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
81. This is about Manchin, not Sanders
Stop caping for Manchin.
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #79)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:47 AM
Cha (286,453 posts)
86. Tou totally misread the poster.. she
is Not ".. giving cover to Manchin.. ".. she is giving the exact timeline of what happened.
She is NOT trying to rewrite history. |
Response to Cha (Reply #86)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:48 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
87. The poster was clearly trying to deflect blame from Manchin to Sanders
Sanders had every right to address the mean tweets, but he was willing to vote for her nomination.
Her nomination failed because of Manchin, someone who supposed to be on her team. |
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #87)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:53 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
89. Blame Manchin. Sanders started it and he gets equal blame. This is not a tough one.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #89)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:57 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
92. Don't bothsides this
Bernie didn't sink Tanden's nomination, Manchin did. Manchin is the problem.
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #92)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:01 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
94. I am on Tanden side. I do not know why you do not get that.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #94)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:03 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
96. Then aim your vitriol at Manchin
Bernie is a red herring, and you know it.
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #96)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:04 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
98. I disagree with you as I have argued thru out this thread.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #98)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:05 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
101. Sounds like you just want an excuse to dump on Bernie
Even though Manchin is literally right there.
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #101)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:09 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
102. Poor picked on Sanders defending himself to the point of scolding a woman on record because she
picked on him with mean tweets. Are you seeing a pattern?
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #102)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:10 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
105. Tanden is mature enough to own those tweets and apologize for them
That's all I have to say.
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #101)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:11 AM
Cha (286,453 posts)
106. Like I said.. she is giving the timeline of
what actually happened.
There's no reason to take it personally. |
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #87)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:10 AM
Cha (286,453 posts)
104. No.. she was Clearly Not "trying to Cover
for Manchin".
And, Neera Tanden had no reason to "apologize.. ". |
Response to Cha (Reply #104)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:15 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
109. Well, Tanden certainly had a reason to apologize. Sanders was scolding her on record at the
committee hearing that was a necessity for a very exciting career move for Tanden. Women often to have to apologetically reach for power and achievement. It is that very fine line dance. Sanders made sure she had no choice but to apologize and all of us recognize exactly what that was.
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #109)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 04:02 AM
Cha (286,453 posts)
122. Yes, for the reason you stated.. but
not for the content of her factual tweets.
|
Response to Cha (Reply #104)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:15 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
110. But she did apologize for her tweets
Because she had the maturity to take responsibility for her writings.
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #110)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:16 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
111. He was holding the job over her head. Are you for real? Damn this would not be the hill I stood on.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #111)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:17 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
114. You're on the hill of blaming Bernie or bust
I don't know why he can't address past statements.
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #114)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:19 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
116. I am calling out Sanders actions that were in part to the ousting of Tanden that I found to be very
sexist. I am done. This just cannot be more clear. So.... whatever.
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #116)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:21 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
119. Tanden put herself in that position with her tweets
It's entirely expected she'd be called out for those, especially by the very senator she attacked. I don't know why this is so controversial.
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #111)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 04:09 AM
Cha (286,453 posts)
124. Exactly.. like I said
in another post.. those attacking her & opposing her think they've won.
I'm thinking Neera's Brilliance with propel her upward in spite of them. |
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #110)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 04:05 AM
Cha (286,453 posts)
123. Yes, I read she "apologized".. she was left with
no choice. But she only tweeted FACTS.
|
Response to Cha (Reply #123)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:11 PM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
145. You're okay with people insinuating that Democrats and allies
received potentially illegal assistance from Russia. Got it.
So much for Democratic unity. |
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #145)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:50 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
146. Not only did Sanders own it, he then blamed HRC for not addressing it. A pattern.
You prefer to ignore what Sanders does in order for unity. Like Republicans demanding unity is doing what they want. Unity would be Sanders owning Russia was working for him to beat HRC and leaving it there. End of story. Not hard, all done. Throwing out that it was wrong would be a walk to unity.
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #72)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 11:36 AM
Cuthbert Allgood (4,473 posts)
135. Reverse it. If Sanders had tweeted about Tanden what she did
would you be blowing off what Sanders said? Or would this be about the mean old white guy saying horrible things? Don't bother. I know it's the latter even if you deny it.
And, in the end, Sanders would 100% have voted for her. |
Response to Cuthbert Allgood (Reply #135)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 12:41 PM
Hassin Bin Sober (25,621 posts)
142. Let's be honest. These people love exacting political revenge for anyone who said anything...
... against their favorite in a previous election. They live for it. They can’t let it go.
This whole kerfuffle is projection 101 They can’t: |
Response to LizBeth (Reply #72)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:02 PM
Hassin Bin Sober (25,621 posts)
148. Here's the thing about being a grownup. You have to conduct yourself as one on social media.
Otherwise it bites you in the ass later on.
|
Response to Hassin Bin Sober (Reply #148)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 03:09 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
154. Here is something else about being a grown up. Recognizing and acknowledging the different standards
for women in being vocal.
|
Response to Hassin Bin Sober (Reply #148)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 05:53 PM
Autumn (42,868 posts)
165. Remember when AOC got her Covid vaccination? That was epic too.
![]() |
Response to Hassin Bin Sober (Reply #148)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 09:13 PM
Midwestern Democrat (747 posts)
171. Agreed - it's like people think people should have their cake and eat it too - get plaudits for
being a fearless truth teller who's not afraid to burn bridges, but not actually have to face the consequences of burned bridges.
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #70)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:18 AM
Skittles (149,481 posts)
83. VERY much deserved
both of them
|
Response to Skittles (Reply #83)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:30 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
84. Tanden did herself no favors with the Bernie mean tweets
Link to tweet ?s=20 It doesn't matter if you're left or centrist, you have to be very stupid to make fun of someone who might vote for your nomination. That said, it's not Bernie and the left who's the problem. It's Manchin and the rest of the right-leaning Democrats. |
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #84)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:52 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
88. Now you acknowledge Sanders part in ousting Tanden then blame Tanden. Just like
Sanders and Manchin did. Amazing.
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #88)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:56 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
90. Bernie had every right to address the mean tweet
He didn't say he was going to sink her nomination, nor is he the problem.
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #90)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:02 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
95. Again you acknowledge Sanders scolding and are good with it. I am not.
Response to LizBeth (Reply #95)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:05 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
99. Yes, nobody can say anything about her mean tweets
Tanden has accepted responsibility for them. Why can't you?
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #99)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:11 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
107. Yes Sanders wagged the finger scolding her and giving her a stern look over his glasses eliciting
an apology from the nasty woman. Really? You are now shifting to this argument that she was scolded into an apology on record by Sanders?
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #107)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:16 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
112. Tanden put herself in that position
And she took responsibility. That should be that, but Manchin torpedoed her. This is not about Bernie.
|
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #84)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 01:56 AM
radius777 (3,446 posts)
91. That tweet is factual and not mean at all.
Tanden has been held to a racist and sexist double standard.
The Bernie fans and Trump fans (most of whom are white) online are well known for being some of the meanest tweeters - yet it's the middle aged brown woman who is taking the fall. |
Response to radius777 (Reply #91)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:01 AM
wellst0nev0ter (7,509 posts)
93. Tanden suggested that Bernie got foreign help
That's pretty slanderous, and it was very stupid of her to say that about someone who may be voting for her nomination. I'm not aware of any tweet from Bernie himself that went after Tanden in this manner.
That said, yes there is a racist and sexist double standard—perpetrated by Joe Manchin. Let's not lose sight here. |
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #93)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:09 AM
radius777 (3,446 posts)
103. But our intelligence agencies suggested that Bernie's movement
was supported by the Russians, to a lesser extent than Trump was, and Bernie did not ask for it - but that the Russians were in fact working to create division by feeding lies to many of Bernie's young supporters, as well as using bots online to amplify divisons.
|
Response to radius777 (Reply #103)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 04:18 AM
Cha (286,453 posts)
125. Exactly.. it was well documented .. it can't be
denied.
Didn't work though |
Response to radius777 (Reply #91)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:04 AM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
97. Yes, exactly. And why I refuse to just walk on by. Yes. You said it well.
Response to radius777 (Reply #91)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 03:40 AM
Cha (286,453 posts)
120. I know.. it's Horrible. No need to
"apologize" for Facts!
TY! |
Response to wellst0nev0ter (Reply #84)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 05:10 PM
Skittles (149,481 posts)
163. yes, telling the truth is not always a great idea
so there's that
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #6)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:40 PM
BradAllison (1,879 posts)
150. Sanders would have voted for her
Just because he wasn't thrilled with her, not every committee member has to rah rah for every nominee. He expressed disappointment with her and moved on. We are not Republicans.
Joe Manchin had a personal issue with her, specifically over his spoiled billionaire CEO daughter. |
Response to BradAllison (Reply #150)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 03:09 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
155. Sanders issue was certainly personal also. He brought it to the forefront in a committee hearing
getting it on the record.
|
Response to LizBeth (Reply #155)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 03:20 PM
BradAllison (1,879 posts)
156. But it was Joey Boy's deal breaker.
Oh well, I guess we "have to respect his constituents" who can afford FAUX News and watch Tucker Carlson.
|
Response to BradAllison (Reply #156)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 03:25 PM
LizBeth (9,682 posts)
157. I have not minimized Manchin's participation in sabotaging Tanden. I refuse to ignore Sanders
participation in the sabotaging is all.
|
Response to liskddksil (Reply #5)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 09:10 PM
Deminpenn (14,899 posts)
47. Bloomberg had nothing to do with Toomey winning
in 2016. Unfortunately Toomey's Dem opponent ran a bad campaign and simply did not inspire Dem voters.
|
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:01 PM
onecaliberal (29,946 posts)
12. :
![]() |
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:01 PM
dsc (51,779 posts)
13. If this were to become a standard going forward, that would be one thing
but I suspect this will be just like what happened with Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood. The standard will only apply to her and maybe some other woman who behaves the way she did, but no white man has anything to fear at all from this new standard.
|
Response to dsc (Reply #13)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:31 PM
sheshe2 (79,437 posts)
34. They are considered uppity women and should know their place.
It's a mans world after all. We woman have been told time and time again. Sorry no. We will be back over and over. We are not done here.
FFS! ![]() |
Response to dsc (Reply #13)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 11:28 PM
JI7 (87,932 posts)
75. Yup, did those who scolded her for tweets say anything about Josh Hawley ?
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:09 PM
Biophilic (2,809 posts)
17. Yes, this is pretty depressing. Sucks to be a woman. Men are not held to the same
so called standard. This should not have happened and it makes me both angry and sad.
|
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:12 PM
bdamomma (62,314 posts)
22. one word
crap. I hope she can find another position.
|
Response to bdamomma (Reply #22)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:25 PM
mobeau69 (10,220 posts)
30. That won't be a problem. nt
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:15 PM
Kaleva (34,685 posts)
25. Biden & Team will pick a highly qualified alternative.
Life goes on.
|
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:24 PM
BlueCheeseAgain (1,079 posts)
29. Sounds like Biden will find a non-confirmation position for her.
But it is strange that of all the people in Washington, she's the only one to face real consequences for mean tweets.
|
Response to BlueCheeseAgain (Reply #29)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:39 PM
bdamomma (62,314 posts)
41. Welcome to DU!
Mean tweets, the past occupier of the WH had won that category.
|
Response to BlueCheeseAgain (Reply #29)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:57 PM
Hortensis (56,759 posts)
46. Yes, and oh yes. It could be noted I suppose that Sanders
dumped his attack dog surrogates like dirty laundry when he agreed to throw in with Biden, but those operated on a whole different level and would never have expected to be allowed to associate with the Biden campaign.
|
Response to BlueCheeseAgain (Reply #29)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 10:26 PM
niyad (101,371 posts)
66. Welcome to our DU family.
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:36 PM
BannonsLiver (15,001 posts)
39. There are a whole lot of fragile, easily bruised egos in the senate.
Susan Collins can let Trump run roughshod for 4 years but Tanden is a bridge too far. And she's not alone. Plenty of friendly fire as well.
|
Response to BannonsLiver (Reply #39)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 11:26 PM
JI7 (87,932 posts)
74. Yup, bitterness over multiple losses which they claim were rigged
Response to BannonsLiver (Reply #39)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 03:57 AM
Cha (286,453 posts)
121. Yeah, they think their
fees have won, too.
I'm thinking Neera's brilliance will propel her upward in spite of them. |
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 08:40 PM
gratuitous (81,173 posts)
43. I thought Presidents had an absolute right to appoint their own people?
At least, that was the iron-clad rule during the last administration. No matter how unqualified or corrupt a nominee, they all got hearings and practically all of them got confirmed by the Senate. I wonder what changed?
|
Response to gratuitous (Reply #43)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 09:52 PM
Nasruddin (621 posts)
59. It should be that way
Regardless of who is president.
The hearings process &al for cabinet officers and others is absurd, this is not the way we staff management positions in organizations now. Perhaps it made sense in the 18th century, but I doubt it - this is one area the framers had just about zero experience in. These are the president's creatures & the president is responsible for them. Of course if they are corrupt or incompetent the legislature should have the power to remove and disqualify them even if the president adores them. But it might point to a presidential problem more than anything else. |
Response to gratuitous (Reply #43)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 09:55 PM
uponit7771 (88,969 posts)
62. They do, the advise and consent doesn't extend to blocking. Same with SC justices ...
... dems are convinced the kGOP wants a functioning democracy and they really want what Putin has (see whole 2020 election year)
Democrats should go to the point of legality when it comes to appointments like Trump, fuck "precedent" or whatever thing offends someone's senses when 90% of the kGOP outright or tacitly supports inssurection. |
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 09:15 PM
Deminpenn (14,899 posts)
50. She'll be fine
Biden will find her a good place for her in the WH that doesn't need Senate confirmation.
|
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 09:37 PM
BigmanPigman (49,404 posts)
53. Damn!!! I love her laugh, wit and experience.
Right after tRump didn't win in 2016 (popular vote count) I wrote to her and asked about Russia and Putin and the fate of the ACA. She is the only person who answered my back and specifically wrote to me, not a form letter.
Can she be put into a different position? She is so experienced she would do well in many positions and in various US govt departments. We must not let this gem get removed from the Biden admin. |
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 09:42 PM
iluvtennis (18,086 posts)
55. I understand why Neera Tanden withdrew, but it's a shame a competent/experienced person couldn't
get confirmed. Mean tweets my patooty, this is all about keeping black/brown/women out.
Look at the incompetents that got confirmed by he who shall remain unnamed - Betsy DeVos, Rick Perry, Ben Carson to name a few. |
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 10:09 PM
mahina (16,208 posts)
63. Too bad. She was great. I guess different standards apply to us.
I’m not questioning their decision because I think they know more of what’s going on than I do but I really am sorry she didn’t get it.
|
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 10:10 PM
Hulk (6,699 posts)
64. After 4 years of the garbage mouth "insulting Insult"....?
Really amazing. These hypocrite repuKKKes are a circus of idiots.
|
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 10:26 PM
quakerboy (13,678 posts)
65. Well... that didnt take long
Will manchin vote for bidens nominee or against..
Well now that the Dino sunk the nomination, lets focus attack people who were going to put aside personal issues and vote for her for the greater good. This bodes real well for 22. |
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 10:30 PM
PatrickforB (14,002 posts)
67. This is sad. But she will land on her feet.
Down the road, the administration will find something for her, hopefully. If not, she is president of the Center for American Progress.
Still, I cannot help but be disappointed in the men who made her nomination sink. There still seems to be a bit of a double standard. I know my wife wasn't happy about it. |
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 10:32 PM
Calista241 (5,483 posts)
68. I still think she was the sacrificial lamb.
The nominee sent out there to get rejected so other politicians could establish their bonafides.
|
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Tue Mar 2, 2021, 10:38 PM
usaf-vet (5,384 posts)
69. If we keep folding without a fight they will challenge every nominee until we fold.
Less than three months and we are IMO showing unwillingness to stand up to bullies.
|
Response to usaf-vet (Reply #69)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:13 AM
tritsofme (15,958 posts)
108. Math is math.
“Trying harder” doesn’t change the math. It’s unlikely any other nominee gets derailed, which would make Biden’s record better than most modern presidents.
|
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 02:05 AM
radius777 (3,446 posts)
100. Sure, it's the middle aged brown woman responsible for the toxic online culture.
Never mind that the Bernie and Trump fans online (most of whom are white) are well known for their abusive behavior - but yeah blame the brown lady for simply rolling with the punches. The truth is most of her detractors are just sore she beat them at their own game, and refused to run and hide.
|
Response to radius777 (Reply #100)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 12:32 PM
Hassin Bin Sober (25,621 posts)
140. You are confusing supporters with the Principal
Bernie Sanders doesn’t do mean tweets. Tanden forgot rule number one of the internet: don’t post publicly under your name anything you don’t want to defend during a job interview.
|
Response to radius777 (Reply #100)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 05:07 PM
Cha (286,453 posts)
161. Yeah, "let's blame it on Neera Tanden".. that should
absolve everyone else".
![]() Yeah she beat them at their own game & I'm thinking her brilliance will still propel her upward in spite of them. |
Response to radius777 (Reply #100)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 05:56 PM
AZProgressive (29,322 posts)
166. Well known?
Last edited Wed Mar 3, 2021, 07:32 PM - Edit history (1) There is hard data that shows "Bernie Bros" are a myth
A few weeks ago I penned a story for Salon attempting to qualitatively disprove the Bernie Bro myth by pulling from psychological theory and the nature of online behavior. To summarize my conclusions: First, there is a general tendency for online behavior to be negative, known as the online disinhibition effect — but it affects all people equally, not merely Sanders' supporters. Second, pundits systematically ignore when other candidates' supporters are mean online, perhaps because of the aforementioned established stereotype; in this sense, the Bernie Bro is not dissimilar from other political canards like the "welfare queen." Third, Twitter is not a representative sample size of the population, and is so prone to harboring propaganda outfits and bots such that it is not a reliable way of gauging public opinion. (Snip) "Bernie followers act pretty much the same on Twitter as any other follower," Winchell says of his results. "There is one key difference that Twitter users and media don't seem to be aware of.... Bernie has a lot more Twitter followers than Twitter followers of other Democrat's campaigns," he added, noting that this may be partly what helps perpetuate the myth. (Snip) Bernie followers act pretty much the same on Twitter as any other follower. There is one key difference that Twitter users and media don't seem to be aware of. Bernie has a lot more Twitter followers than Twitter followers of other Democrat's campaigns. People responding to hundreds of millions of people online tend to dehumanize others. They remember that someone is female/male or follows some candidate or is of some race, but they frequently don't pay attention to differentiate actions of one member of that group versus another. So rather than consider how frequently an individual of some group acts, they think of how frequently the group acts as a whole. If they interact with many more members of one group than another, that perception of the group is magnified by the number of members they see. https://www.salon.com/2020/03/09/there-is-hard-data-that-shows-bernie-bros-are-a-myth/ |
Response to radius777 (Reply #100)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 08:25 PM
Cha (286,453 posts)
169. Yes I saw it with my OWN EYES.. nobody
can tell me it didn't happen.
|
Response to superpatriotman (Original post)
Wed Mar 3, 2021, 05:13 AM
Hortensis (56,759 posts)
126. What will Tanden's new position in the Biden admin be?
I'm looking forward to finding out. And to their finding out.
We all know "mean tweets" doesn't even begin to describe the unremitting, vicious lies of hundreds of their own pols and operatives. This is just more of their despicable ugliness, and no surprise they attacked a woman nominated to power. This is the white male authoritarian party the GOP has become; god knows they've run many of their own women out of office. Meanwhile, this is the worst they could manage with one of ours. They didn't take her out and can't. ![]() |