https://twitter.com/Yair_Rosenberg/status/1211788678617542659

https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1211688757197516800

https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1211720732314607621

That's the transition period when the democratic nominee becomes the President-elect of the United States.

The outgoing administration traditionally works with the incoming president and their team to make the handover as smooth as possible.

Trump's not going to do that.

There probably won't be any White House meeting after the election. Obama welcomed Trump to the White House two days after the 2016 election. Bush welcomed Obama a week after the 2008 election.

There probably will be pressure on government officials and agencies not to co-operate with the incoming president's team.

And who is to rule out the prospect of Trump doing something so reckless as he refuses to admit being fired that he goes fully rogue deliberately creating a new gigantic mess for his successor.

Tom is a billionaire.

Tom is a lifelong democrat going back to actually working for Vice President Mondale in 1984.

Tom has raised money for Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and numerous congressional and gubernatorial candidates over the years.

Tom has used his wealth and privilege to help the Democratic Party in funding grassroots organisation including voter registration groups.

Tom has used his wealth and philanthropy to passionately advocate on the issue of climate change going back years. Funding environmental activism, using his voice and stature to support lawmakers who are on the right side of the issue and target those who are not --- including those in the democratic party, to educate and promote the cause to the public and finance research and industry led innovation for a better, sustainable green energy future.

Tom as a presidential candidate is pledging to declare the issue of climate change a national emergency.

Tom as a presidential candidate is empathetic and forthright in the issue of immigration.

Tom is open and honest about the corporate culture in this country sucking from the lower income and middle class in the country and he uses his wealth to explain that saying the state of a good economy is beyond the stock market and the rich. He says it because he knows he is one of those people who the economy is doing well for and knows it's failing the ordinary person so he wants to fix it.

If Tom dropped out tomorrow and donated to my candidate I wouldn't reject it because he falls in the category of the 'b' word. I'd accept it knowing Tom is one of those who knows he is fortunate and privileged with the cards life has dealt him and he wants to help those less fortunate in electing a president who will make government work for people like them and less for people like Tom himself.

https://twitter.com/douglaswburns/status/1207454319718608902

I totally agree. You have to admire Andrew Yang.

He's outlasted governors. He's outlasted senators and congressmen. He's made every debate of 2019.

People might say that's a mockery of the system and I won't disagree. The man is totally under-qualified to be president. But I can't knock the guy. Because his rise hasn't been a result of feuding with other campaigns. It's the opposite. It's become a bit of a meme that on the debate stage everyone else is sparring yet that one dude at the end only gets to talk once every half hour.

Yang never talks badly of anyone else. He just focuses on himself. His campaign is probably the most relaxed I've ever seen and in some polls he is as high as fifth. The guy is a likeable guy who makes very salient points about the 4th Industrial Revolution and I'd like to see him get a job in the next administration.

https://www.270towin.com/2020-democratic-delegate-calculator/



https://www.270towin.com/news/2019/12/07/introducing-the-2020-democratic-delegate-calculator_912.html

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1206667019602583553

As individual items they polled well.



In 2017 he took away the Conservative party's majority in the House of Commons.

The real two reasons why Labour took a pounding is Brexit and Corbyn himself.

1) In 2016 Corbyn did not do a good job promoting the need to remain in the EU as he was an old school socialist who never wanted to join the EU in the first place. But 70% of his party voted to remain. In 2017 Corbyn said he'd respect the result of Brexit but didn't elaborate what that meant. Labour leavers in key northern seats stuck by him because they felt he was on their side. Labour remainers were mostly in London and University towns which are safe Labour seats anyway. But in 2019 he said he'd support a second vote. Labour leavers felt betrayed and voted for either the Tories for the first time or the Brexit Party (Nigel Farage). Farage's new party won no seats but they were a damaging protest vote.

2) Corbyn was seen as a weak leader. He got attacked viciously by the press and never fought back the charges. He was seen as weak on national security because he in the past said Britain's nuclear weapon defense program was a waste of money and morally wrong. He was seen as a traitor to patrioticism because he met with the IRA, Hamas and Hezbollah while criticising the British army for war crimes. He couldn't stop antisemitism growing under his leadership. He already had to fend off a vote of no confidence from his own MPs. He was basically made out to be anti-British, open borders, weak on crime, economically damaging communist and that campaign evidently worked.

But I repeat, the policies as individual items polled well. Maybe a new, less problematic leader can sell them better. A new Labour leader will still get destroyed by the right wing press. Ed Miliband had it just as bad, if not worse, as they targetted Miliband's deceased father who was a Jewish British WW2 veteran who fled persecution in Nazi occupied Belgium.



The key is also not to overpromise. Too much too soon is bad. Tony Blair won in 1997 by being charismatic, young and media saavy. Blair won in 1997 with his "education, education, education" mantra. Winning an election is not about out-promising your opponent because you're just going to disappoint everyone and fail once in government. And you might not even get in government as people stop taking you seriously. Focus on a few key policies, hammer them every day, have a good media response team. Do the work and the voters will follow.

That abhorrent, vile rag hasn't lost an election in the UK since 1974. Every party they have backed --- with the exception of Tony Blair's Labour --- has been the Conservatives. And every party they have backed has won.

The most read paper in the UK with the exception of the City of Liverpool where it is boycotted for blaming the victims of the Hillsborough disaster.



Tony Blair only got their backing because he was to some extent seen as agreeable by Murdoch since Blair shifted Labour to the middle and the Conservatives had 18 years of uninterrupted power. Jeremy Corbyn ironically was elected leader to reverse the "neo-liberalism" of Blair but look what happened. The conservative party will probably get to 2029 with their big majority with the only Labour leader to win a general election in half a century being despised by progressives and endorsed by The Sun. Blair won three elections on the trot very easily. No one else who has led Labour could win one.

When Pete entered the race



vs

When Pete is now a serious player in the race



It's as if now he's a threat to this journalist's preferred candidate, it's no longer that he's not passing the purity test on healthcare and college debt, he's not passing the purity test on being sufficiently gay.

Give me a break.