TomatoPie wrote:Barbara Bush is the most gracious woman I've ever met, learning and remembering names of everyone around her.

Dunno about having a beer with any of the bush guys other than 41, but seems like they've done pretty well with their choices of mates

and yeah I know about the dark/sordid/privileged issues at least 2 of those dames have

drsmooth wrote:That snippet doesn't give anyone - not even someone who brings long-held biases to it - the opportunity to form any impression of DWS at all

There are two interesting things about the Democratic field. One is Hillary is winning by a lot and going to be the nominee. The other is the guy in second is an Independent elected to the US Senate who calls himself a 'democratic socialist' or at times just a 'socialist.' In US politics this is a label that Democrats tend to get upset about when it is leveled at their candidates or policies. It would seem any competent party head would be prepared to explain what she perceives the difference between a Democrat and a socialist to be given the party's dislike of being termed that and Sanders' prominence in the field. The answer doesn't even have to really make sense - "Like Mr. Sanders, Democrats believe more needs to be done to ensure all Americans regardless of race, gender, or class are able to succeed in this country, and the Democratic Party platform says the best way to achieve this goal is through smart reforms within our free enterprise system to make sure everyday people are treated more fairly." She should have an answer though.

The convention speaking bit is Matthews trying to nail down how comfortable she is with Bernie and his views representing the Democratic Party. There've been disastrous guy who comes in 2nd speaks in prime time moments before - Pat Buchanan in 1992.

Of course Matthews is an asshole. He went to LaSalle. But you know what you're getting with him when you go on his show.

smitty wrote:I'm impressed that she doesn't have a name but just initials.

Smitty, YOU go ahead & spell out her too-long-by-too-many-names name

thought she should have been able to answer that too. pretty easy question if you understand simple things about politics and economics.

there's almost literally nothing simple about economics tho

well like a simple definition of socialism ya know

Maybe you think it's unfair to judge her based on one interview. But she's objectively been terrible for the Democrats--Ruben Amaro terrible. Not just losing badly in both the House and the Senate, but getting obliterated at the state level as well.

drsmooth wrote:

smitty wrote:I'm impressed that she doesn't have a name but just initials.

Smitty, YOU go ahead & spell out her too-long-by-too-many-names name

I don't know what her name is. It must be weird.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz. How many people is that? DWS works now.

jerseyhoya wrote:.... It would seem any competent party head would be prepared to explain what she perceives the difference between a Democrat and a socialist to be...She should have an answer though.

I think you missed the part where Matthews didn't even give her a chance to draw a breath in that 90 second snippet

TenuredVulture wrote:Maybe you think it's unfair to judge her based on one interview. But she's objectively been terrible for the Democrats--Ruben Amaro terrible. Not just losing badly in both the House and the Senate, but getting obliterated at the state level as well.

Is that like how Wrench prepus presiding over the republican POTUS clown car is "winning"

Frankly I think both you and Jerz may be overstating the awesome power and influence of either of these people on the course of events. I know I'm guilty of that re: punchable pudgy face boi

CalvinBall wrote:thought she should have been able to answer that too. pretty easy question if you understand simple things about politics and economics.

ffs calvin you can't do it

jerseyhoya wrote:

It's never been clear to me why DWS was party chair, but she really struggles. Hard to imagine she brings a lot to the table behind the scenes in building donor networks/maintaining fractious party orgs like Reince or has a strategic vision like Dean, and it seems like she says or does something demonstrating her lack of aptitude for the job on a pretty regular basis. Matthews has become more hackish over the past decade, but good to see him not let her sink immediately into the talking points.

I don't think she comes off nearly as badly as you think she does, and I was entirely prepared to see her sink. Though for better or worse I had no idea what DWS stood for, nr ovuld I have definitely identified her as chair of the DNC given her full name.

jerseyhoya wrote:

drsmooth wrote:That snippet doesn't give anyone - not even someone who brings long-held biases to it - the opportunity to form any impression of DWS at all

It would seem any competent party head would be prepared to explain what she perceives the difference between a Democrat and a socialist to be given the party's dislike of being termed that and Sanders' prominence in the field.

She's a lot less polished than I would have expected, I agree. She didn't know how to handle such an aggressive interviewer, which is probably related to a set of people skills that should be required in the position.

Werthless wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

drsmooth wrote:That snippet doesn't give anyone - not even someone who brings long-held biases to it - the opportunity to form any impression of DWS at all

It would seem any competent party head would be prepared to explain what she perceives the difference between a Democrat and a socialist to be given the party's dislike of being termed that and Sanders' prominence in the field.

She's a lot less polished than I would have expected, I agree. She didn't know how to handle such an aggressive interviewer, which is probably related to a set of people skills that should be required in the position.

She should have punched his face in and told him to STFU. Seriously.

Werthless wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

drsmooth wrote:That snippet doesn't give anyone - not even someone who brings long-held biases to it - the opportunity to form any impression of DWS at all

It would seem any competent party head would be prepared to explain what she perceives the difference between a Democrat and a socialist to be given the party's dislike of being termed that and Sanders' prominence in the field.

She's a lot less polished than I would have expected, I agree. She didn't know how to handle such an aggressive interviewer, which is probably related to a set of people skills that should be required in the position.

You are two of the few people on the board who might be able to do it: could you explain the difference between a Democrat and and a Socialist in less than 15 seconds in a way that isn't completely fatuous? Although in the context of this interview it would probably have ti be in 1.5 seconds. I think she played it better putting it off rather than having the first word out her mouth jumped on.

It can be fatuous; that's jersey's point. "Socialists and Democrats care more about well-being of the people in this country; that's why they often identify with folks in the Democratic party. We are all looking to move this country forward for ALL people blah blah blah. We do have our differences; non-socialist Democrats tend to favor more market based solutions, whereas socialists will argue that many problems are too important to leave to a market solution."

You can even throw something in about Bernie's historical record, and claim that he has embraced market solutions where it made sense.

i'm not sure if that's fatuous or not

dictionary.com seems to be down

I'm not very fatuous in general, so I gave a better answer.

Ted cruz said if the Iran deal goes through then Obama/Clinton/Kerry (which is how he said it, lol) will be the leading funder of terrorism in the world.

Wow. Ms Wasserman is crazy!

No Reagan, though

So...could Joe Biden run?