Displaying 361 To 390 Of 19,504 Comments Why a Biden Nomination is Likely to Elect a Republican President in 2024 twilson117, it is an existential election. If Trump was to win, it would be the end of our democracy as we know it. I know that may seem dramatic but we are already witnessing the destruction of our government and democracy in real time by Trump daily. Attacking our intelligence agencies, turning the DoJ into a Russian-like loyalty organization, assaults on our free press, using our tax money to enrich himself and his family, undermining our allies and trying to pull us closer to the tyrants in Russia, Saudi Arabia and North Korea. And all of the deceit, lying constantly to the American people and hiding so many truths from them. Not to mention putting unqualified extremists in the courts. Trump has proven how fragile our democracy is, all it takes is one madman who refuses to obey laws and rules and a party that only really cares about money, power and winning re-election. Most of the safeguards on our democracy have been disabled. And IMO, Pelosi and her team have voluntarily surrendered the primary one, impeachment, due to political calculation and putting power first and country second. Law enforcement is compromised and won’t protect the country from Trump’s criminal and unconstitutional behavior nor will some courts. All we have left to stop Trump is The Press and our votes, that’s it. So we have to make an effort like we never have before, to get the vote out in Nov 2020 (and a big help with that is having a presidential candidate that inspires people to come out and vote for her/him). » Posted By AdLib On August 27, 2019 @ 12:39 pm twilson117, I wholly agree with you that turnout by Dems is critical for Trump to be defeated in 2020. What I found most helpful in Ms. Bitecofer’s analysis of 2018 and 2020 goes to the competing propositions that Dems either need to win back the white working class men who voted Trump or they need to energize their own base voters to win. The analysis of 2018 has been pretty clear as to massive Dem turnout and a historic victory. But the reason Dems won in red districts has been mistakenly portrayed as Repubs being won over by Dems instead of bigger Dem turnout. Why this matters to me is because it makes a big difference as to which candidate would be the better nominee and what kind of campaign will be run. The Biden campaign is betting everything on voters not being aware of what Ms. Bitecofer explained. Biden has made clear that his strategy for beating Trump is appealing to the white Trump voters to cross over to him. I think the data makes clear that this could be a path for failure. And pandering to the more conservative, white male voters supporting Trump (and unlikely to leave him) can be additionally destructive to Dem enthusiasm and turnout in 2020. Will young voters, minorities and women who didn’t vote in 2016 be energized to come out and vote for a Dem candidate whose focus is on placating rural white voters who gave us Trump? Sure seems less likely. So the logical conclusion would seem to be that Dems need to nominate someone who will excite the demographics of Dems that didn’t come out in 2016 and that would mean the more Progressive candidates. As you say, in recent times, when the Dems come into power, they have to spend much of their time and efforts in fixing the destruction that Repubs have wrought, They have less time to advance an agenda that brings the people and the country ahead. Some things that Dems could do if they win unified power in 2020, to prevent this cycle from continuing, are as follows. They could attack gerrymandering, voter suppression and election tampering in a new Voting Rights Act, key ways the Repubs keep winning power despite losing the popular vote. They could install campaign finance laws including transparency for SuperPACS. They could pass laws that restrain presidents from the kinds of abuses Trump has engaged in and a Dem president can permanently erase the OLC decision that says sitting presidents can’t be indicted. They could also enlarger the SCOTUS to allow the Dem president to take back the stolen seat given to Kavanaugh and give majority control to reasonable judges. Then such things as Citizens United, the Heller decision and other horrible decisions from the court that have damaged the country could be overturned. I would like to see the Electoral College ended but changing the Constitution is a tall order and could open the door for Repubs to try to make constitutional changes that could forever harm the nation. So that’s a double edged sword. No matter what, Dems must beat the GOP and Trump in 2020, my focus is to spread the info about what kind of candidate would have the best chance at beating Trump AND having coattails to help Dems win the Senate and keep the House…a candidate that will energize the Dem vote and not mistakenly chase after Trump voters instead who will never flip in the end. » Posted By AdLib On August 27, 2019 @ 12:27 pm We can at least look at the latest polls and longer term trends as indicators. Here is the latest poll out today from Monmouth that shows Warren and Sanders tied at 20%…and Biden in 3rd at 19% after a big drop. Warren is the only candidate showing strong upward momentum during the past 3 months in Swing States and Other States though Sanders ticked up strongly in Other States. “3-Way Lead as Dem 2020 Picture Shifts” https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_us_082619/ » Posted By AdLib On August 26, 2019 @ 10:23 am It seems apparent that Biden is being heavily propped up by the Dem establishment. His arguments are devoid of substance and aren’t really about his traits as a candidate at all. 1. Polls show I have the best chance to beat Trump. 2. I was President Obama’s VP. Neither argument says, “I will make a good president,” or “These are the main issues I will fight for as President.” IMO, Biden is a cypher for the Dem establishment and an empty vessel that worried Dems can fill with their fears of Trump’s re-election. At the same time, if he was the Dem nom, I will vote for him without hesitation because it’s either him or Trump and there is no comparison of awfulness. I do think a fresh face will give voters added enthusiasm for voting Dem, that is more often the case. Though Biden may be leading in the polls at this point, it appears that he has a low ceiling of support and some of the support he does have is soft enough to have evaporated overnight when he had a poor debate. » Posted By AdLib On August 24, 2019 @ 12:05 pm You seem to have sped past the truths of why the ACA turned out as it did to justify your slam of Dems. Facts do matter. Obama worked with Repubs to get bipartisan support for the ACA. They betrayed him after he incorporated some of what they insisted on to support it. Obama then pushed the public option as far as he could but without the needed 60 votes in the Senate, he had to decide between passing the ACA and its protections (which have saved the lives of people I know) or acting like a purist and failing to get any improvement to healthcare passed. Joe Lieberman was the final vote Obama needed to pass the ACA with a public option and Lieberman refused. https://planetpov.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Joe-Lieberman-and-Sarah-P-001.jpg
Why Joe Lieberman is holding Barack Obama to ransom over healthcare Democrats accuse Gore’s former running mate of bitterness and vanity after he uses his deciding vote in Congress to water down president’s reforms. Now, in the view of some, he is plumbing new depths of betrayal by using his deciding vote as an independent member of the Senate to hold hostage Barack Obama’s reform of America’s dysfunctional healthcare system. Obama, desperate to ensure that the reform bid does not fail, has told congressional leaders to rewrite the legislation to keep Lieberman happy by removing any real competition to private insurance companies in an effort to get it passed by Christmas. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/dec/16/joe-lieberman-barack-obama-us-healthcare It’s easy for purists to insist the impossible should have been magically accomplished somehow but reality isn’t changed by wishes and foot stamping. And purists are not the ones (or thinking of the ones) who were suffering and who would have lost their lives along the way without the ACA passed. And to those with perspective, it can be seen as a step forward towards single payer or Medicare For All which voters will be able to support in the current Dem primary. So slamming progress towards and saving the lives of many people as we get to single payer isn’t principled, it seems uncaring of real people, those who had and have serious medical conditions that couldn’t wait many years until the perfect could be achieved. » Posted By AdLib On August 23, 2019 @ 1:51 pm It’s not a matter of purity for most Dems who support a candidate other than Biden. And most of them, including me, will vote for whoever the Dem candidate is as a massive improvement over the insane racist in the WH now. I have seen pundits on the news channels scolding Democratic candidates for trying to compete against Biden, calling it “a circular firing squad” and destructive. What they have amazingly forgotten is that it is a primary. This is where candidates should be promoting themselves and explaining why leading candidates aren’t a better choice. This is how a primary works and always has. If a candidate has baggage, that should come out in the primary. If they can address it successfully, they’re better prepared for the GE if they win. If they can’t, better for it to sink them in the primary than the GE. And at the end, as always, Dems will unify and vote for whoever the candidate is…aside from the few actual purists who put their self-importance above responsible behavior. » Posted By AdLib On August 23, 2019 @ 10:58 am Let me begin with where I agree with you. As I wrote, I think Biden, Warren or whoever the Dem nominee is will be likely to beat Trump in 2020. However, you didn’t respond to my main point, do you think an 81 year old Joe Biden who hasn’t supported big changes, would be in a strong position to win re-election against a younger, more energetic Republican promising big change in 2024? I also agree that Republicans have only been effective in their propaganda, not their governing and many who vote for them have voted themselves into worse lives. I also agree that to get progress on the really important issues facing Americans and the world, Americans need to vote Democrat. Where I disagree with you is in portraying Democrats who aren’t moderate or conservative and don’t support the DNCs moderate/conservative leadership as all being Sanders supporters. IOW, not loyal Dems. It may make it easier to discount fellow Dems who don’t share the same perspective by portraying all of them in such a way but it simply isn’t true. It is unusual to hear it said that there is no establishment in a long established organization such as the DNC. That is the very nature of longtime organizations, they have establishments that provide a continuity year after year. What longtime organization doesn’t have an established leadership structure? Longtime organizations never bring in a totally unconnected group of people to take over power. I don’t understand the theory of an established organization not having an establishment. Anyone who has been a part of any organization, business, etc. knows that there are always competing groups of members/execs who share a perspective, vying to get and maintain control for themselves and their allies. Surely, the DNC isn’t unique among organizations as utopian, where there is perfect equality among all members in decision making and those who have power happily hand it off to others they disagree with? Politics is about power and a political organization is very much about who wields that power and keeps that power. The DNC has been run by many of the same longtime Democratic Party operatives for some time, a moderate/conservative clique. Would anyone claim that the DNC has ever been run by liberals? They would be mistaken if they did. The DNC has been run by an establishment that has consistently operated to maintain it’s dominance. One glaring example is superdelegates (until the DNC establishment negotiated with Progressives to put them aside after the 2016 election…and how could the DNC negotiate with Progressives if Progressives were already part of their power structure?). In 2015, as in previous Dem primaries, the establishment candidate, Hillary Clinton, started off with 359 Superdelegates in her pocket. Long before a single vote was cast by a single Democratic voter, in a single caucus or primary, Hillary already had almost 20% of the total amount of delegates needed to win the nomination. Such a slanted primary system was designed to help a particular type of candidate. The DNC had to have decided upon and voted to institute that system, knowing it would only benefit a candidate who had deep institutional ties and widespread relationships with Democrats already in office and positions of power. They had to know that outsiders, like Barack Obama, would be at a big disadvantage in such a system while someone like Hillary Clinton, who had a long term relationship with the DNC and many Dem politicians, would have a big advantage. Here is a sampling of DNC Chairs, for the past 38 years, plenty of longtime conservative, moderate and corporate-friendly Dems but not a single liberal one: Charles Manatt 1981–1985 California So when I refer to Establishment Dems, I’m referring to the moderate/corporate wing of the party that has dominated the DNC year after year. As is probably pretty clear, I do not think that the moderate/corporate/incremental sensibilities of those who have consistently run the DNC will bring the country to where it needs to be. Millions of Dems share that view and they are just as valid Dems for having that view as those who support the DNC leadership and moderates. I think they’re wrong and that the positions and candidates they support will not end up helping Americans as urgently and profoundly as Progressive positions and candidates. But I would not make an effort to discount them or deem them not real Democrats because I think going down that path displays a degree of denial and is not unifying. You and I agree on many issues, we disagree on certain things but I respect your perspective and know that many Dems feel similarly to you. We are all in this together, what we disagree on and debate though is just the best way to get to the same destination. » Posted By AdLib On August 23, 2019 @ 10:48 am While I agree that Biden should not be nominated by the Dems if they want an inspiring and winning candidate over the next 8 years and the kind of big change so much of our government and social structure needs in this country, I do see a very big difference between having a racist madman Repub or a corporate-friendly establishment Dem in the White House. It may be the better of two evils (though I don’t think Biden is evil) but voting 3rd party or not voting at all is simply helping Trump get re-elected and, as you suggested, maybe setting us up for him to fully destroy our democracy. However Biden may serve corporations, he certainly wouldn’t be a threat to our democracy. Just the opposite, it would be in his interest and the Dem party to confront the gerrymandering, voter suppression and Russian attacks on our elections. So, would 4 more years of Trump be the same as 4 years of Biden? Would the country and its people be better off with Trump in the WH until (or possibly past) 2024 then with Biden? I don’t see how that argument could be made. I do think that Biden would not be able to win re-election so voting for him in 2020 is cutting off one’s nose to spite Trump’s face. It’s putting Don Jr. in the WH in 2024. That alone is a good enough reason not to support Biden. But his coziness with corporations, his focus on pandering to the white male Trump voters while simultaneously insulting Progressives and Dems who live on the coasts and his rejection of the big changes we badly need at this point in history makes him absolutely the wrong person to represent the current diverse and conscientious Dem party…and the nation. » Posted By AdLib On August 22, 2019 @ 7:11 pm Why buy Greenland? Because it’s valuable (or so Trump’s been told) Very nice overview of Greenland and the value it has to offer. I liked what one pundit said about the lunacy of trying to buy Greenland, “Why buy when you can rent?” The US already has an airbase there so we already have the strategic value there. And let’s think, when was the last time that one country bought a large swath of land from another country? 1867? When the US bought Alaska? That’s not the way the world has worked since 1867, no one but an insane racist would think you can buy part of another country in 2019. Maybe he has annexation envy of Putin and Crimea? » Posted By AdLib On August 22, 2019 @ 11:30 am Trump to Create Phantom Army to Fight Phantom Threats Very clever, Steppenwolf! Enjoyed it! » Posted By AdLib On August 22, 2019 @ 11:31 am The Safe Bet Of An Old White Guy To Beat Trump in 2020 I remember the same MSM outlets like MSNBC during Obama’s push for the ACA, cautioning the overly-ambitious nature of it, preferring a much more conservative and incremental change to health care that “could appeal to Republicans”. Er…trying to appeal to Republicans on health care for all is like trying to appeal to Lex Luthor…on health care for all. When Dems lost the filibuster-proof Senate with the death of Ted Kennedy and the election of Scott Brown, Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s Chief of Staff, led the charge of the Establishment Dems to insist to Obama that he will never pass the ACA now, that he had to give up on the ACA and just settle for a small tweak here or there because that’s all that could be passed. Instead, we all know now that Obama’s determination resulted in a historic change and rescue for tens of millions of Americans, saving countless lives. The point is, Republican pundits like Joe and Dem pundits on MSNBC can pound their chests on how impossible and what a huge negative it is for Progressive Dems to be supporting Medicare for All/Single Payer, that giving up ambitions and making the big changes needed are too politically unpopular…so vote for Joe Biden! But that is not how leadership works. Obama fought against incredible odds to pass the ACA because he would not accept the Dem Establishment’s insistence that he would only fail. A leader brings the people along to their vision, people who may have opposed it or at least not supported it previously. We should all remember how unpopular the ACA was when it passed and after Repubs demonizing it in 2010, how public opinion tanked (where are those death panels again? Oh yeah, in the Trump WH). Medicare for All/Single Payer may not have majority support right now but knowing that this is how nearly all developed countries provide healthcare successfully for all of their citizens…with better outcomes than in the US…a new president who is a true leader with vision and determination can bring the public along to support what will in the end, be best for them and all Americans (unless we like the idea of health insurance being permanently threatened, the ACA being supported then undercut as Dems and Repubs trade power in each election). » Posted By AdLib On August 22, 2019 @ 11:47 am Agreed Murph, I think the Dem field is quite a smart group of people who recognize what nasty political mudslinging is being concocted by the Repubs, including the socialist/communist/Israel-hater BS and none of them will play into that. And I agree with you about Biden, he is too shaky as a speaker to come out of a debate with Trump as a strong winner. As soon as Biden falters and drops a gaffe in a debate with Trump, Trump will slice him up and say it proves Biden is senile/dottering/too old/etc. To me, Biden feels like he’s just kind of holding together right now, not strong but tentative, as if the spit and bailing wire keeping him together might snap at any moment. I think it will in the upcoming debates. On the other hand, I think the campaign trail is strengthening Warren. I haven’t seen her look weak or tentative in the debates, forums or rallies. She appears steady and well-balanced. It’s hard to imagine Trump putting her off balance. Whereas Biden, it seems an eventuality. Despite the MSM and Establishment Dem hype for Biden as the most electable, I think Dem voters will vote for who they think will be the best president and by beating Biden in the primary, Warren will prove her electability. Not only that, since Biden’s only argument to vote for him is his electability, if he loses in Iowa, I think the proof that he isn’t the most electable will sink him quickly (though he may still do well in SC because the older African American vote there is more conservative but after that, in this scenario, he’d be cooked). » Posted By AdLib On August 21, 2019 @ 7:28 pm Same here, Opie Cat. I may have to shift from voting enthusiastically for a Dem to voting for a Dem to prevent a second term for Trump but I will be voting for a Dem to rid this country of the stench of Trump no matter who the Dem nom is. With what happened in 2016, anyone who tries to stand on some purist ground and proudly proclaims they will vote 3rd party or not vote at all “to send a message” to the Dems, is pathetic and de facto an ally of Trump’s. » Posted By AdLib On August 21, 2019 @ 7:14 pm Who Is Responsible For Gun Deaths In The United States? That is such an important component of justice, impartiality. Justice should not vary based on a judge’s political bent. Additionally, I think there should be a term limit on judges, the idea of lifetime appointments might have made sense in 1776 when the average lifespan was 36 years old but nowadays, having people in their 80s making such life-altering decisions for the country? It’s crazy! Also it would allow the sooner recycling of human garbage that Repubs shove onto the court like Kavanaugh. I think 10 years could be a good term limit for all federal judges including SCOTUS. We should be able to have a refreshing of the brain trust in the judiciary more often than waiting for them to die. That’s not very democratic and pretty morbid too. » Posted By AdLib On August 22, 2019 @ 11:54 am The Heller decision was a case of activist judges ignoring The Constitution to advance their political beliefs and it’s no surprise that Scalia was in the middle of it. The RW always accuses Democrats of what they are guilty of, whining about “liberal activist judges” while their RW activist judges are responsible for assisting in the mass murder of Americans. No rights are absolute, the RW is happy to infringe on all the other amendments except the 2nd which they worship as immaculate. I have supported the idea of the Dems, if they win in 2020, enlarging the SCOTUS by 2 judges which would then shift to favor a moderate, more liberal agenda. One strong argument for this is to save American lives by reversing the Heller decision. Add to that, reversing Citizens United, gerrymandering and voter suppression and approving of campaign finance laws among other things. The argument against that is that Repubs would just do the same thing when they regained unified power in DC. My response to that is, they already cheated to steal a SCOTUS seat so what’s the difference? Even more so, with gerrymandering, voter suppression and Citizens United addressed, the Repubs wouldn’t even have a shot at winning unified power for many years. And by then, so much good will be done and so much corruption, which they rely on, would be stopped. They are a minority and the only way to grow to a majority would be to leave their racism and corruption behind. The alternative is not rocking the boat and spending a generation under the oppression of RW rule in the SCOTUS with no guarantee it won’t continue through our lifetimes. We will just sit back and watch our losing one right after another including abortion, the right to vote, equality for women, LGBTQ, minorities, etc, the right to privacy, separation of church and state and on and on. We need drastic change to stop the increasing murders of Americans by weapons of war and so much other madness the SCOTUS allows to continue. Adding seats to the SCOTUS and having a more reasonable court can lead to a permanent change in this country for the better. » Posted By AdLib On August 20, 2019 @ 2:13 pm Weekend Music Thread – Woodstock It was a period full of terrible conflict and hatred (sound familiar?) but it was also a moment when what’s also beautiful in human beings flowered. Peace, love, caring for Mother Earth, freedom, individuality, self-exploration and spirituality. All these positive themes in humanity have continued in one way or another but the concentration and intensity of them when they exploded on the scene back then was so powerful and influential. It would be seen as naive today, to be promoting love and peace as wholly as it was back then but I could imagine much worse things than promoting that and just being called “naive”. » Posted By AdLib On August 21, 2019 @ 10:04 am Trump Exploring U.S. Purchase of Wakanda Hey Dajuan! Bring it on, Trump! https://media1.popsugar-assets.com/files/thumbor/WQdebkMIEP-QPTWdc_gMOrIQ5fE/fit-in/2048xorig/filters:format_auto-!!-:strip_icc-!!-/2018/04/29/813/n/1922283/tmp_U6LBq8_81d39e532bcc3f1b_InfinityWar5aa86b67caefb.jpg » Posted By AdLib On August 23, 2019 @ 12:55 pm Welcome to Sunday church in MalanIvankaDon!
» Posted By AdLib On August 20, 2019 @ 3:50 pm I don’t want to spoil it for you but there really isn’t a Trump Tower in Wakanda. 😉 » Posted By AdLib On August 20, 2019 @ 3:47 pm Trump has already closed this acquisition deal…to win the WH in 2016. https://i.ytimg.com/vi/7t_9N13ahNs/maxresdefault.jpg » Posted By AdLib On August 16, 2019 @ 6:23 pm I wonder how Trump’s massive use of taxpayer money to buy Krypton is working out… https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-23-2016/Io4fXu.gif » Posted By AdLib On August 16, 2019 @ 5:49 pm Questions About Jeffrey Epstein’s Death Aside from this new claim, another question should be asked now, shouldn’t Barr be fired for this happening on his watch? He was the one in charge of that prison and Epstein was one of the highest priority prisoners the US had. It was Barr’s responsibility to make sure he was safely held in federal prison to stand trial. So he asked for investigations, so what? He’ll just come out with a summary of the investigation that exonerates Trump of collusion with Russia and obstruction of justice. Barr has destroyed any credibility he might have originally had (which wasn’t much after he auditioned for the position writing an article declaring Trump above the law) so now when he wants to have the public believe him, only the GOP cultists will. » Posted By AdLib On August 12, 2019 @ 11:48 am Well…with Michael Cohen out of the picture, Trump needed a new “fixer” and Barr’s already proven he’s just the right slimeball to be that. There are way too many questionable things swirling around this death and this latest news about Barr’s visit is scary stuff that needs to be fully investigated. That said, I see that the source for this info is a mobster who represents that Barr “may” have visited Epstein so that makes this a little suspect. Have to wait to see if other sources confirm this. » Posted By AdLib On August 11, 2019 @ 8:08 pm Biden Takes on Trump: A Call to Integrity and Courage in The Wave of Two Mass Shootings I will spray the site for chaos, it will be clear by tomorrow! Have a nice nap! » Posted By AdLib On August 21, 2019 @ 10:10 pm Heh! Those are the two other phrases I learned in Japanese were “moshi moshi” and “konnichiwa”. Not what you’d describe as “fluent” but just enough to get tea sprayed out of noses. » Posted By AdLib On August 21, 2019 @ 10:08 pm So true, they can’t choose to act differently but that’s unseen by us, we remember who they were and would hope to see them decide to change what they can’t change. In many cases, they do seem to be happy much of the time, in the cases of dementia. And they have their moments of clarity which can be tough, when they tearfully confess they can’t remember anything or can’t figure things out. But it passes and because of their memory issues, they can quickly forget all that and be happy a moment later. » Posted By AdLib On August 21, 2019 @ 10:02 pm John Delaney after Warren clapped back at him: https://media.giphy.com/media/dmZ9q9hbxL40IKuNMK/giphy.gif I’m patient and confident, I think it will take time for the public and most Dem voters to become really familiar with Warren and recognize the vision and change she represents. The Dem Party has suffered from having this kind of ruling elite that has the hubris to think they are superior to the Dem voters and are better equipped to decide what’s best for them. And as we’ve seen, it’s always what’s best for them. They want one of their own, a Dem Establishment type, to win the WH so they personally can benefit from it in the form of cabinet positions or other types of power or money. They are not altruistic, as most people with power aren’t. Obama beat their candidate and was an exception to the rule. If Warren wins the nom, they won’t be very happy either. I’m sure they’ll fully support Warren if she’s the nom, to beat Trump, just saying that the status quo means they have power so they want to keep the status quo. And Dem voters watching the media have been seeing wall-to-wall PR from them insisting that electability is the most important factor and Biden is the most electable. So of course, voters are initially shepherded to their candidate but I think once Warren and Biden have had enough exposure to Dem voters, Warren will pass him by. That is a better way of putting it, voting for Biden only postpones a Repub presidency until 2024 and a possibly completed destruction of our democracy since that’s the only way they can hold onto power. Biden is a long term problem, that’s a powerful point that will need to be put out to Dem voters. » Posted By AdLib On August 21, 2019 @ 9:57 pm Arigatōgozaimashita, ii hito! » Posted By AdLib On August 21, 2019 @ 9:38 pm You really describe what’s going on in the mind of people suffering from Asperger’s so well, from living with a relative with it, I know but still it’s very powerful. We do take a lot for granted, how naturally we can interact with others, empathize and understand them and how we’re perceived and how foreign that can be for people with Asperger’s. I’ve only known one person with it years ago and while he wasn’t aggressive for the most part, it was difficult to connect with him or understand why he said some of the things he did. That’s a funny story! I have some too from relatives with Alzheimer’s, it’s nice to get a little comic relief sometimes when you have a family member suffering from a mental illness. » Posted By AdLib On August 21, 2019 @ 9:34 pm What is the female version of Mensch in Japanese, cause back at ya! » Posted By AdLib On August 21, 2019 @ 9:19 pmComments Posted By AdLib
Paul G. Kirk 1985–1989 Massachusetts
Ron Brown 1989–1993 New York
David Wilhelm 1993–1994 Ohio
Debra DeLee 1994–1995 Massachusetts
Chris Dodd
Donald Fowler 1995–1997 Connecticut
Roy Romer
Steven Grossman 1997–1999 Colorado
Ed Rendell
Joe Andrew 1999–2001 Pennsylvania
Terry McAuliffe 2001–2005 Virginia
Howard Dean 2005–2009 Vermont
Tim Kaine 2009–2011 Virginia
Donna Brazile 2011 Louisiana
Debbie Wasserman Schultz 2011–2016
Donna Brazile 2016–2017 Louisiana
Tom Perez 2017–present Maryland
«« Back To Stats Page
Home Stats
