The Root ranks every Democratic candidates’ ‘Black Agenda’. Comprehensive, and well worth reading for the details and commentary. But here’s the spoiler-iffic end results, listing the candidates from worst to best (all scores out of 100 possible points)

  • Tulsi Gabbard: 0
  • Amy Klobuchar: 22
  • Michael Bloomberg: 43
  • Bernie Sanders: 50
  • Tom Steyer: 62
  • Pete Buttigieg: 66
  • Joe Biden: 70
  • Elizabeth Warren: 79

There you have it. Elizabeth Warren’s “black agenda” is the blackest of them all. Unfortunately, she also seems to be invisible to everyone except Mike Bloomberg. But that’s only because she keeps punching him in the face during the debates.

Then again, we’ve only counted the white votes.

There’s Nothing Revolutionary About Harassing Critics:

Perfect, superhuman leaders do not exist in life. They exist in propaganda, and what toxic Sanders supporters seem most vehemently interested in is not hurting individual people, but creating a state of play in which only propaganda about Sanders can be spoken without reprisal. By doing so, they’re creating the conditions for a president who acts without accountability, a president who gets to create his own truth and use his passionate following to terrorize anyone who contradicts him—a president very much like the one we have now.

End the filibuster, flip the Senate: the debate Democrats almost had

We’re deep into the primary now. There have been 10 Democratic debates (12 if you count the debates broken into two nights), and even more forums, town halls, and so on. We know, at this point, what the candidates want to do. It’s time for debate moderators to start pressing them, in a serious and sustained way, on how they’ll do it.

We went out to Elizabeth Warren’s rally at the Seattle Center Armory tonight. Warren was great. So glad we went out and got to see her. She’s really does come across just as good as you’d hope she would: incredibly intelligent, passionate, articulate, engaged, warm, and through everything, energetic and having fun.

She went through about a fifteen minute stump speech, then took five questions from pre-selected attendees, and spent about 30 minutes total answering them. Her answers were incredible—both because she gave good answers to the questions, and also because she very deftly was able to use each of them as launching points for touching on other focus points and areas of her campaign, but always coming back to the original question and never giving the impression that the question didn’t actually matter. I didn’t record the stump speech, but did record the Q&A; I’ve got it going up to YouTube now and will add it to this post later…but rather than bother with my amateur, from-the-crowd video, here’s King 5’s video of the full thing (Warren starts speaking at about 25 minutes in):

So, yes. Warren is my preferred candidate. I absolutely believe that she has a plan for everything, and knows exactly how to get about getting it done.

Once again, very glad we got to go.

Now, though, we’re exhausted.

From Cosmopolitan: I WANT an Angry Woman as My President, Actually:

Warren’s anger is a great thing. She’s not using it to fight for herself. She’s fighting for the less privileged, a trait I actually really, really want in a leader. For instance, during the debate, she was furious as she stood up for the thousands of men of color who have been stopped and frisked, the millions of black and brown families who were preyed upon with redlining, and children with disabilities who faced budget cuts while billionaires got a tax break this year.

Warren’s rage is almost always in the service of others and that’s her secret weapon. Nothing made that more obvious than when Pete Buttigieg pressed Amy Klobuchar about forgetting the name of the president of Mexico. Warren jumped in, not to prove that she knew the answer, but to stand up for the only other woman onstage, even if she’s her competitor.

“Let’s be clear: Missing a name all by itself does not indicate that you do not understand what’s going on, and I just think that’s a mistake,” Warren said. Even when an injustice is lobbed at her opponent in a way that could totally benefit her, Warren doesn’t take the bait. Isn’t that precisely the quality we want in the person we elect to the highest office?

And, related, an image I found on Facebook and reposted earlier today:

Warren was not mean, nor angry. She was _effective_.

There is nothing wrong with women expressing anger. We’ve certainly given them enough reasons to do so.

And any blather about Warren’s debate performance being too mean, or aggressive, or not pleasant enough, is astoundingly obvious sexist claptrap (but of course, to my utter lack of surprise, is plentiful).

It’s important to remember that Martin Luther King Jr. had a lot more to say in his life than just his “I Have a Dream” speech:

Figures like President Barack Obama have reminded us that King once said, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” But over time, the great orator’s writings became less magnanimous and ever more convinced that white supremacy was the most significant obstacle in attaining liberation for all black people.

In his final book, Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?, originally published in 1967, King wrote that “Whites, it must frankly be said, are not putting in a similar mass effort to reeducate themselves out of their racial ignorance. It is an aspect of their sense of superiority that the white people of America believe they have so little to learn. The reality of substantial investment to assist Negroes into the twentieth century, adjusting to Negro neighbors and genuine school integration, is still a nightmare for all too many white Americans.”

He continued: “These are the deepest causes for contemporary abrasions between the races. Loose and easy language about equality, resonant resolutions about brotherhood fall pleasantly on the ear, but for the Negro there is a credibility gap he cannot overlook. He remembers that with each modest advance the white population promptly raises the argument that the Negro has come far enough. Each step forward accents an ever-present tendency to backlash.”

By this point in his life, King had abandoned the rose-colored glasses of his youth. Instead, he was laser-focused on addressing white supremacy in its basest and most intimate forms: in communities, schools, and neighborhoods.

I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

— Martin Luther King, Jr., in Letter From Birmingham Jail