SUPER TUESDAY: 5 THINGS TO WATCH The single largest day of voting in the 2020 presidential primary has arrived: Super Tuesday. Fourteen states, including California and Texas, as well as American Samoa and Democrats abroad, will cast ballots. The four major contenders: Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Mike Bloomberg. [HuffPost]
By Patrick Martin in the USA, 3 March 2020:
On eve of “Super Tuesday” primaries
The Democratic Party is engaged in a last-ditch effort to boost the struggling campaign of former Vice President Joe Biden and block the nomination of Senator Bernie Sanders. They fear that in today’s primary contests in 14 states, Sanders could open up an insurmountable lead in terms of the number of delegates to the Democratic nominating convention.
In the wake of Biden’s victory in the South Carolina primary Saturday, the party leadership has pushed two of the right-wing candidates for the presidential nomination, Senator Amy Klobuchar and former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg, out of the race. Both traveled to Dallas, Texas Monday to endorse Biden, with Buttigieg appearing with former vice president at a local restaurant, and Klobuchar addressing a campaign rally in the evening. …
It is not known who spoke to Klobuchar, but she addressed a campaign rally in Salt Lake City, Utah on Monday morning as a candidate and 90 minutes later announced she was ending her campaign and endorsing Biden.
Another failed presidential candidate, former Representative Beto O’Rourke of Texas, also announced his support for Biden on Monday, as did a slew of other top Democrats: … Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, former chair of the Democratic National Committee; … Senator Tim Kaine, Hillary Clinton’s vice-presidential running mate in 2016 ..
Biden himself is the most right-wing of all the major candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination, steeped in the crimes of American imperialism … which followed his 36-year career in the US Senate, where he boasted of close relationships with reactionaries like Strom Thurmond and James Eastland, and, more recently, Mitch McConnell. …
Sanders is unacceptable to the party because it has no intention of raising any issue of significant social reform in the 2020 elections. It wants to run a right-wing campaign, largely based on attacking Trump as a Russian agent, a re-run of the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign, in which it seeks to gain the support of Wall Street and the CIA …
What Biden & Co. denounce as “socialism” is Sanders’ advocacy of mildly reformist policies, involving only slightly higher taxes on the gigantic accumulation of wealth by the super-rich to finance improvements in social programs such as health, education and child care that already lag far behind those in many other industrialized countries.
While Biden was receiving endorsements, the Sanders campaign staged a series of mass rallies addressed by the candidate as he traveled coast-to-coast over the weekend: 6,500 people in Springfield, Massachusetts; 10,000 on Boston Common; 10,000 at a sports arena in Springfield, Virginia, in the Washington DC suburbs; 13,000 at Virginia Wesleyan University in Virginia Beach; 10,000 in downtown San Jose, California; and finally, on Sunday night, nearly 25,000 at the Los Angeles Convention Center.
Sanders’ campaign also announced Sunday that 2.2 million people had donated money in February, for a total of $46.5 million, the most for any single month.
Given this growing popular support, it is possible that the anti-Sanders campaign will fall short of its goal and be unable to block his nomination. In that event, however, as the price of not sabotaging his campaign, the Democratic Party would demand such far-reaching concessions on program, personnel and policy that a Sanders administration would mean a Sanders fig leaf for the continued domination of Wall Street and the military-intelligence apparatus.
And large sections of the Democratic Party would balk at any such arrangement. They fear that the nomination of a candidate who calls himself a “democratic socialist” could encourage the entry into American political life of broad layers of working people and youth who have been excluded by the corporate-controlled two-party system.
Given a choice between Sanders … and Trump, much of the Democratic leadership will choose Trump.
By Patrick Martin in the USA, 3 March 2020:
The “Russian meddling” fraud
In a remarkable statement that has gone virtually unreported in the American media, Representative Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, publicly denounced US intelligence agencies for interfering in the presidential contest and attempting to sabotage the campaign of Democratic frontrunner Bernie Sanders.
In an opinion column published February 27 by the Hill, Gabbard attacked the article published by the Washington Post on February 21, the eve of the Nevada caucuses, which claimed that Russia was intervening in the US election to support Sanders. She also criticized the decision of billionaire Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City, to repeat the anti-Russia slander against Sanders during the February 25 Democratic presidential debate in South Carolina.
Gabbard is a military officer in a National Guard medical unit who has been deployed to Iraq and Kuwait and has continuing and close contact with the Pentagon. She is obviously familiar with the machinations of the US military-intelligence apparatus and knows whereof she speaks. Her harsh and uncompromising language is that much more significant.
Enough is enough. I am calling on all presidential candidates to stop playing these dangerous political games and immediately condemn any interference in our elections by out-of-control intelligence agencies. A “news article” published last week in the Washington Post, which set off yet another manufactured media firestorm, alleges that the goal of Russia is to trick people into criticizing establishment Democrats. This is a laughably obvious ploy to stifle legitimate criticism and cast aspersions on Americans who are rightly skeptical of the powerful forces exerting control over the primary election process.
We are told the aim of Russia is to “sow division”, but the aim of corporate media and self-serving politicians pushing this narrative is clearly to sow division of their own—by generating baseless suspicion against the Sanders campaign. It’s extremely disingenuous for “journalists” and rival candidates to publicize a news article that merely asserts, without presenting any evidence, that Russia is “helping” Bernie Sanders—but provides no information as to what that “help” allegedly consists of.
If the CIA, FBI or any other intelligence agency is going to tell voters that “Russians” are interfering in this election to help certain candidates—or simply “sow discord”—then it needs to immediately provide us with the details of what exactly it’s alleging.
After pointing out that the Democratic Party establishment and the corporate media have had little interest in measures to actually improve election security, such as requiring paper ballots or some other form of permanent record of how people vote, Gabbard demanded:
The FBI, CIA or any other intelligence agency should immediately stop smearing presidential candidates with innuendo and vague, evidence-free assertions. That is antithetical to the role those agencies play in a free democracy. The American people cannot have faith in our intelligence agencies if they are pushing an agenda to harm candidates they dislike.
As socialists, we do not share Gabbard’s belief that the intelligence agencies have a positive role to play or that the American people need to have faith in … the military-intelligence apparatus.
Gabbard denounces this “new McCarthyism” and calls on her fellow candidate to rebuff the CIA smears and “defend the freedoms enshrined in our Constitution.” Not a single one of the remaining candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination … has responded to her appeal.
Her statement concludes that the goal of the “mainstream corporate media and the warmongering political establishment” was either to block Sanders from winning the nomination, or, if he does become the nominee, to “force him to engage in inflammatory anti-Russia rhetoric and perpetuate the new Cold War and nuclear arms race, which are existential threats to our country and the world.” …
She has based her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination largely on an appeal to antiwar sentiment, particularly opposing US intervention in Syria. She has also said that if elected, she would drop all charges against Julian Assange and pardon Edward Snowden.
These views led to a vicious attack by Hillary Clinton, the defeated Democratic presidential candidate in 2016, who last October called Gabbard “a Russian asset”, claiming that she was being groomed by Russia to serve as a third-party candidate in 2020 who would take votes away from the Democratic nominee and help re-elect President Trump. …
Since Clinton’s attack, the Democratic National Committee has excluded Gabbard from its monthly debates, manipulating the eligibility requirements so that billionaire Michael Bloomberg would qualify even for debates held in states where he was not on the ballot but Gabbard was, such as Nevada and South Carolina.
This 2 February 2020 video from the USA says about itself:
Joe Biden doesn’t want to let the voters decide who the democratic nominee should be. Ana Kasparian and John Iadarola, hosts of The Young Turks, break it down.
“Former Vice President Joe Biden said Sunday he would contest the presidential primary nomination at the Democratic convention if Sen. Bernie Sanders (Independent -Vermont) is leading in delegates without securing a majority.
Read more here.
This 3 February 2020 video from the USA says about itself:
Saagar Enjeti examines the odds of a brokered Democratic convention from the wave of Biden’s endorsements.