theguardian--2020-01-15--Warren-Sanders tension simmers and Steyer makes a mark: key debate takeaways

The final Democratic debate before voting begins in the Iowa caucus early next month ended in a testy confrontation between progressive senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders .
But it also had numerous other moments of tension , argument and policy to and fro .
Here are some of they key takeaways : Sanders v Warren : the fight goes on In past debates Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have been like a married couple who catch each other ’ s eye at a party full of annoying guests .
But on Tuesday they were more like divorcees with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surface .
Sanders denied telling Warren during a private meeting in December 2018 that he did not believe a woman could win the presidency .
“ As a matter of fact , I didn ’ t say it , ” Sanders said .
Warren said : “ Bernie is my friend and I ’ m not here to fight with Bernie.
” But then she delivered a killer line : “ Look at the men on this stage : collectively , they have lost 10 elections .
The only people on this stage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they ’ ve been in are the women : Amy [ Klobuchar ] and me .
And the only person who has beaten an incumbent Republican any time in the past 30 years is me.
” Most observers felt that Warren won the exchange and Sanders had somehow alienated the Hillary Clinton wing of the party even more .
At the end of the debate , Sanders tried to shake Warren ’ s hand but was rebuffed .
Warren clasped her hands together and uttered some strong words .
Sanders seemed momentarily taken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grumpily away so fast that he almost missed Tom Steyer ’ s handshake .
If that ’ s the mood of the candidates , imagine their fervent fanbases .
The candidates were cautious , less aggressive than might be expected and likely did little to change voters ’ minds .
For the first time , there were no candidates of color and it showed .
Diverse candidates bring diverse viewpoints .
They were missed .
Deval Patrick , the only African American left in the race , said : “ Tonight , six @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over two hours .
There were many good ideas from strong candidates , but there was not one question about racism in tonight ’ s debate .
Not one.
” There were also no candidates of colorfulness .
No Tulsi Gabbard , no Marianne Williamson , no Andrew Yang .
This could matter because , come the general election , the nominee will be up against Trump , reality TV star , circus master and greatest showman .
In the media age , some star quality is required .
Biden is still the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ low expectations , Biden can be relieved that he avoided any major pre-caucus gaffes .
The days when Kamala Harris went for his jugular now seem a long time ago .
But he was , once again , questioned over his vote in favor of the Iraq war , newly pertinent in the light of Trump ’ s abrupt decision to kill Iranian general Qassem Suleimani in a drone strike .
“ I said 13 years ago it was a mistake to give the president the authority to go to war if , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get inspectors into Iraq to stop what – thought to be the attempt to get a nuclear weapon , ” Biden said .
“ It was a mistake , and I acknowledged that .
Biden loyalists were happy .
“ Joe Biden looked like a president tonight – he was strong and steady , ” said Tom Vilsack , former secretary of agriculture and governor of Iowa .
But not for the first time , Biden ’ s main gain came by default .
The debate was largely inconsequential .
Media oxygen will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clash , then the impeachment trial .
That will suit the national front runner just fine .
Perhaps the greatest theme of the Democratic primary so far has been healthcare .
No issues better captures the divide between centrists and progressives .
And so it was again on Tuesday night .
Sanders defended Medicare for All .
“ We are now spending twice as much per person on healthcare as do the people of any other country .
We are finally gon na have to stand up to the health industry and end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and profiteering , ” he said .
Joe Biden and Tom Steyer said they wanted to build on the Affordable Care Act .
Other centrists had their talking points ready .
Taking on Warren , Buttigieg said : “ It ’ s just not true that the plan I ’ m proposing is small .
We have to move past the Washington mentality that suggests that the bigness of plans only consists of how many trillions of dollars they put through the treasury.
” Senator Amy Klobuchar said : “ This debate isn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vegas the other day , and someone said don ’ t put your chips on a number on the wheel that isn ’ t even on the wheel.
” Reporting from Iowa suggests that healthcare is a much bigger deal for caucusgoers than impeachment or Iran .
Many are surprised to find businessman Tom Steyer on stage with seasoned politicians .
With the stage down to six candidates , he had a chance to make his mark , especially when asked about the climate crisis .
“ I would declare a state of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” said Steyer , who has surged in South Carolina in particular , where he has spent massively on TV ads .
The debate moderators noted that Steyer partly built his fortune from investing in coal , oil and gas , questioning whether he is the right messenger .
Steyer insisted that he was , having divested from fossil fuels a decade ago and campaigned against them ever since .
Steyer even did enough to earn a presidential tweet : “ Steyer is running low on cash , ” Trump wrote .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on coal .
So funny !
” But he got most attention because of his role as interloper in the Sanders-Warren conversation .
Steyer graciously declined to reveal anything he heard , telling CNN : “ I felt like , OK , there ’ s something going on here .
Good night , I ’ m out of here .
It was one of those awkward moments where I felt like , OK , I need to move on as fast as possible .
”

The final Democratic debate before voting begins in the Iowa caucus early next month ended in a testy confrontation between progressive senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.
But it also had numerous other moments of tension, argument and policy to and fro. Here are some of they key takeaways:
Sanders v Warren: the fight goes on
In past debates Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have been like a married couple who catch each other’s eye at a party full of annoying guests. But on Tuesday they were more like divorcees with old slights and recriminations boiling to the surface.
Sanders denied telling Warren during a private meeting in December 2018 that he did not believe a woman could win the presidency. “As a matter of fact, I didn’t say it,” Sanders said.
Warren said: “Bernie is my friend and I’m not here to fight with Bernie.” But then she delivered a killer line: “Look at the men on this stage: collectively, they have lost 10 elections. The only people on this stage who have won every single election that they’ve been in are the women: Amy [Klobuchar] and me. And the only person who has beaten an incumbent Republican any time in the past 30 years is me.”
Most observers felt that Warren won the exchange and Sanders had somehow alienated the Hillary Clinton wing of the party even more.
At the end of the debate, Sanders tried to shake Warren’s hand but was rebuffed. Warren clasped her hands together and uttered some strong words. Sanders seemed momentarily taken aback, then talked some and walked grumpily away so fast that he almost missed Tom Steyer’s handshake.
If that’s the mood of the candidates, imagine their fervent fanbases.
The vanilla debate
The candidates were cautious, less aggressive than might be expected and likely did little to change voters’ minds.
For the first time, there were no candidates of color and it showed. Diverse candidates bring diverse viewpoints. They were missed.
Deval Patrick, the only African American left in the race, said: “Tonight, six Democrats were on the debate stage for over two hours. There were many good ideas from strong candidates, but there was not one question about racism in tonight’s debate. Not one.”
There were also no candidates of colorfulness. No Tulsi Gabbard, no Marianne Williamson, no Andrew Yang. This could matter because, come the general election, the nominee will be up against Trump, reality TV star, circus master and greatest showman. In the media age, some star quality is required.
Biden is still the frontrunner
Such is the soft bigotry of low expectations, Biden can be relieved that he avoided any major pre-caucus gaffes. The days when Kamala Harris went for his jugular now seem a long time ago. But he was, once again, questioned over his vote in favor of the Iraq war, newly pertinent in the light of Trump’s abrupt decision to kill the Iranian general Qassem Suleimani in a drone strike.
“I said 13 years ago it was a mistake to give the president the authority to go to war if, in fact, he couldn’t get inspectors into Iraq to stop what – thought to be the attempt to get a nuclear weapon,” Biden said. “It was a mistake, and I acknowledged that.”
This video has been removed. This could be because it launched early, our rights have expired, there was a legal issue, or for another reason. Elizabeth Warren rebukes Bernie Sanders: 'A woman can win the presidency' – video
Biden loyalists were happy. “Joe Biden looked like a president tonight – he was strong and steady,” said Tom Vilsack, former secretary of agriculture and governor of Iowa.
But not for the first time, Biden’s main gain came by default. The debate was largely inconsequential. Media oxygen will be consumed by the Sanders v Warren clash, then the impeachment trial. That will suit the national frontrunner just fine.
The healthcare faultline continues
Perhaps the greatest theme of the Democratic primary so far has been healthcare. No issues better captures the divide between centrists and progressives. And so it was again on Tuesday night.
Sanders defended Medicare for All. “We are now spending twice as much per person on healthcare as do the people of any other country. We are finally gonna have to stand up to the health industry and end hundreds of billions of dollars of waste and profiteering,” he said.
Joe Biden and Tom Steyer said they wanted to build on the Affordable Care Act. Other centrists had their talking points ready.
Taking on Warren, Buttigieg said: “It’s just not true that the plan I’m proposing is small. We have to move past the Washington mentality that suggests that the bigness of plans only consists of how many trillions of dollars they put through the treasury.”
Senator Amy Klobuchar said: “This debate isn’t real. I was in Vegas the other day, and someone said don’t put your chips on a number on the wheel that isn’t even on the wheel.”
Reporting from Iowa suggests that healthcare is a much bigger deal for caucus-goers than impeachment or Iran.
Steyer style
Many are surprised to find businessman Tom Steyer on stage with seasoned politicians. With the stage down to six candidates, he had a chance to make his mark, especially when asked about the climate crisis.
“I would declare a state of emergency on day one on climate,” said Steyer, who has surged in South Carolina in particular, where he has spent massively on TV ads.
The debate moderators noted that Steyer partly built his fortune from investing in coal, oil and gas, questioning whether he is the right messenger. Steyer insisted that he was, having divested from fossil fuels a decade ago and campaigned against them ever since.
Steyer even did enough to earn a presidential tweet: “Steyer is running low on cash,” Trump wrote. “Nobody knows him. Made his money on coal. So funny!”
But he got most attention because of his role as interloper in the Sanders-Warren conversation. Steyer graciously declined to reveal anything he heard, telling CNN: “I felt like, OK, there’s something going on here. Good night, I’m out of here. It was one of those awkward moments where I felt like, OK, I need to move on as fast as possible.”


theguardian--2020-01-15--Democratic debate: Warren appears to reject handshake with Sanders after clash – as it happened

The Senate sergeant-at-arms and Capitol Police are launching an unprecedented crackdown on the Capitol press corps for the impeachment trial @ @ @ @ @ following a standoff between the Capitol ’ s chief security officials , Senate Rules Chairman @ @ @ @ @ committees of correspondents .
Capitol Police Chief Steven A Sund and Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Michael C. @ @ @ @ @ that intends to protect senators and the chamber , but it also suggests that credentialed @ @ @ @ @ interact with on a daily basis are considered a threat .
Additional security screening and @ @ @ @ @ for reporters are two issues that are drawing criticism from Capitol Hill media .
The @ @ @ @ @ which represents journalists credentialed in the daily press galleries in the House and Senate , @ @ @ @ @ the planned restrictions that it says rejected every suggestion made by the correspondents ‘ without @ @ @ @ @ restrictions contribute to safety rather than simply limit coverage of the trial .
’

15 Jan 2020 05.41 GMT Key takeaways from tonight's debate That’s it from me tonight. Here are some of the biggest takeaways from the seventh Democratic debate, the final debate before the Iowa caucuses: Elizbaeth Warren and Bernie Sanders clashed over reports that Sanders told Warren a woman could not be elected president, which the Vermont senator denied. After the debate ended, Warren appeared to reject a handshake from Sanders, and the pair engaged in a seemingly contentious exchange that was not picked up by a microphone.
and clashed over reports that Sanders told Warren a woman could not be elected president, which the Vermont senator denied. After the debate ended, Warren appeared to reject a handshake from Sanders, and the pair engaged in a seemingly contentious exchange that was not picked up by a microphone. Despite the post-debate drama, the night was largely notable for the lack of explosive moments. The candidates were mostly civil toward each other as they laid out their policy differences.
The beginning of the debate was dominated by a foreign-policy discussion, as US-Iranian tensions escalate. The candidates outlined their visions for America’s future in the Middle East while largely warning against engaging in “endless wars”, but Sanders made a point to criticize Joe Biden for his 2002 vote in support of the Iraq war.
for his 2002 vote in support of the Iraq war. The debate was notable for who was not on stage. Tonight’s event featured the smallest and whitest stage yet, a trend that has sparked criticism against the Democratic National Committee. The US politics live blog will be back tomorrow to cover the latest on the Senate impeachment trial. Thanks for following our live debate coverage from Iowa.
Updated at 05.43 GMT
15 Jan 2020 05.30 GMT Bernie Sanders’ campaign said the Vermont senator brought in $1.7m tonight, marking his strongest fundraising performance during a presidential debate yet. .@BernieSanders camp tells reporters they brought in more money tonight than any other prior Democratic debate: $1.7 million raised from more than 100,000 donors. — Ruby Cramer (@rubycramer) January 15, 2020 Sanders has outpaced his rivals in terms of fundraising, bringing in $34.5m during the final quarter of 2019 thanks to the strength of his grassroots support. The second-largest Democratic haul during that quarter belonged to Pete Buttigieg, who raised $24.7m. But Trump outraised all of the Democratic candidates with his $46m total for the quarter.
Updated at 05.40 GMT
15 Jan 2020 05.18 GMT Speaking to CBS News after the debate, Amy Klobuchar said she was opposed to proposed press limitations on Capitol Hill as the Senate advances toward an impeachment trial. .@amyklobuchar, ranking member of the Senate's Rules Committee, tells @edokeefe she does not support severe press restrictions that are anticipated for the impeachment trial:
"We should have open access for the press...I think this is a big mistake" https://t.co/IegNDWPalP pic.twitter.com/iIFZsqgpjC — CBS News (@CBSNews) January 15, 2020 Roll Call reported earlier today: The Senate sergeant-at-arms and Capitol Police are launching an unprecedented crackdown on the Capitol press corps for the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, following a standoff between the Capitol’s chief security officials, Senate Rules Chairman Roy Blunt and the standing committees of correspondents. Capitol Police Chief Steven A Sund and Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Michael C. Stenger will enact a plan that intends to protect senators and the chamber, but it also suggests that credentialed reporters and photographers whom senators interact with on a daily basis are considered a threat. Additional security screening and limited movement within the Capitol for reporters are two issues that are drawing criticism from Capitol Hill media. The Standing Committee of Correspondents, which represents journalists credentialed in the daily press galleries in the House and Senate, has come out forcefully against the planned restrictions that it says rejected every suggestion made by the correspondents ‘without an explanation of how the restrictions contribute to safety rather than simply limit coverage of the trial.’
Updated at 05.25 GMT
15 Jan 2020 05.11 GMT Pressed again about what he overheard between Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders after the debate, Tom Steyer said he tried to quickly move away from the contentious-looking exchange. “I felt like, OK, there’s something going on here. Goodnight, I’m out of here,” the billinoaire activist said. “It was one of those awkward moments where I felt like, OK, I need to move on as fast as possible.” The two progressive senators appeared to share tense words after Warren rejected Sanders’ handshake.
Updated at 05.12 GMT
15 Jan 2020 05.01 GMT Speaking to the Guardian’s Daniel Strauss in Des Moines, Jeff Weaver, a senior adviser to Bernie Sanders, pleaded ignorance on the words the Vermont senator exchanged with Elizabeth Warren after the debate concluded. Daniel Strauss: You don’t know what the two said? Because it looked like a heated exchange.
Jeff Weaver: I don’t. I don’t. I saw what you saw.
DS: I’ve watched a lot of debates, man. I’ve never seen that.
JW: I watched what you watched.
DS: What are you going to ask Senator Sanders about that?
JW: “Hey Bernie, what was going on in that moment?” Weaver, who served as Sanders’ campagin manager in 2016, added, “Look, they’re friends, they respect each other. They’ve obviously had – it’s a political campaign and when you run in a political campaign, there’s disagreements, so that’s it.”
Updated at 05.11 GMT
15 Jan 2020 04.52 GMT Trump lashes out against Steyer after debate After the conclusion of the seventh Democratic debate, Trump took to Twitter to criticize (perhaps surprisingly) Tom Steyer. The president reshared a tweet from the Republican National Committee highlighting the billionaire activist’s past financial ties to the fossil-fuel industry, echoing a question moderators posed earlier tonight about whether Steyer was the right messenger for combatting climate change. Steyer is running low on cash. Nobody knows him. Made his money on coal. So funny! https://t.co/vS48ta5IFr — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 15, 2020 Steyer has spent nearly $20m on campaign ads so far, an investment that has helped catapult him into the top tier of candidates in the early-voting states of Nevada and South Carolina. But it’s perplexing why Trump lashed out against Steyer, when he spoke the least out of all the Democratic candidates on stage tonight.
Updated at 04.54 GMT
15 Jan 2020 04.44 GMT The moment when Elizabeth Warren appeared to reject a handshake from Bernie Sanders at the end of the debate may have been the most contentious moment of the night. Depsite many commentators’ predictions that the candidates were headed for the most tense debate yet as they vied for Iowa voters’ affections, the night was generally calm as candidates laid out their policy differences. Amy Klobuchar, whose campaign rests on her performance in Iowa, attributed the candidates’ civility to the kind disposition of the state’s residents. After the debate, @amyklobuchar tells me that she attributes a more polite tone among candidates tonight to the Iowa setting, 20 days before the caucuses, where voters appreciate civility. — Jeff Zeleny (@jeffzeleny) January 15, 2020
15 Jan 2020 04.33 GMT After Elizabeth Warren was seen rejecting Bernie Sanders’ handshake after the debate, much of Twitter erupted with the same question: what did Tom Steyer hear? As the two progressive senators were seemingly engaged in a tense conversation, Steyer walked over to shake their hands and likely overheard some of their exchange. But it appears the billionaire activist is not going to be very forthcoming with any details on what he heard. Tom Steyer is currently on MSNBC: "I don't know what they were saying. (says he was exchanging niceties) ... I was trying to get out of the way as fast as possible." — Emma Kinery (@EmmaKinery) January 15, 2020
15 Jan 2020 04.31 GMT Former Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick, the only African-American candidate left in the Democratic presidential primary, criticized the debate’s moderators for not asking the six white participants on stage tonight about racism. “Tonight, six Democrats were on the debate stage for over two hours,” Patrick said in a statement. “There were many good ideas from strong candidates, but there was not one question about racism in tonight’s debate. Not one. “Let’s face reality. Racism is not all there is to talk about, but when millions of Americans deal with it daily, encouraged by our president, when do we face their truths?”
15 Jan 2020 04.27 GMT Despite his tension with Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders had the best hour of fundraising during any debate so far, according to the Vermont senator’s campaign. The @BernieSanders campaign is saying that the first hour of tonight’s debate is best hour of fundraising for any debate thus far pic.twitter.com/dCoSTdbFc0 — Cara Korte (@CaraKorte) January 15, 2020
15 Jan 2020 04.16 GMT Warren appears to reject Sanders' handshake after debate concludes As the candidates moved off stage following the conclusion of the debate, Elizabeth Warren appeared to reject a handshake from Bernie Sanders. The two then engaged in conversation before exiting the stage. Woah did anybody see that last bit at the end of the debate? While everyone was shaking hands Warren went over to Bernie, Bernie reached out his hand, Warren said something. Bernie seemed to respond tersely. Steyer came over. then the two walked in opposite directions. — Daniel Strauss (@DanielStrauss4) January 15, 2020 The most tense moment of the night came when Sanders denied he told Warren a women could not be elected president, even though Warren substantiated reports indicating he had. Warren addressed the controversy by pointing out that she and the only other woman on stage, Amy Klobuchar, have a better record of electoral success than the male candidates participating tonight.
Updated at 04.17 GMT
15 Jan 2020 04.11 GMT Seventh Democratic debate concludes Running about 10 minutes over, the seventh Democratic presidential debate has concluded in Des Moines, Iowa. The Guardian team will have more analysis and updates coming, so stay tuned.
15 Jan 2020 04.10 GMT Pete Buttigieg said this election represented a unique opportunity to change the direction of the country and ensure average families can enjoy in the country’s economic success. Elizabeth Warren began her closing statement by listing some of the issues that were not discussed tonight, such as student-loan forgiveness and disability rights. But the Massachusetts senator said she came to the stage with “a heart filled with hope” for the future of the country. Bernie Sanders urged Democrats that this was their moment to “think big, not small” and “have the courage to take on the 1%”. Joe Biden began his closing statement by saying, “Character is on the ballot.” The former vice-president also warned another four years of Trump’s presidency would cause irreversible damage to the country.
Updated at 04.11 GMT


theguardian--2020-01-15--Elizabeth Warren's confrontation with Bernie Sanders caps testy debate night

A post-debate confrontation between progressive senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders capped the final Democratic debate before the Iowa caucuses after an evening of infighting on foreign policy , healthcare , and what makes a candidate most fit to defeat Donald Trump .
In a sign of the depth of the tension between Sanders and Warren , at the end of the debate , as candidates were shaking hands , the Massachusetts senator walked over to the Vermont senator .
Sanders outstretched his hand ; Warren did not .
It was not immediately clear what the two said but after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from both sides they shook their heads and walked in opposite directions .
The moment came after several days of tension between the two camps , shattering a longstanding detente between America ’ s two leading progressives .
The squabble culminated in a dispute over remarks Warren claimed Sanders had made to her privately about the ability of a woman to successfully take on Trump .
About 45 minutes into the debate , the issue came up and Sanders repeated the denial that he had ever said a woman could not win the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a matter of fact , I didn ’ t say ” that , adding that it was “ incomprehensible ” he would hold such a view .
Sanders went on to note that he supported Hillary Clinton in 2016 and thought she could beat Trump .
When Warren was asked to respond , she earned a loud cheer from the audience by saying only the women on the stage had won every election they ran in .
“ Look at the men on this stage , ” Warren said .
“ Collectively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The only people on this stage who have won every single election that they ’ ve been in are the women .
Amy and me , ” referring to Minnesota senator Amy Klobuchar .
Then things got pettier .
Sanders noted that he beat a popular Republican 30 years ago , causing Warren to pause .
She said in the last 30 years , and that particular election was 30 years ago , Sanders noted .
Sanders was referring to his fight for a congressional seat against Republican Peter Smith .
Though the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been eagerly awaited , Warren also signaled she wanted to move beyond it .
“ Bernie is my friend , and I ’ m not here to fight with Bernie , ” she said , though those sentiments were not echoed in the apparently hostile post-debate confrontation .
Other divisions were also on display .
Sanders was also ready to get into it with former vice-president Joe Biden .
And all the contenders were eager to talk about healthcare .
Six were on the stage : Sanders , Warren , Biden , Minnesota @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mayor Pete Buttigieg , and businessman Tom Steyer .
The debate began with a wide-ranging discussion on foreign policy , including the war in Iraq and whether to leave some American troops in the Middle East or pull them out .
Some divisions were on display .
Biden defended his vote on the Iraq war , for which he has been criticized for recently .
Sanders contrasted himself with Biden .
“ I did everything I could to prevent that war .
Joe saw it differently , ” Sanders said .
Warren said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the region .
Buttigieg did not give a clear answer on whether to recall all troops or not .
Later on , ideological divides emerged .
Buttigieg became defensive on healthcare , pushing back on criticism that his healthcare proposal was too modest .
Healthcare has been a major marker dividing liberal candidates like Warren and Sanders with centrist ones who don ’ t support Medicare for All : Klobuchar , Biden , and Buttigieg .
“ It ’ s just not true that my plan is small , ” Buttigieg said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ who Want It , is not as expansive as the Medicare for All proposals championed by Sanders and Warren .
“ This would be a game-changer.
” Warren was eager to engage with Buttigieg there .
“ Look , the numbers that the mayor is offering just don ’ t add up , ” Warren said .
And later on Sanders was asked about the effect his healthcare overhaul plan would have on towns with a large health insurance industry .
Sanders digressed .
“ We are finally going to have to stand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of billions of dollars of waste , and profitering , ” Sanders said .
The sense from Democrats on the ground in Iowa ahead of the debate was that despite recent polls showing the former vice-president Biden leading the field , the escalating feuds between Sanders and Warren or Biden and the former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg could upend the race .
“ It feels like a free-for-all here , ” said Norm Sterzenbach , an Iowa-based Democratic strategist who served as the state director for former representative Beto O ’ Rourke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sterzenbach said the primary is full of Democrats not fully committed to one single candidate and he expects an “ unprecedented of people are going to walk in on caucus night unsure of where they want to be ” .
“ These final three weeks are going to have a major impact of who walks out of Iowa .
The debates are an important piece of it , ” Sterzenbach added .
Candidates will need to differentiate themselves in order to gain ground in the state , said Grant Woodard , an Iowa-based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to an Iowa Democratic member of Congress .
There ’ s also a sense that Biden is not impervious and a win in Iowa or a strong debate showing from a rival could oust him from the frontrunner spot .
“ There are still so many variables , even till Iowa , that things could change , ” said Bradley Tusk , a political strategist who served as campaign manager for Michael Bloomberg ’ s 2009 mayoral re-election bid in New York .

A post-debate confrontation between progressive senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders capped the final Democratic debate before the Iowa caucuses after an evening of infighting on foreign policy, healthcare and what makes a candidate most fit to defeat Donald Trump.
In a sign of the depth of the tension between Sanders and Warren, at the end of the debate, as candidates were shaking hands, the Massachusetts senator walked over to the Vermont senator. Sanders outstretched his hand; Warren did not. It was not immediately clear what the two said but after a few short, apparently stern words from both sides they shook their heads and walked in opposite directions.
The moment came after several days of tension between the two camps, shattering a longstanding detente between America’s two leading progressives. The squabble culminated in a dispute over remarks Warren claimed Sanders had made to her privately about the ability of a woman to successfully take on Trump.
About 45 minutes into the debate, the issue came up and Sanders repeated the denial that he had ever said a woman could not win the 2020 presidential election. Sanders said “as a matter of fact, I didn’t say” that, adding that it was “incomprehensible” he would hold such a view.
Sanders went on to note that he supported Hillary Clinton in 2016 and thought she could beat Trump. When Warren was asked to respond, she earned a loud cheer from the audience by saying only the women on the stage had won every election they ran in.
“Look at the men on this stage,” Warren said. “Collectively, they have lost 10 elections. The only people on this stage who have won every single election that they’ve been in are the women. Amy and me,” referring to the Minnesota senator Amy Klobuchar.
Then things got pettier. Sanders noted that he beat a popular Republican 30 years ago, causing Warren to pause. She said in the last 30 years, and that particular election was 30 years ago, Sanders noted. Sanders was referring to his fight for a congressional seat against Republican Peter Smith.
Though the clash between the two progressive heavyweights had been eagerly awaited, Warren also signaled she wanted to move beyond it. “Bernie is my friend, and I’m not here to fight with Bernie,” she said, though those sentiments were not echoed in the apparently hostile post-debate confrontation.
Other divisions were also on display. Sanders was also ready to get into it with former vice-president Joe Biden. And all the contenders were eager to talk about healthcare. Six were on the stage: Sanders, Warren, Biden, Klobuchar, former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg, and businessman Tom Steyer.
The debate began with a wide-ranging discussion on foreign policy, including the war in Iraq and whether to leave some American troops in the Middle East or pull them out. Some divisions were on display. Biden defended his vote on the Iraq war, for which he has been criticized for recently. Sanders contrasted himself with Biden.
“I did everything I could to prevent that war. Joe saw it differently,” Sanders said.
Warren said she supported pulling American troops out of the region. Buttigieg did not give a clear answer on whether to recall all troops or not.
This video has been removed. This could be because it launched early, our rights have expired, there was a legal issue, or for another reason. Elizabeth Warren rebukes Bernie Sanders: 'A woman can win the presidency' – video
Later on, ideological divides emerged. Buttigieg became defensive on healthcare, pushing back on criticism that his healthcare proposal was too modest. Healthcare has been a major marker dividing liberal candidates like Warren and Sanders with centrist ones who don’t support Medicare for All: Klobuchar, Biden, and Buttigieg.
“It’s just not true that my plan is small,” Buttigieg said. His plan, called Medicare for All Who Want It, is not as expansive as the Medicare for All proposals championed by Sanders and Warren. “This would be a game-changer.”
Warren was eager to engage with Buttigieg there.
“Look, the numbers that the mayor is offering just don’t add up,” Warren said.
And later on Sanders was asked about the effect his healthcare overhaul plan would have on towns with a large health insurance industry. Sanders digressed.
“We are finally going to have to stand up to the healthcare industry and hundreds of billions of dollars of waste, and profiteering,” Sanders said.
The sense from Democrats on the ground in Iowa ahead of the debate was that despite recent polls showing Biden leading the field, the escalating feuds between Sanders and Warren or Biden and Buttigieg could upend the race.
“It feels like a free-for-all here,” said Norm Sterzenbach, an Iowa-based Democratic strategist who served as the state director for former representative Beto O’Rourke’s now defunct presidential campaign. Sterzenbach said the primary is full of Democrats not fully committed to one single candidate and he expects an “unprecedented of people are going to walk in on caucus night unsure of where they want to be”.
“These final three weeks are going to have a major impact of who walks out of Iowa. The debates are an important piece of it,” Sterzenbach added.
Candidates will need to differentiate themselves in order to gain ground in the state, said Grant Woodard, an Iowa-based Democratic strategist and former chief of staff to an Iowa Democratic member of Congress.
There’s also a sense that Biden is not impervious and a win in Iowa or a strong debate showing from a rival could oust him from the frontrunner spot.
“There are still so many variables, even till Iowa, that things could change,” said Bradley Tusk, a political strategist who served as campaign manager for Michael Bloomberg’s 2009 mayoral re-election bid in New York.


theguardian--2020-01-15--The FBI and Apple are facing off over an iPhone again. What's going on?

Three years after the high-stakes battle between Apple and the US federal government over unlocking a suspected terrorist ’ s iPhone , a new standoff is shaping up between the privacy-minded tech company and the Trump administration .
On Monday , the US attorney general , William Barr , called on Apple to help the Federal Bureau of Investigation ( FBI ) unlock two iPhones related to the fatal shooting of three Americans at a Florida naval base in December .
The shooting , by a Saudi air force cadet who was training with US forces , is now considered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The attorney general complained that Apple had “ not given us any substantive assistance ” .
“ This situation perfectly illustrates why it is critical that investigators be able to get access to digital evidence once they have obtained a court order , ” he said .
The demand for assistance in unlocking a suspected terrorist ’ s iPhone echoes the 2016 dispute between Apple and the FBI , which sought access to information stored on the iPhone of one of the killers in the San Bernardino , California , mass shooting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement Monday evening , saying that it rejected the idea that it had not helped law enforcement , and noting that it had responded to the FBI ’ s requests for assistance within hours , and had already provided investigators with “ many gigabytes of information ” .
But Apple also reiterated its opposition to weakening encryption , noting that “ there is no such thing as a backdoor just for the good guys ” .
“ Backdoors can also be exploited by those who threaten our national security and the data security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said in a statement .
The information that Apple provided the government was likely data stored on Apple ’ s cloud .
The information that the FBI still wants is the data stored directly on the phone , which is only accessible to a user with the phone ’ s password – and not to Apple .
Apple is one of many tech companies that have limited the amount of user data they store on their own servers in the wake of the Edward Snowden revelations , in part in order to avoid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday , Donald Trump waded into the dispute with a tweet lashing out at Apple for refusing to “ unlock phones used by killers , drug dealers and other violent criminal elements ” .
The standoff over the San Bernardino killer ’ s phone ignited when Apple refused to comply with a federal court order to help the FBI unlock the phone .
At the time , the chief executive Tim Cook pushed back forcefully on the government ’ s request , which he said would “ undermine the very freedoms and liberty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Civil liberties groups rallied behind Apple in the court battle , but the case became moot when the FBI broke into the phone with the help of a private company .
The dispute lay dormant for several years , until October 2019 , when Barr revived it with a letter to Facebook calling for a backdoor in the end-to-end encryption that the company plans to implement in all its messaging apps .
The UK home secretary and Australian minister for home affairs joined Barr in his letter to Facebook , prompting global @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ This is bigger than any single iPhone , ” the American Civil Liberties Union tweeted on Monday .
“ The government ’ s demand would weaken the security of millions of iPhones , and is unconstitutional .
”

Three years after the high-stakes battle between Apple and the US federal government over unlocking a suspected terrorist’s iPhone, a new standoff is shaping up between the privacy-minded tech company and the Trump administration.
On Monday, the US attorney general, William Barr, called on Apple to help the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) unlock two iPhones related to the fatal shooting of three Americans at a Florida naval base in December. The shooting, by a Saudi air force cadet who was training with US forces, is now considered an act of terrorism, Barr said.
The attorney general complained that Apple had “not given us any substantive assistance”. “This situation perfectly illustrates why it is critical that investigators be able to get access to digital evidence once they have obtained a court order,” he said.
The demand for assistance in unlocking a suspected terrorist’s iPhone echoes the 2016 dispute between Apple and the FBI, which sought access to information stored on the iPhone of one of the killers in the San Bernardino, California, mass shooting.
Apple responded to Barr in a statement on Monday evening, saying that it rejected the idea that it had not helped law enforcement, and noting that it had responded to the FBI’s requests for assistance within hours, and had already provided investigators with “many gigabytes of information”.
But Apple also reiterated its opposition to weakening encryption, noting that “there is no such thing as a backdoor just for the good guys”. “Backdoors can also be exploited by those who threaten our national security and the data security of our customers,” the company said in a statement.
The information that Apple provided the government was probably data stored on Apple’s cloud. The information that the FBI still wants is the data stored directly on the phone, which is only accessible to a user with the phone’s password – and not to Apple.
Apple is one of many tech companies that have limited the amount of user data they store on their own servers in the wake of the Edward Snowden revelations, in part in order to avoid being subject to government requests.
On Tuesday, Donald Trump waded into the dispute with a tweet lashing out at Apple for refusing to “unlock phones used by killers, drug dealers and other violent criminal elements”.
We are helping Apple all of the time on TRADE and so many other issues, and yet they refuse to unlock phones used by killers, drug dealers and other violent criminal elements. They will have to step up to the plate and help our great Country, NOW! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 14, 2020
The standoff over the San Bernardino killer’s phone ignited when Apple refused to comply with a federal court order to help the FBI unlock the phone. At the time, the chief executive, Tim Cook, forcefully resisted the government’s request, which he said would “undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect”. Civil liberties groups rallied behind Apple in the court battle, but the case became moot when the FBI broke into the phone with the help of a private company.
The dispute lay dormant for several years, until October 2019, when Barr revived it with a letter to Facebook calling for a backdoor in the end-to-end encryption that the company plans to implement in all its messaging apps.
The UK home secretary and Australian minister for home affairs joined Barr in his letter to Facebook, prompting global criticism from security experts and privacy experts.
“This is bigger than any single iPhone,” the American Civil Liberties Union tweeted on Monday. “The government’s demand would weaken the security of millions of iPhones, and is unconstitutional.”


theguardian--2020-01-15--From the Oscars to the Democratic party: why are US culture and politics still so white? | Mary Rett

From the Oscars to the Democratic party: why are US culture and politics still so white? | Mary Retta

It has been an upsetting week for racial representation on both the cultural and political front – between Cory Booker ’ s recent suspension of his presidential campaign and the overwhelmingly white ( and male ) composition of this year ’ s Oscar ’ s nominations , it seems we are regressing in a way that ’ s certainly hurtful , if slightly unsurprising .
With America ’ s population never more diverse , why is cultural and political representation still so white ?
While the answer seems , on the one hand , obvious , recent political history adds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s election in 2016 , the need for progressive candidates of color became clearer than ever .
As a result , politicians such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , Ilhan Omar and Tiffany Cabán soared to the frontlines , promising to solve racial and class inequities on both a national and local level .
The composition of presidential candidates shifted , too , and the 2020 Democratic ballot was the most progressive and diverse it ’ s ever been – no doubt in opposition to the hyper-conservative platform of our current president .
Kamala @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – Harris ’ s history on criminal justice was less than satisfying – but the political caliber of both was undeniable , and many voters were rightfully excited at the prospect of two promising black Democratic candidates .
This excitement faltered when Harris declared her withdrawal from the presidential race last month , and was further stalled this week when Booker announced the same .
This news is especially frustrating given that most of the Democratic candidates that remain in the race are white men : Pete Buttigieg , Joe Biden , Bernie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Booker withdrawing from the race was disappointing is an understatement .
It felt personal : though I was never entirely on the same page with either candidate politically , the comfort and validation that comes from seeing a candidate who looks like you , who vows to protect you and your community , is undeniable .
But my sadness stems from something much deeper than a desire for representation ; it ’ s my sense that the increasingly white Democratic slate confirms people of color ’ s worst fears about the trajectory of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In the devastating aftermath of Trump ’ s 2016 win , we were consoled only by the conviction that this was fated to happen , that we needed a candidate to win on a platform of hate so that we could wake up to the immediate necessity of electing a leader who prioritized the values of unity , justice and , of course , love .
As such , seeing promising candidates of color fail is even more devastating because it questions that logic and makes Trump ’ s win feel like less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prediction of our future .
This same is true of our disappointment with this year ’ s Oscar nominations .
Like the 2020 Democratic ballot , this year ’ s Oscar nominations are oppressively ( if unsurprisingly ) white .
In the wake of the nomination announcements , viewers and critics alike have been quick to point out the large number of creatives who were snubbed , many of whom were people of color .
Lupita Nyong ’ o did not get an Oscar nomination for her spellbinding lead performance in Us , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was not given to the actors in films such as Hustlers and Parasite .
The black British actor Cynthia Erivo was the only person of color nominated across 20 acting categories , and out of five directing nominations , all nominees were male .
Ultimately , what ’ s most upsetting is not the number of white candidates or the number of white nominations , it ’ s what this whitewashing represents : a grand invalidation of the lived experiences of people of color .
Marginalized politicians and creatives face greater pressures to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resources , as well as to use their platforms to amplify the concerns of their communities amid a culture that often couldn ’ t care less .
Every year it becomes clearer that the Academy can not be trusted to choose the stories that best represent our culture ; the organization seems preoccupied with ensuring that only its historic demographic – heterosexual , older white men – is allowed to have its experiences validated and seen .
Similarly , the cyclical defeat of marginalized candidates due to a lack of money or support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quality that one must possess in order to be effective as a leader or individual .
In this way , whiteness becomes both a standard to achieve as well as one to fight against , ensuring that creatives and politicians of color are doomed to fail .
Focusing on the individual experiences of Nyong ’ o or Booker is easier than facing the uncomfortable reality that we are living under a white supremacist regime that does not recognize the humanity of marginalized politicians , creatives or people .
We can only hope that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people to organize , to vote , to show up for marginalized artists and to recognize the worth of people of color even as we are structurally and systematically undervalued .

It has been an upsetting week for racial representation on both the cultural and political front – between Cory Booker’s recent suspension of his presidential campaign and the overwhelmingly white (and male) composition of this year’s Oscar’s nominations, it seems we are regressing in a way that’s certainly hurtful, if slightly unsurprising. With America’s population never more diverse, why is cultural and political representation still so white?
While the answer seems, on the one hand, obvious, recent political history adds nuance to frustration. After Donald Trump’s election in 2016, the need for progressive candidates of color became clearer than ever. As a result, politicians such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar and Tiffany Cabán soared to the frontlines, promising to solve racial and class inequities on both a national and local level. The composition of presidential candidates shifted, too, and the 2020 Democratic ballot was the most progressive and diverse it’s ever been – no doubt in opposition to the hyper-conservative platform of our current president.
Kamala Harris and Booker weren’t perfect – Harris’s history on criminal justice was less than satisfying – but the political caliber of both was undeniable, and many voters were rightfully excited at the prospect of two promising black Democratic candidates. This excitement faltered when Harris declared her withdrawal from the presidential race last month, and was further stalled this week when Booker announced the same. This news is especially frustrating given that most of the Democratic candidates that remain in the race are white men: Pete Buttigieg, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders.
To say that Harris and Booker withdrawing from the race was disappointing is an understatement. It felt personal: though I was never entirely on the same page with either candidate politically, the comfort and validation that comes from seeing a candidate who looks like you, who vows to protect you and your community, is undeniable. But my sadness stems from something much deeper than a desire for representation; it’s my sense that the increasingly white Democratic slate confirms people of color’s worst fears about the trajectory of this country’s political landscape.
In the devastating aftermath of Trump’s 2016 win, we were consoled only by the conviction that this was fated to happen, that we needed a candidate to win on a platform of hate so that we could wake up to the immediate necessity of electing a leader who prioritized the values of unity, justice and, of course, love. As such, seeing promising candidates of color fail is even more devastating because it questions that logic and makes Trump’s win feel like less of a fluke and more of a prediction of our future.
The comfort and validation that comes from seeing a candidate who looks like you ... is undeniable
This same is true of our disappointment with this year’s Oscar nominations. Like the 2020 Democratic ballot, this year’s Oscar nominations are oppressively (if unsurprisingly) white. In the wake of the nomination announcements, viewers and critics alike have been quick to point out the large number of creatives who were snubbed, many of whom were people of color. Lupita Nyong’o did not get an Oscar nomination for her spellbinding lead performance in Us, and it seems strange that more attention was not given to the actors in films such as Hustlers and Parasite. The black British actor Cynthia Erivo was the only person of color nominated across 20 acting categories, and out of five directing nominations, all nominees were male.
Ultimately, what’s most upsetting is not the number of white candidates or the number of white nominations, it’s what this whitewashing represents: a grand invalidation of the lived experiences of people of color. Marginalized politicians and creatives face greater pressures to succeed in their field, despite lesser resources, as well as to use their platforms to amplify the concerns of their communities amid a culture that often couldn’t care less.
03:56 How can we make award shows more diverse? – video explainer
Every year it becomes clearer that the Academy cannot be trusted to choose the stories that best represent our culture; the organization seems preoccupied with ensuring that only its historic demographic – heterosexual, older white men – is allowed to have its experiences validated and seen.
Similarly, the cyclical defeat of marginalized candidates due to a lack of money or support reinforces the notion that whiteness is a quality that one must possess in order to be effective as a leader or individual. In this way, whiteness becomes both a standard to achieve as well as one to fight against, ensuring that creatives and politicians of color are doomed to fail.
Focusing on the individual experiences of Nyong’o or Booker is easier than facing the uncomfortable reality that we are living under a white supremacist regime that does not recognize the humanity of marginalized politicians, creatives or people. We can only hope that this week’s setbacks will mobilize people to organize, to vote, to show up for marginalized artists and to recognize the worth of people of color even as we are structurally and systematically undervalued.


theguardian--2020-01-15--Sadly, a truce between Sanders and Warren seems unlikely. That only benefits Biden | Nathan Robinson

Tuesday night ’ s Democratic debate was mostly “ low-key ” – a kinder description than “ boring ” .
With the except of the moment everyone came to see , candidates largely repeated their standard talking points .
I wouldn ’ t say that anybody won , except CNN and its advertisers .
We were all waiting to see what would happen between Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders .
Warren had recently alleged that Sanders told her privately that he didn ’ t think a woman could win the presidential election , a statement Sanders vehemently denied making .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ they argue about what was said ?
Bernie received the first question on the topic .
He once again issued an emphatic denial , and pointed out how absurd it would be for him to say such a thing , given that he asked Warren herself to run in 2016 , and given that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote .
Then it was Warren ’ s turn .
The moderator ’ s question presumed that Sanders wasn ’ t telling the truth ( “ What did you think when Senator Sanders told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election ?
” ) Warren accepted the characterization , saying she disagreed with Sanders ’ opinion , but did not elaborate on what she was alleging Sanders to have said to her .
Instead she gave a general pitch for the power of female candidates , and touted her own electability , saying she was the only candidate on stage to have beaten an incumbent Republican within the last 30 years .
( The latter statement wasn ’ t true , and it led to the only direct Warren-Sanders confrontation of the night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an incumbent Republican – which he had , 29 years and two months ago . )
The moderators did not press Warren on what had transpired , or whether there could have been a misunderstanding .
So we didn ’ t come away with any better sense of what was said in that meeting .
What we do know is that both candidates have been hurt by this : many Sanders supporters now despise Warren for launching a damaging attack weeks before the Iowa caucus , and Warren ’ s supporters believe Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the debate , Sanders offered to shake Warren ’ s hand and Warren rebuffed him , suggesting that she does not intend to revive any “ truce ” between them .
That ’ s why Joe Biden had the best night of anyone on the state , even though he put in one of his worst performances .
Biden seemed lethargic and said very little that was memorable .
But he did what he needed to do , which was escape completely unscathed .
Bizarrely , even though Biden is the frontrunner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ major attack on him .
It has been strange to see how lightly the candidates have treated Biden given his appalling record and electoral weaknesses .
He was the clear beneficiary of the tension between the two progressives , and the fallout from Warren ’ s attack on Sanders might well lead to Biden winning Iowa .
Amy Klobuchar and Tom Steyer will probably both be praised for their performances .
Both were composed and articulate , though they mostly benefit from being given equal time to the race ’ s actual frontrunners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ single-payer healthcare and free college as pipe dreams .
Steyer gave an unexpectedly forceful attack on the private health insurance industry , backing up Warren and Sanders in making the case that corporate profiteers in healthcare are the problem .
But the prominence of Steyer and Klobuchar was a reminder of the absence of Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard .
Both Yang and Gabbard have livened up these debates and provided useful alternative perspectives – Yang with his pitch for a universal basic income and Gabbard with a critique of militarism .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , can fund his way into these debates while the others are kept out .
( Cory Booker , who just suspended his campaign , is also missed . )
The CNN moderators were vicious , far beyond ordinary criticism .
Sanders came in for the worst of it – he was asked how voters knew he wouldn ’ t bankrupt the country ( the US can ’ t go bankrupt ) and about whether he owed the American people an explanation on Medicare for All ’ s costs .
But the moderators @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over her uninspiring “ pragmatism ” and Pete Buttigieg over his inability to generate support among black voters .
Much of the debate was turned over to uneventful discussions about troop levels , impeachment , and trade deals .
Biden said he would not meet with Kim Jong-un without preconditions , putting him to the right of Trump on North Korean diplomacy .
Klobuchar pitched impeachment as a “ decency check ” for the country – which , in a proudly indecent country , is unlikely to excite too many voters .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will you pay for it ” debate , even though we have obvious answers to this question .
Buttigieg was asked why he didn ’ t believe in “ free college ” if he believed in free public high school , and replied that everyone is expected to finish high school .
This didn ’ t make much sense – we don ’ t expect everyone to use the public library , but we give it to everyone equally .
Unfortunately , the discussion didn ’ t get much further .
Ultimate takeaway @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but I guarantee he is smiling tonight .
• None Nathan Robinson is the editor of Current Affairs and a Guardian US columnist

Tuesday night’s Democratic debate was mostly “low-key” – a kinder description than “boring”. With the except of the moment everyone came to see, candidates largely repeated their standard talking points. I wouldn’t say that anybody won, except CNN and its advertisers.
We were all waiting to see what would happen between Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. Warren had recently alleged that Sanders told her privately that he didn’t think a woman could win the presidential election, a statement Sanders vehemently denied making. Would she renew her allegation? Would they argue about what was said?
Bernie received the first question on the topic. He once again issued an emphatic denial, and pointed out how absurd it would be for him to say such a thing, given that he asked Warren herself to run in 2016, and given that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. Then it was Warren’s turn. The moderator’s question presumed that Sanders wasn’t telling the truth (“What did you think when Senator Sanders told you a woman could not win the election?”) Warren accepted the characterization, saying she disagreed with Sanders’ opinion, but did not elaborate on what she was alleging Sanders to have said to her. Instead she gave a general pitch for the power of female candidates, and touted her own electability, saying she was the only candidate on stage to have beaten an incumbent Republican within the last 30 years. (The latter statement wasn’t true, and it led to the only direct Warren-Sanders confrontation of the night. Sanders responded that he had beaten an incumbent Republican – which he had, 29 years and two months ago.)
Joe Biden had the best night of anyone on the stage, even though he put in one of his worst performances
The moderators did not press Warren on what had transpired, or whether there could have been a misunderstanding. So we didn’t come away with any better sense of what was said in that meeting. What we do know is that both candidates have been hurt by this: many Sanders supporters now despise Warren for launching a damaging attack weeks before the Iowa caucus, and Warren’s supporters believe Sanders is a sexist. At the end of the debate, Sanders offered to shake Warren’s hand and Warren rebuffed him, suggesting that she does not intend to revive any “truce” between them.
That’s why Joe Biden had the best night of anyone on the stage, even though he put in one of his worst performances. Biden seemed lethargic and said very little that was memorable. But he did what he needed to do, which was escape completely unscathed. Bizarrely, even though Biden is the frontrunner, neither Warren nor Sanders launched a major attack on him. It has been strange to see how lightly the candidates have treated Biden given his appalling record and electoral weaknesses. He was the clear beneficiary of the tension between the two progressives, and the fallout from Warren’s attack on Sanders might well lead to Biden winning Iowa.
Amy Klobuchar and Tom Steyer will probably both be praised for their performances. Both were composed and articulate, though they mostly benefit from being given equal time to the race’s actual frontrunners. Klobuchar, as usual, attacked single-payer healthcare and free college as pipe dreams. Steyer gave an unexpectedly forceful attack on the private health insurance industry, backing up Warren and Sanders in making the case that corporate profiteers in healthcare are the problem.
But the prominence of Steyer and Klobuchar was a reminder of the absence of Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard. Both Yang and Gabbard have livened up these debates and provided useful alternative perspectives – Yang with his pitch for a universal basic income and Gabbard with a critique of militarism. It seems unjust that Steyer, a billionaire, can fund his way into these debates while the others are kept out. (Cory Booker, who just suspended his campaign, is also missed.)
The CNN moderators were vicious, far beyond ordinary criticism. Sanders came in for the worst of it – he was asked how voters knew he wouldn’t bankrupt the country (the US can’t go bankrupt) and about whether he owed the American people an explanation on Medicare for All’s costs. But the moderators aggressively questioned others, too – Klobuchar over her uninspiring “pragmatism” and Pete Buttigieg over his inability to generate support among black voters.
Much of the debate was turned over to uneventful discussions about troop levels, impeachment and trade deals. Biden said he would not meet with Kim Jong-un without preconditions, putting him to the right of Trump on North Korean diplomacy. Klobuchar pitched impeachment as a “decency check” for the country – which, in a proudly indecent country, is unlikely to excite too many voters. The healthcare section relitigated the tedious “how will you pay for it” debate, even though we have obvious answers to this question. Buttigieg was asked why he didn’t believe in “free college” if he believed in free public high school, and replied that everyone is expected to finish high school. This didn’t make much sense – we don’t expect everyone to use the public library, but we give it to everyone equally. Unfortunately, the discussion didn’t get much further.
Ultimate takeaway: Biden didn’t do well, but I guarantee he is smiling tonight.


theguardian--2020-01-15--The Democratic debate showed the race desperately needs a jolt | Richard Wolffe

Nevermind the Oscars or the Baftas .
There are few stages that look so white as a Democratic debate in Iowa in early 2020 .
It wasn ’ t just the recent departures of every leading candidate of color in this contest to unseat our orange president .
Somehow the makeup caked on the faces of the surviving contenders made them look even more white than the frozen cornfields they watch through the windows of their campaign buses all day .
Until one moment , after an hour of earnest discussion about national security , when the blood suddenly rushed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the face of it , Bernie ’ s face was burning from the much-anticipated discussion of a pre-election conversation with his former friend and current rival Elizabeth Warren .
Did he really say a woman couldn ’ t win an election ?
Did she really fib about what he ’ d said behind closed doors ?
For two candidates who like to talk about structural , radical change , this sounded like a good old-fashioned dispute about spilling beer in a crowded bar .
The beverage was just an excuse for a beating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different dispute – not about women , but about winning .
Specifically , whether he could beat an incumbent Republican .
And more specifically , whether he could add up .
“ Look at the men on this stage , ” Warren said .
“ Collectively , they have lost 10 elections .
The only people on this stage who have won every single election that they ’ ve been in are the women .
Amy and me .
And the only person on this stage who has beaten an incumbent Republican anytime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Until this point , Sanders had given a fine account of himself , denying any sexist sentiment , pledging his support for the ultimate nominee , and even praising Hillary Clinton for winning the popular vote .
Which hasn ’ t exactly been his most popular talking point for the last three years .
But that wasn ’ t enough for Sanders , who decided to dispute Warren ’ s real attack : that none of them had beaten a Republican for 30 years .
Sanders insisted he had , back in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ smiled and pretended to do the math .
Sanders grew flustered as it dawned on everyone that he thought 1990 must be more recent than three long decades .
His cheeks flushed brightly and he spluttered his way through an emphatically delivered diatribe about nothing in particular .
So much of Tuesday ’ s debate was a matter of time travel .
In the contest to fire a 73-year-old president , a 78-year-old socialist senator spent the first half hour of a TV debate arguing with a 77-year-old former vice-president about their respective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iraq 17 years ago .
There are voters preparing to caucus in Iowa who were not born when these old men were first arguing about weapons of mass destruction .
The ghosts of that time stalked the stage in Des Moines at the final debate before the fateful first votes in this election year .
The last time Democratic voters picked a nominee to run against a gun-slinging Republican president , they faced a stark choice between a leftist populist and a centrist snoozebag .
After dating Howard Dean , they married John @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Democratic voters of Iowa face a similar choice between the rabble-rousers and the comfy pair of slippers .
Just three weeks from the first votes of the 2020 cycle , the final debate revolved around four candidates vying for two slots : Elizabeth Warren versus Bernie Sanders , and Pete Buttigieg versus Joe Biden .
It ’ s good manners to point out that there were two other candidates on stage : an entirely respectable senator , Amy Klobuchar , and an entirely forgettable rich white guy , Tom Steyer .
Klobuchar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to face up to reality .
Steyer weirded out the nation by turning dramatically to look into the camera every time he piped up .
But with so little time left for Iowa to enjoy its brief moment of global importance , let ’ s not waste this blip in the historical record .
For the Iowa polls suggest we ’ re looking at a four-way race , bunched up in the high-teens or early-20s , depending on how many new voters the pollsters think will show up to caucus .
For most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hands were only too happy to look down on the chaos and lament the lack of credibility at a time when Tehran looks more restrained than Trump .
They didn ’ t even bother to point out when Sanders confused George W Bush and Donald Trump when he was talking about support for the Saudi bombing campaign in Yemen .
Back in 2004 , it was the capture of Saddam Hussein that marked the moment when Dean began his collapse and Kerry rose up from the depths of his dismal polling to take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden was a surrogate for Kerry , testifying to his friend ’ s national security experience and leadership skills .
Today , Biden ’ s strongest moments on stage were when he was silent .
His defense for his vote on the war in Iraq was that Barack Obama hired him .
His best argument for the boldness of his healthcare plan was that Obamacare was a big effing deal .
It is still true that the idea of Joe Biden is rather more impressive than the reality .
And much of that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ friend Barack .
This is a big moment for the tiny state of Iowa ( population : 3.2 million ) , so the final Iowa debate was held in a room that appeared no bigger than your average display of butter sculpture .
As the candidates scribbled their pre-debate notes in the minutes before the debate began , CNN ’ s pundits were close enough to the stage that they hushed themselves for fear of disturbing the candidate ’ s brainwaves .
But in just a few weeks , Iowans will do something @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than two of the Democrats on stage this week .
In the meantime , they and the rest of the nation will be consumed by the impeachment of a very stable genius .
Even more than an Elizabeth Warren debate trap , the trial will bring a rush of blood to this contest .
Judging from this final pre-Iowa debate , it sorely needs the defibrillator that Donald Trump represents .
Democrats are looking for a candidate to beat Trump even more than a candidate with the best plans for healthcare reform @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an Iraq-style quagmire , Iowa ’ s Democrats may start to look at this race anew .
The winner may well be the candidate who knows how to turn that moment of Trumpian triumph into a rallying cry for disappointed Democrats .

Nevermind the Oscars or the Baftas. There are few stages that look so white as a Democratic debate in Iowa in early 2020.
It wasn’t just the recent departures of every leading candidate of color in this contest to unseat our orange president.
Somehow the makeup caked on the faces of the surviving contenders made them look even more white than the frozen cornfields they watch through the windows of their campaign buses all day.
Until one moment, after an hour of earnest discussion about national security, when the blood suddenly rushed into Bernie Sanders’ cheeks.
On the face of it, Bernie’s face was burning from the much-anticipated discussion of a pre-election conversation with his former friend and current rival Elizabeth Warren. Did he really say a woman couldn’t win an election? Did she really fib about what he’d said behind closed doors?
For two candidates who like to talk about structural, radical change, this sounded like a good old-fashioned dispute about spilling beer in a crowded bar. The beverage was just an excuse for a beating.
Only Sanders got suckered into a different dispute – not about women, but about winning. Specifically, whether he could beat an incumbent Republican. And more specifically, whether he could add up.
“Look at the men on this stage,” Warren said. “Collectively, they have lost 10 elections. The only people on this stage who have won every single election that they’ve been in are the women. Amy and me. And the only person on this stage who has beaten an incumbent Republican anytime in the past 30 years is me.”
Until this point, Sanders had given a fine account of himself, denying any sexist sentiment, pledging his support for the ultimate nominee, and even praising Hillary Clinton for winning the popular vote. Which hasn’t exactly been his most popular talking point for the last three years.
But that wasn’t enough for Sanders, who decided to dispute Warren’s real attack: that none of them had beaten a Republican for 30 years. Sanders insisted he had, back in 1990, done just that.
Elizabeth Warren speaks with Bernie Sanders as billionaire activist Tom Steyer listens after the seventh Democratic 2020 presidential debate at Drake University in Des Moines.
Photograph: Shannon Stapleton/Reuters
Warren smiled and pretended to do the math. Sanders grew flustered as it dawned on everyone that he thought 1990 must be more recent than three long decades. His cheeks flushed brightly and he spluttered his way through an emphatically delivered diatribe about nothing in particular.
So much of Tuesday’s debate was a matter of time travel. In the contest to fire a 73-year-old president, a 78-year-old socialist senator spent the first half-hour of a TV debate arguing with a 77-year-old former vice-president about their respective decisions to vote on the war in Iraq 17 years ago.
There are voters preparing to caucus in Iowa who were not born when these old men were first arguing about weapons of mass destruction.
The ghosts of that time stalked the stage in Des Moines at the final debate before the fateful first votes in this election year.
The last time Democratic voters picked a nominee to run against a gun-slinging Republican president, they faced a stark choice between a leftist populist and a centrist snoozebag. After dating Howard Dean, they married John Kerry. Almost two decades later, the Democratic voters of Iowa face a similar choice between the rabble-rousers and the comfy pair of slippers.
Just three weeks from the first votes of the 2020 cycle, the final debate revolved around four candidates vying for two slots: Elizabeth Warren versus Bernie Sanders, and Pete Buttigieg versus Joe Biden.
It’s good manners to point out that there were two other candidates on stage: an entirely respectable senator, Amy Klobuchar, and an entirely forgettable rich white guy, Tom Steyer. Klobuchar had some fine moments urging the lefties to face up to reality. Steyer weirded out the nation by turning dramatically to look into the camera every time he piped up.
But with so little time left for Iowa to enjoy its brief moment of global importance, let’s not waste this blip in the historical record. For the Iowa polls suggest we’re looking at a four-way race, bunched up in the high teens or early 20s, depending on how many new voters the pollsters think will show up to caucus.
For most of the night, the steady establishment hands were only too happy to look down on the chaos and lament the lack of credibility at a time when Tehran looks more restrained than Trump. They didn’t even bother to point out when Sanders confused George W Bush and Donald Trump when he was talking about support for the Saudi bombing campaign in Yemen.
Back in the 2004 campaign, it was the capture of Saddam Hussein in December 2003 that marked the moment when Dean began his collapse and Kerry rose up from the depths of his dismal polling to take the nomination.
Judging from this final pre-Iowa debate, it sorely needs the defibrillator that Donald Trump represents
Back then, Joe Biden was a surrogate for Kerry, testifying to his friend’s national security experience and leadership skills. Today, Biden’s strongest moments on stage were when he was silent. His defense for his vote on the war in Iraq was that Barack Obama hired him. His best argument for the boldness of his healthcare plan was that Obamacare was a big effing deal.
It is still true that the idea of Joe Biden is rather more impressive than the reality. And much of that notional Biden is built around his old friend Barack.
This is a big moment for the tiny state of Iowa (population: 3.2 million), so the final Iowa debate was held in a room that appeared no bigger than your average display of butter sculpture. As the candidates scribbled their pre-debate notes in the minutes before the debate began, CNN’s pundits were close enough to the stage that they hushed themselves for fear of disturbing the candidate’s brainwaves.
But in just a few weeks, Iowans will do something very big: award winning tickets to no more than two of the Democrats on stage this week.
In the meantime, they and the rest of the nation will be consumed by the impeachment of a very stable genius.
Even more than an Elizabeth Warren debate trap, the trial will bring a rush of blood to this contest. Judging from this final pre-Iowa debate, it sorely needs the defibrillator that Donald Trump represents. Democrats are looking for a candidate to beat Trump even more than a candidate with the best plans for healthcare reform.
As the impeachment trial sinks into an Iraq-style quagmire, Iowa’s Democrats may start to look at this race anew. The winner may well be the candidate who knows how to turn that moment of Trumpian triumph into a rallying cry for disappointed Democrats.


theguardian--2020-01-15--Trump impeachment: House transfers articles to Senate – live

The standing committees , press gallery staff , Capitol Police , sergeant-at-arms and Senate Rules Committee have been in negotiations @ @ @ @ @ for an eventual Senate trial .
In recent weeks , Capitol Police personnel have come @ @ @ @ @ Gallery with tape measures in preparation for the installation of magnetometers and possibly removing reporter @ @ @ @ @ lines of reporters waiting to enter the chamber one by one , long before a @ @ @ @ @ The planned restriction on the press will surpass those in place for the Clinton impeachment @ @ @ @ @ charged confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh , when hundreds of protesters led @ @ @ @ @ even though none of the protesters were credentialed media .

Maanvi Singh in San Francisco (now) and Amanda Holpuch (earlier)

16 Jan 2020 01.33 GMT CNN releases audio of the testy post-debate exchange between Warren and Sanders. After the Democratic debate ended yesterday, Bernie Sanders outstretched his hand. Elizabeth Warren snatched hers away, and the two progressive candidates, who recently broke an apparent agreement not to turn negative against each other, engaged in what appeared to be a testy exchange. CNN’s Anderson Cooper released audio of the conversation. “I think you called me a liar on national TV” Warren said to Sanders.
“Let’s not do it right now,” Sanders responded. “You called me a liar”. Meanwhile, Tom Steyer caught awkwardly between the quarreling progressives, said: “I don’t want to get int the middle... I just wanted to say ‘Hi,’ Bernie.” “Yeah, ok. Good,” Sanders said.
Updated at 01.39 GMT
16 Jan 2020 00.22 GMT Lev Parnas: “President Trump knew exactly what was going on.” Lev Parnas to @maddow: "President Trump knew exactly what was going on. He was aware of all my movements. I wouldn't do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani, or the President."https://t.co/8J1UBFeIbs — Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) January 16, 2020 Parnas, the Rudy Giuliani associate who has been implicated in an alleged scheme to pressure the Ukrainian government to dig up dirt on Joe Biden and his son, sat down with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow for an interview.
In a preview of the interview, which will air at 9pm Eastern time, Parnas said that Trump “was aware of all my movements. I wouldn’t do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani, or the president.” Pages of text messages, notes and other documents that House investigators released yesterday show that Parnas and his associates may have been carrying out surveillance of the US ambassador to Ukraine. One of the released documents was a letter that Giuliani wrote, requesting a Volodymyr Zelenskiy, then the president-elect of Ukraine, with Trump’s “knowledge and consent”.
Updated at 01.15 GMT
16 Jan 2020 00.07 GMT The Senate is prepared to enforce strict measures that would limit journalists’ access during the impeachment trial. According to Roll Call:
The standing committees, press gallery staff, Capitol Police, sergeant-at-arms and Senate Rules Committee have been in negotiations for months about enhanced security for an eventual Senate trial. In recent weeks, Capitol Police personnel have come to the Senate Daily Press Gallery with tape measures in preparation for the installation of magnetometers and possibly removing reporter workspaces to make room for lines of reporters waiting to enter the chamber one by one, long before a final decision was made... The planned restriction on the press will surpass those in place for the Clinton impeachment trial and even the highly charged confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, when hundreds of protesters led to daily media crackdowns — even though none of the protesters were credentialed media. But the move has drawn criticism from both Democrats and Republicans in the Senate. “The press will play a critical role in making sure the American public are able to witness the Senate fulfill its Constitutional obligation,” said Senator Bob Casey, a Democrat representing Pennsylvania. “Let them do their jobs as they do every day with the same level of access to lawmakers.” “U.S. senators are grown, women and grown men. If they don’t want to make a comment, they know how to say ‘no comment,’” John Kennedy, a Republican Senator from Louisiana told Politico. “We aren’t children.”
Updated at 00.08 GMT
15 Jan 2020 23.14 GMT Donald Trump’s supporters have taken issue with Nancy Pelosi’s choice to use commemorative pens to sign the resolution to transfer articles of impeachment to the Senate, saying it undercuts her insistence that impeachment is a solemn undertaking. No surprise...Speaker Pelosi just held a celebratory signing ceremony handing out souvenir impeachment pens.
The truth comes out.
This isn't "somber" or "serious" for @HouseDemocrats. This has been partisan since day one. pic.twitter.com/E07UFIXNgr — House Republicans (@HouseGOP) January 15, 2020 But it’s worth noting that Trump is himself a fan of commemorative pens. He handed out his own souvenir pens after signing the China trade deal today. Donald Trump, like many presidents before him, gives out souvenir pens in the Oval Office when he signs things. https://t.co/FDGkGi6S1p — Hunter Walker (@hunterw) January 15, 2020
15 Jan 2020 22.49 GMT McConnell: The trial will commence Tuesday Senate leader Mitch McConnell announced that the Senate will exhibit the articles tomorrow at noon, to read the articles on the Senate floor. At 2 pm, chief justice John Roberts will arrive in the Senate and be sworn in. But the trial will begin in earnest on Tuesday, McConnell, announced. In his message, McConnell asked his fellow senators to rise above partisanship. “This is a difficult time for our country—but this is precisely the kind of time for which the framers created the Senate. I’m confident this body can rise above short-termism and factional fever, and serve the long-term best interests of our nation,” he said.
Updated at 23.24 GMT
15 Jan 2020 22.33 GMT Why does Pelosi have so many pens? It’s a laborious process because she’s using multiple pens.
“It makes for a funny signature,” she jokes. https://t.co/szLoKhgyg8 — Lauren Gambino (@laurenegambino) January 15, 2020 The House speaker signed the resolution using not just one pen, but trays full of them. They’re commemorative pens, emblazoned with her signature. After painstakingly signing the document using each of the pens, Pelosi handed them to her impeachment managers and key committee members as souvenirs. Though critics are questioning Pelosi’s choice to use souvenir pens, they’re not entirely unexpected. Souvenir pens were used during Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial as well. Back then, Senators who signed an oath book kept their pens even though they were printed with a misspelling: “Untied States Senator”.
Updated at 22.43 GMT
15 Jan 2020 22.28 GMT Nancy Pelosi signs resolution to transfer the impeachment articles to the Senate Pelosi spoke before signing the resolution to transmit the two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump to the Senate for trial. Photograph: Susan Walsh/AP “Today, we will make history,” Pelosi said, speaking at the engrossment ceremony on Capitol Hill. “When the managers walk down the hall, we will cross a threshold in history. Delivering articles of impeachment against the president of the United States for abuse of power and obstruction of the House.”
The articles of impeachment. Photograph: Leah Millis/Reuters And very soon, “as soon as tomorrow”, the Senators will take an oath to deliver impartial justice in the trial of Donald Trump, the Speaker said.
15 Jan 2020 21.30 GMT The press is gathering ahead of the Democrats planned delivery of the articles of impeachment to the Senate. However, it sounds like the Republicans don’t actually plan on accepting them tonight. Senate leaders have said they will tell the House members to return tomorrow to present the articles if they deliver them at 5pm ET as planned, according to CNN. Democrats have said they intend to stick with the 5pm plan. We will see how this all shakes out in the next hour. Cameras starting to gather to document procession of House clerk to Senate to “exhibit” the articles of impeachment and formally notify the Senate that managers have been appointed
This is the first of many ceremonial steps we’ll witness over next few days as we head to trial pic.twitter.com/SaltBIqTcK — Lindsay Wise (@lindsaywise) January 15, 2020
15 Jan 2020 21.08 GMT A Michigan state senator, who has suggested he could run for governor, has apologized after telling a reporter that a group of boys could have “a lot of fun” with her. State senator Peter Lucido, a Republican, told the reporter, Allison Donahue, he could speak to her for a story after he was done honoring a group of students from an all-boys school who were standing nearby.
“What was meant to be an opportunity for Lucido to respond to the report, turned into him making comments that objectified and humiliated me in front of a group of young boys,” Donahue said in a first-person account of the experience:
“You should hang around! You could have a lot of fun with these boys, or they could have a lot of fun with you.” The teenagers burst into an Old Boys’ Network-type of laughter, and I walked away knowing that I had been the punchline of their “locker room” talk. Except it wasn’t the locker room; it was the Senate chamber. And this isn’t high school. It’s my career. After Lucido initially told the Detroit Free Press that he did not feel he owed the reporter an apology and saying he felt the quotes were taken out of context and had been blown out of proportion, he apologized. It was not immediately clear if he apologized directly to Donahue, the AP reported. “I apologize for the misunderstanding yesterday and for offending Allison Donahue,” Lucido said.
15 Jan 2020 20.51 GMT Photos Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, accompanied by House Judiciary committee chairman Rep Jerrold Nadler, left, and House Intelligence committee chairman Adam Schiff, speaks during a news conference to announce impeachment managers Photograph: José Luis Magaña/AP US senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican, joined by fellow Republican leaders talk to the press after it was announced earlier that the House Democrats plan to vote Wednesday to send two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump to the Senate Photograph: UPI/Barcroft Media Anti-Trump protestors take a break on the Senate steps on Capitol Hill in Washington, where the Senate is awaiting the two articles of impeachment Photograph: Samuel Corum/EPA


theguardian--2020-01-15--Progressives call for Warren-Sanders truce, fearing feud could lift centrists

When Senator Elizabeth Warren walked up to Senator Bernie Sanders after Tuesday night ’ s Democratic debate , refused to shake his hand and exchanged only a few words with her rival 2020 presidential candidate , it seemed like the progressive wing of the Democratic party would sink into more infighting .
But a day later , supporters of both candidates and neutral liberal figures were keen to find some kind of off-ramp .
The fear is that the longer the row goes between the two candidates , the higher the chances that neither of them will benefit and instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s nomination for the White House will open up for a more centrist candidate like the former vice-president Joe Biden or the former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg .
“ I think that what is most constructive is that progressives across this country unite in fighting against the corporate wing rather than fighting against each other , ” said Charles Chamberlain , the executive director of the liberal political action committee Democracy for America .
“ There is way more that unites these candidates than divides them .
Only Elizabeth Warren and Bernie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a Green New Deal .
They ’ re the ones that are talking about closing the gap between the working class and the millionaire class .
These are the only two candidates that are entirely funded by small-dollar contributions instead of big money and private one-on-one fundraisers , ” he added .
The feud happened quickly .
Last week Warren and Sanders were still acting on a sort of civil detente the two had followed for most of the cycle , refraining from attacking each other .
But over the weekend Politico @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Sanders campaign had been circulating to organizers urging them to say that Warren ’ s supporters were really only wealthy Democrats and she would not bring in new voters .
Then another report , from CNN , came out saying that during the 2018 meeting in which Sanders and Warren discussed their interest in running for president in 2020 , Sanders said that a woman couldn ’ t win .
Sanders has repeatedly denied saying that , including when asked about it during the debate .
Warren , also during the debate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Then , at the end of the debate , Warren approached Sanders and as he outstretched his hand , she didn ’ t shake it ; she started talking and Sanders shook his head .
After a few more words , the two walked away from each other .
Neither campaign has offered more information on what was said .
Immediately after the debate , Sanders ’ senior adviser Jeff Weaver told reporters that he did not know more about what was said but that the two senators remained friends .
The exchange @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On Wednesday , two hashtags were trending on Twitter : # neverwarren and # warrenisasnake .
The Nebraska Democratic party chairwoman , Jane Kleeb , said fighting between Warren supporters and Sanders supporters was unhelpful .
“ We need them – the moderate and conservative wing – represented as well .
We often say we need both wings to fly , especially going against Trump .
So I think all of the hate that I ’ m seeing on both sides , both Warren and Bernie supporters attacking each other , is some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve seen this election cycle .
None of us were in the room , ” she said .
Kleeb added : “ I ’ m sure it was a contentious meeting .
But for us to throw stones at each other now weeks before the Iowa caucus is the stupidest move progressives can have because we are strong right now in number.
” Chamberlain recalled that in 2004 , just before the Iowa Democratic caucuses , the then Vermont governor , Howard Dean , and then House Democratic leader , Dick Gephardt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That paved a way for the then senator John Kerry to win the caucuses and eventually become the Democratic nominee .
Kerry went on to lose the election to George W Bush , decisively .
“ That ’ s the risk , that ’ s what ’ s at stake here , ” Chamberlain said .
“ So it ’ s absolutely critically important that at the end of the day progressives need to be united in supporting the progressive candidate against the corporate wing .
Because that ’ s what it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump in November .
”

When Senator Elizabeth Warren walked up to Senator Bernie Sanders after Tuesday night’s Democratic debate, refused to shake his hand and exchanged only a few words with her rival 2020 presidential candidate, it seemed like the progressive wing of the Democratic party would sink into more infighting.
But a day later, supporters of both candidates and neutral liberal figures were keen to find some kind of off-ramp.
The fear is that the longer the row goes between the two candidates, the higher the chances that neither of them will benefit and instead a larger pathway to the party’s nomination for the White House will open up for a more centrist candidate like the former vice-president Joe Biden or the former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg.
“I think that what is most constructive is that progressives across this country unite in fighting against the corporate wing rather than fighting against each other,” said Charles Chamberlain, the executive director of the liberal political action committee Democracy for America.
“There is way more that unites these candidates than divides them. Only Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are talking about Medicare for All, a Green New Deal. They’re the ones that are talking about closing the gap between the working class and the millionaire class. These are the only two candidates that are entirely funded by small-dollar contributions instead of big money and private one-on-one fundraisers,” he added.
The feud happened quickly. Last week Warren and Sanders were still acting on a sort of civil detente the two had followed for most of the cycle, refraining from attacking each other. But over the weekend Politico reported on a set of talking points the Sanders campaign had been circulating to organizers urging them to say that Warren’s supporters were really only wealthy Democrats and she would not bring in new voters.
Then another report, from CNN, came out saying that during the 2018 meeting in which Sanders and Warren discussed their interest in running for president in 2020, Sanders said that a woman couldn’t win.
Sanders has repeatedly denied saying that, including when asked about it during the debate. Warren, also during the debate, maintained Sanders did say it. Then, at the end of the debate, Warren approached Sanders and as he outstretched his hand, she didn’t shake it; she started talking and Sanders shook his head. After a few more words, the two walked away from each other.
Neither campaign has offered more information on what was said. Immediately after the debate, Sanders’ senior adviser Jeff Weaver told reporters that he did not know more about what was said but that the two senators remained friends. The exchange did not look friendly, though.
On Wednesday, two hashtags were trending on Twitter: #neverwarren and #warrenisasnake.
Anyone using #NeverWarren is clearly overcome with white privilege and is not and has not been effected by this monstrous administration. We shouldn't be saying "NEVER" about anyone EXCEPT #Trump. Get your 'ish together. #WokeAF — DanielleMoodie-Mills (@DeeTwoCents) January 15, 2020
Yep, let's be clear: if you're tweeting in support of this ludicrous #NeverWarren hashtag, you're not only dumb but you're also telling the world that you're ok with kids in cages and bans on Muslims. https://t.co/VZgA01hzIp — Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) January 15, 2020
If you wanna sell Bernie, sell his virtues and well. But this thread begins on a morning when #NeverWarren is trending and I’d say the exact same thing if #NeveBernie was trending. Fuck that rank stupidity. And fuck you for deflecting straight-up criticism of that stupidity. https://t.co/1B2396yzHy — David Simon (@AoDespair) January 15, 2020
I'll say it again.
I'll vote for whoever the Dem nominee is.
I think most progressives/liberals feel that way—with the exception of one candidates' base.
That's a problem.
People tweeting #Never Warren are in a cult too, just with a different messiah.https://t.co/ZzMIpmT5GV — John Pavlovitz (@johnpavlovitz) January 15, 2020
The Nebraska Democratic party chairwoman, Jane Kleeb, said fighting between Warren supporters and Sanders supporters was unhelpful.
“We need them – the moderate and conservative wing – represented as well. We often say we need both wings to fly, especially going against Trump. So I think all of the hate that I’m seeing on both sides, both Warren and Bernie supporters attacking each other, is some of the most ridiculous things that I’ve seen this election cycle. None of us were in the room,” she said.
Kleeb added: “I’m sure it was a contentious meeting. But for us to throw stones at each other now weeks before the Iowa caucus is the stupidest move progressives can have because we are strong right now in number.”
Chamberlain recalled that in 2004, just before the Iowa Democratic caucuses, the then Vermont governor, Howard Dean, and then House Democratic leader, Dick Gephardt, were in a heated feud. That paved a way for the then senator John Kerry to win the caucuses and eventually become the Democratic nominee. Kerry went on to lose the election to George W Bush, decisively.
“That’s the risk, that’s what’s at stake here,” Chamberlain said. “So it’s absolutely critically important that at the end of the day progressives need to be united in supporting the progressive candidate against the corporate wing. Because that’s what it’s going to take to defeat Donald Trump in November.”