Drum roll for our women Democrats- let them be "them"

Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris should not ‘simmer down’ one iota

We don’t need anyone ‘mansplaining’ on the types of Democrats who should run for office- opinion echo published in the Oakland California newspaper the East Bay Times. 

Senator from California, Kamala Harris, addressed the media January, 21 2019, at Howard University in Washington, DC, after announcing earlier in the day that she is seeking to become the first African American woman to hold the office of US president, joining an already-crowded field of Democrats lining up to take on (and get rid of....) Donald Trump. 

Kamala Harris joins Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Hawaii congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and former housing secretary Julian Castro, among others, either in the race or exploring a run for the 2020 Democratic nomination. Nearly 22 months before the 2020 election, the battle for the White House is already firming up, as Americans begin to assess who might be the opposition party nominee to challenge Trump for control of the White House. 

Harris made the announcement on the national holiday honoring civil rights movement icon Martin Luther King Jr., whom she said her mother met. 

Letter writer references: Re: “Howard Schultz should be recruited to run as a Dem,” “Perhaps Schultz can show Democrats the way back,” “Wealthy need more say in allocating their tax dollars” (Letters to the editor, Feb 5):

Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen recently “mansplained” on the kind of people the Democrats should run for office and the kind of policies we should endorse (“Dems mad at Schultz for more than risking Trump’s reelection,” Eastbaytimes.com, Feb. 3). He advised Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren to “simmer down a bit,” and why taxing wealthy people is wrong.

Sorry, Marc, you are a Republican apologist, and you have no right to opine on the direction the Democratic Party should take.

We don’t need oligarchs to determine how much philanthropy they want to give us, we need just taxation to reverse the growing inequity caused by decreasing tax rates over the last 40 years, and a democratic decision-making process on how to spend our national wealth.

I don’t expect Marc Thiessen or Howard Schultz or any other billionaire to like it, and I don’t want Warren or Harris to simmer down one iota.    — Deborah Bayer, Richmond

Hillary Clinton - progressive leadership experience and no new news

NewsMax is sending Hillary Clinton an overt warning about what to expect if she decides to run for President.  Of course, the hate and negativity from right wing media will begin the moment Mrs. Clinton announces (in fact, it's already positioned ready to go).  Nevertheless, Mrs. Clinton is the hope for progressives. Yet, there's no "new news" in Mrs. Clinton's biography; so whatever horribles right wing invents will be old news.  What Mrs. Clinton needs to do is to focus on the future.
Issues for the future:
1.  Liveable wages
2.  Affordable, quality and accessible health care
3.  Job security
4.  Economic growth through government investment in research and investment in advancing technologies.
5.  Protection of earned benefits like Social Security, Medicare, Veterans pensions, benefits and eduction.  
6.  Support for sciences over myths - impact of global warming!
7.  Energy policy
8.  Strong national defense
9.  Path to citizenship for all legal immigrants
10.  Bi-partisanship in Congress

Meanwhile, be prepared and batten down the hatches against right wing hate.  From NewsMax:

Albert R. Hunt: 
Clinton Should Be Ready for Predictable Attacks

Democrats' drubbing in the midterm elections simplified one of Hillary Clinton's challenges: Now she can strike some distance from President Barack Obama. Everybody else is doing it.

The former secretary of state, who is almost certain to run for president, has the luxury of time to elaborate her strategy. 

Nevertheless, there will be matters beyond her control: relentless attacks, even including some from the left.

But it's mainly the political right and Republicans who will work tirelessly to dig up dirt on the expected 2016 Democratic nominee. For all the talk of empowered congressional Republicans investigating every facet of the Obama administration, they won't miss any opportunity to look into Clinton.

She's tough, resilient, and likely to be prepared for this predictable onslaught. More instructive is whether she's prepared for matters within her control. These include defining her candidacy and possible presidency. It won't be sufficient to run on competence, breadth of experience and reminders that, by the way, my husband's White House years were the salad days for the U.S. economy.  

Her foreign policy credentials are fodder for champions and critics alike. But there is no domestic centerpiece. She needs an innovative, even bold approach -- this is a cautious politician -- to dealing with middle-class economic stagnation and income inequality.

That requires choices and trade-offs. She has a good and lucrative association with Goldman Sachs. She also praises the liberal Massachusetts Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren: 

"I love watching Elizabeth give it to those who deserve to get it," she said last month at a campaign rally in Massachusetts. One of the institutions Warren likes to "give it to" is Goldman Sachs.

Can Clinton put together an efficient, functioning campaign? In the 2007-2008 cycle, the Clinton camp was rife with infighting, warring clans as the many elements of Clintonland weighed in, sometimes not helpfully. Especially controversial was top strategist Mark Penn, who had to step down late in the campaign when it was disclosed he was simultaneously working for the government of Colombia.

It's expected that former President Bill Clinton's chief of staff, John Podesta, will assume the role of chief executive in the 2016 campaign. It would be a widely praised selection. He is an adult who, as a strategist, understands the nexus of politics and policy as well as anyone since Jim Baker, the legendary Republican who served in the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations.

Other names being considered for top positions include Democratic operatives and Clinton campaign alumni such as Robby Mook, who won every primary he directed for her in 2008, and Guy Cecil, who has run the Democrats' national Senate campaign committee. 

There also are prominent women such as Stephanie Schriock, who has managed successful Senate candidates and now runs Emily's List, which tries to elect pro-choice Democratic women to political office. (And Penn, who was on the outs, is reportedly talking to the Clintons.)

Clinton also is reaching out for advice outside her political circle, most notably from David Plouffe, who ran Obama's presidential campaigns.

The big question is whether she will assemble a coherent team that holds at bay some of the more disruptive elements of the far-reaching Clinton constellation.
 

Will there be a Bill problem? The former president's indelicate comments caused her some anxiety in 2008. He was rusty then, having been out of the campaigning limelight for a while. In 2012 and during this year's midterm congressional elections, he's shown he's back: easily America's best stump campaigner as well as the most popular politician.

Like everyone else, she pales next to him on the campaign trail. He also possesses superb political instincts; she doesn't and is more methodical. Unfavorable comparisons will be made; she can't let that get to her.

The ex-secretary of state's book and promotional tour earlier this year fell flat. Yet she won raves for her campaign appearances this autumn.

In modern American politics, there has never been such a prohibitive front-runner who wasn't the incumbent president. No one, in either party, can boast of such odds of winning. Yet Clinton's path will be full of unforeseen changes, and more than a few ugly moments.

How she prepares in the next few months may well determine how she weathers the storms.