Michigan will replace Iowa as the first primary contest for Dems

[Ferguson97]

https://twitter.com/jmart/status/1598407602483986458

[Ferguson97]

Michigan is a Sanders '16 state and was never going to be allowed to go first.

This is a very weird way to look at it considering Biden won it by an even bigger margin in 2020.

[Ferguson97]

SC first and GA also in the first 4? It's pretty obvious they want the establishment candidate to win.

If by "establishment" you mean "candidate who can actually appeal to Black voters" then sure.

[Ferguson97]

Dean was one of the best DNC heads. Obama replacing him with Kaine was one of his biggest mistakes.

Yeah, right. Howard Dean proclaimed, at a campaign event in 2004, that .... "The Supreme Court is more conservative now than it has been at any time in the last 150 years."
That's precisely the kind of message that the Dems should be spreading right now. Right.

Considering that the supreme court overturning Roe is what won Democrats the midterms, yes, it is the kind of message they should be spreading.

[Ferguson97]

Dean was one of the best DNC heads. Obama replacing him with Kaine was one of his biggest mistakes.

Yeah, right. Howard Dean proclaimed, at a campaign event in 2004, that .... "The Supreme Court is more conservative now than it has been at any time in the last 150 years."
That's precisely the kind of message that the Dems should be spreading right now. Right.

Considering that the supreme court overturning Roe is what won Democrats the midterms, yes, it is the kind of message they should be spreading.

Because the SCOTUS overturned ONE popular precedent, it is MORE CONSERVATIVE now than at any time in the last 170 years?!?! The Court is more conservative now than when it struck down minimum wage laws, than when it struck down price-control laws, and than when it declared that business owners have a constitutional right to prevent their employees from joining labor unions?

IF the SCOTUS, in recent times, were to strike down the 1964 Civil Rights Act, if it revives laissez-faire economics doctrine as if that's required by the Constitution, and if it strikes down Social Security, Medicare, and virtually all of the rest of the modern welfare state enacted by the federal government in the last 90 years, then you might plausibly get away with saying that the SCOTUS is, now, MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN AT ANY TIME IN THE LAST 170 YEARS, but until then, if you try to say that Howard Dean was accurate with what he said 18 years ago, you only make it perfectly clear that you will say any FALSE thing you feel like if that FALSE statement happens to persuade enough low-information voters to vote for your party that you win. But if so, do not claim that your party is more truthful than the Republicans.

So are you arguing that it's bad messaging, or are you arguing that it's inaccurate? Because at first you seemed to be arguing that it was bad messaging, but when I provided an example showing that your claim was inaccurate, you switched to making an argument that the claim was inaccurate.

Stick to one argument, Mark.

[Ferguson97]

Inaccurate messages are one of the worst kinds of messaging, so there's nothing inconsistent.

This is simply not true. Inaccurate messaging wins elections all the time.