From Real Clear Politics, here are today’s poll numbers:
The conventional wisdom among pundits seems to be that the Q poll on Sanders-Clinton is an outlier since Clinton has held a slim but steady lead in other recent polls. I think Hillz wins in a squeaker (probably just jinxed her) and Trump soundly thrashes Cruz & Co. But who knows?
Sad internet paeans to the deeper meaning of the Sanders campaign are already appearing on lefty blogs — way prematurely, IMO (I remember reading similar eulogies when Obama lost in New Hampshire). Here’s a line from a tribute to the netroots published by Chris Bowers on Daily Kos:
But no matter the outcome in Iowa, there is something that the Sanders campaign has already proven, and it is something that every single Democrat in the country needs to pay attention to and take to heart.
The lesson is this: A more progressive America is possible than you believe. And not just in some hypothetical future with demographics and legislative maps very different than those of the present day. A more progressive America than you believe is possible than you believe right now.
Emphasis his. That last line left me scratching my noggin for a moment, sort of like the line from Bilbo Baggins’ farewell speech at the Party Tree: “I don’t know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.”
Okay then. Any predictions?
schrodinger's cat
Can anyone tell me how the caucus works? How are delegates apportioned?
Geeno
I have to agree with you.
Hillary in a close one, say +5% on delegate count
Trump domination
@schrodinger’s cat: That I’m afraid is in the realm of quantum theory and way over my humble head
Ruckus
I give it to Clinton. And tDump.
Clinton has had the strongest numbers for a long time and while the hate for her is palpable, it also is not that strong on the D side. It does exist that’s for sure, that decades of right wing/media bullshit does work it’s magic and doubt is easy, checking out the bullshit is harder.
Most people take the easy way out, especially if it is rolled out right in front of them.
Cacti
I’d say Clinton by about +5% and Cruz by 2-3 on the R side.
Interestingly, FiveThirtyEight has Cruz at 51% likelihood of winning Iowa vs. 29% for Trump in their polls plus analysis. I think their reasoning is mostly based on Trump depending heavily on first time caucus goers or those who don’t usually participate.
JCJ
I predict the citizens of the Hawkeye State will be glad when this is all over. As a college basketball fan I will be glad to see Iowa play on the B1G Ten Network without all those ads. Bring on the seed and fertilizer commercials!
ruemara
I predict people continue to be wrong. Considering the Sanders camp has been downgrading expectations and talking about conspiracies by Clinton to steal win by “packing the caucus(?)”, their internal polling may not show the levels of momentum their supporters feel is there.
LanceThruster
My hope for Bernie’s fate is like that of sports junkies and their favorite franchise…except that this actually matters in the bigger scheme of things.
JPL
@Cacti: I just checked and they have Trump 46% and Cruz 39%
According to our latest polls-plus forecast, Donald Trump has a 46% chance of winning the Iowa caucuses.
Ken
@JCJ: And farm equipment and implements!
catclub
Various candidates turn invisible after Iowa.
Others pop up in New Hampshire, pretending they were there all along.
Irony Abounds
I think Clinton and Sanders are within 3% of each other, if I had to pick I’d say HRC will win. Rubio will be the biggest surprise of the night on the GOP side. He won’t win but he will be high enough (within 5 or so points of the winner, most likely Trump) that he will be the undisputed establishment candidate and get some momentum into NH, where he will finish a strong 2nd to Trump. Go to the bank on it…unless I’m wrong, which is entirely possible.
DCF
‘You Got To Dance With Them What Brung You.’ – Molly Ivins
Hillary Clinton Made More in 12 Speeches to Big Banks Than Most of Us Earn in a Lifetime
https://theintercept.com/2016/01/08/hillary-clinton-earned-more-from-12-speeches-to-big-banks-than-most-americans-earn-in-their-lifetime/
Cacti
@JPL:
Would you happen to have a link for that? I can’t seem to find it.
Elizabelle
@Cacti: I wonder if that heavy-handed mailer by Cruz will knock some points off his totals.
This Cruz mailer sent this voter into the Rubio camp.
Irony Abounds
@Cacti: I know Iowa’s evangelicals are just plain stupid, but I don’t think anyone really likes Ted Cruz and IMHO his support has been slipping for the past week or so and I think Trump, Cruz and Rubio will all finish within 5 or 6 % of each other, and it wouldn’t shock me if Rubio came in second. Of course, it wouldn’t shock me if I don’t have a clue. I have trouble understanding the general species of Republican, let alone the Iowa sub-species.
Cacti
@DCF:
Is GG bitter that he couldn’t get his own billionaire sugar daddy to loosen up the purse strings a bit more?
dlw32
@schrodinger’s cat: The delegates are proportionally distributed in the first several primaries. So if the Hillary/Bernie are 60/40, then Hillary would get 60% of them and Bernie would get 40%..
Except that there are also super-delegates who don’t get voted for… the amount to about 20% of total you need to get the nomination. These are the party movers and shakers. Back in Nov, I saw a graphic that Hillary had a lock on half the super delegates.
Same is true on the GOP side.
Brachiator
Nope. I want to see what happens, and how the candidates react and adjust their campaigns, based on the results.
And is there still a chance that the GOP results could be dragged out for weeks?
The post caucus interviews might be interesting, depending on who’s up and who’s down.
And God have mercy on us all if Trump does spectacularly well.
El Caganer
@DCF: Hey, good for her. Sweet gig if you can get it.
JPL
@Cacti: Nate Silver
smintheus
NH voters frequently reject whatever candidate Iowa has just gone for. That’s partly because Iowa voters are far out there, esp. on the Republican side, and partly because some NH voters may feel that just falling in line behind Iowa’s choice makes their primary a mere footnote.
If Hillary wins in Iowa, she almost certain to lose in NH, and there’s a decent chance that a Trump victory in Iowa would make a defeat in NH more likely.
Emerald
Clinton by more than anyone thinks. She hired the best caucus people in the state months ago. She has a fantastic ground organization. According to the Selzer poll her supporters are more committed and more enthusiastic than Sanders. She and her people are almost fanatically determined that what happened in 2008 will not happen again. She wants to shut Sanders down.
Plus, Sanders has some serious problems. Much of his support comes from Independents, who are more likely to go the Republican caucuses (and yes, many of them will vote for Trump). The students are not on vacation they way they were in 2008; they’re in class. That means that the out-of-state students won’t be home to vote. Also: big storm predicted for tomorrow, so his students are likely to stay in their college towns instead of spreading the vote out they way he needs to have it. There’s some evidence that his ground game isn’t that good, and that his people don’t really understand the intricacies of the caucus process, according to Al Giordano (who knows his stuff). Plus, the Selzer poll has turnout predictions of new caucus goers. In 2008 newbies were over 50%. This time they’re something like 38%. There also has not been a major surge in new voter registrations.
Judging from the whining coming from the Sanders camp today, they know it.
Cacti
@Irony Abounds:
Cruz is my horse because Iowa GOPers tend to have a soft spot for the religiously insane. In 1988, Pat Robertson finished ahead of George H.W. Bush there and second to Bob Dole.
Hildebrand
My guess is that the Clinton folks will be happy with any victory, but something north of 5% would make them do a little happy dance. They need a win to give them something tangible to build on – and to shake off their creeping sense of deja vu.
On the Republican side – whoever wins tonight will not get the nomination. It is just the way of things. So let it be written, so let it be done.
Roger Moore
@dlw32:
I don’t think that’s quite true. As I understand it, there are superdelegates on the Republican side (though they’re called something different) but they make up a substantially smaller part of the overall delegate count.
Cacti
@JPL:
Weird. I got the 46% Trump, and then it switched to the 51% Cruz. Technical difficulties?
Elizabelle
WaPost: Dear Trump supporters: Hear me out before you vote. Yours, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Your candidate isn’t who you think he is.
chopper
jesus, that sounds like it came out of a liberal george W.
scav
I somehow think that that both the Trump and Saunders popularity shouldn’t be read simply as the popularity of the positions they espouse. They’re two flavors of a Plague on Both Your Houses vis-a-vis the main parities. There is actual signal on positions in there and the signal need not be the same for both individuals, but it’s muddied by general crankiness. (I hope there’s more of the inner Saunders than the inner Trump in people, but keep being surprised on the downside.) So, maybe results depends on how much crankiness works as a snowplow or exhausts itself by strongly voiced opinions on the telephone. Class Four complexity. Which is probably simpler than the parsing of that last bolded sentence.
Iowa Old Lady
I predict Clinton and Trump but we’ll see. I’ll report on my caucus this evening when I get back.
Mnemosyne
Honestly, I think the next few primaries are going to be a good indication of whether or not Democrats are willing to get up off their butts and caucus/vote or if it’s all a bunch of internet noise. I’m hoping for the Democratic turnout overall to be higher than the Republican turnout overall regardless of who wins.
DCF
@El Caganer:
Sweet Baby Jeebus…a swing (and a MISS!)….
Here’s a clue: READ Molly Ivins….
chopper
man, if clinton wins the kos kids are gonna have to be put on suicide watch.
Mustang Bobby
I think Clinton wins in a squeaker and Trump in a fairly close call, followed by Cruz and Marco, which will not be enough to get the little twerp (Rubio) to quit. Aloha Santorum, Huckabee, Fiorina, and Carson, but it will take until South Carolina to get Jeb out, at which time he’ll have to explain to Poppy and Babs why he gosh-darn blew it (and is secretly relieved).
That was my closing line of my high school graduation speech in 1971. I got the same reaction Bilbo did: “Huh?”
Jacel
The Iowa caucuses go through several levels of meetings starting with the delegates being selected now. Four years ago, after the initial reports of Romney winning, Santorum had the most votes by a slight margin. And by the time the multi-tier delegate process ended, most of the delegates who actually represented Iowa the the Republican convention were Ron Paul supporters. The Iowa Caucuses are truly democracy at its finest…
Cacti
@chopper:
I wonder what the preferred conspiracy theory will be.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@DCF: I had her in 2004 whence said was resisting the urge to joyfully down the drain with Dennis cause the stakes were too high
Keith G
Hey Betty C., I responded to the mostly correct observation you made on the Late Open Thread of the 30th.
Prediction about what happens tonight and beyond: The insults will continue, as will the use of Tweets as evidence of how misguided one side or the other has become.
joel hanes
Any predictions?
The northern-western half of Iowa (Steve King country) will spend Tuesday in full-scale blizzard conditions, with eight to twelve inches of new snow and sustained winds over 30 mph. NOAA is saying that travel will be impossible at times.
The partisans are highly motivated and the residents are hardy, but this is a very rural area and many prospective caucus-goers will face ten or twenty miles of travel on secondary and tertiary roads in whiteout conditions.
So:
Prediction 1: Turnout in general will be low.
Prediction 2: Turnout in the most rural precincts will be very, very low. Towns and cities will do better. Turnout in the liberal SE half of the state will be higher than in the teahadist-dominated NW half.
Prediction 2: Because of 1 and 2, and because of the way that Iowa’s caucuses work, polling means very little. Expect surprises.
I’m looking forward to the reports of journalists who don’t hail from the north.
catclub
@smintheus:
Huh? Isn’t Trump much farther ahead in NH than in Iowa? I would guess that a win for him in Iowa, outdoing predictions of under performance there, would give him a big boost in NH. It would mean that nobody else will
be able to claim momentum (Rubio, Kasich) from Iowa.
Brachiator
@DCF:
“If you can’t eat their food, drink their booze, screw their women, take their money and then vote against them you’ve got no business being up here.” — Jesse M. Unruh
Jim, Foolish Literalist
do you also dance with them you brung?
Felonius Monk
Pat Paulsen will be the big winner and that won’t be good for John McCain.
Iowa Old Lady
@Jacel: The Ds and Rs allocate delegates differently. They do pretty much everything differently and are run by different people. Wikipedia has as good an explanation as any.
bystander
Prediction? Chris Bowers never gets a job teaching English. That last paragraph is atrocious.
Without a Democratic-held Congress, no POTUS, no matter how progressive, will achieve anything remotely like single-payer healthcare, free college tuition or meaningful gun control. One of the great things about Obama is how much he got done even after Dems lost the Senate and the House.
Chyron HR
@Cacti:
Bernie Sanders is a DNC double-agent that Hillary planted to sabotage the Sanders campaign.
Ked
Ugh, why do you go to RCP for polling results? Sure, they aren’t in the really-loony Unskewed sort of territory, but they consistently have had their thumbs on the scales for every presidential cycle. Not the “we change the numbers so you don’t have to” lie, but the “let’s game what counts as a recent poll so the Republican comes out even or at least closer in our averages (which are badly and baldly unscientific anyway)” lie.
I’d go look at Pollster. Yeah, I know, HuffPo owns them now, but at least it’s stupid ownership instead of evil.
And yeah, Kos is frighteningly toxic right now. It’s worse than 2008 – the well-adjusted users are the ones being chased off the site.
El Caganer
@DCF: I’ve read Molly Ivins. I like Molly Ivins. And you’re no Molly Ivins. Why should I give a shit how much the banksters give her? They’re sure not going to give it to me. You’re worried about the corrupting influence of money on politics? Christ, that train left before they even finished the Overland Route.
Eolirin
@Brachiator: Watch it, we’ve got enough Hillary is a secret lesbian going around in some circles, no need to add fuel to the fire :p :)
smintheus
@catclub: May be counterintuitive, but I think a Trump loss in IA would solidify his support in NH by turning it into a make or break thing for Trump. But a Trump victory in IA identifies at most one or two credible rivals for the anybody-but-Trump voters to line up behind.
MomSense
@Mustang Bobby:
I would have cheered. Too bad we didn’t have a balloon-juice high school.
Applejinx
I guess the deal is, if Clinton LOSES then it’s the end of the world as we know it.
Again I’m reminded of Romney. At this point I’m like, okay okay OKAY fine, your Hillary is going to march on a road of bones and she’s going to be coronated just like all the pundits insist she is.
Only reality will tell, in the end. And the reality is, if she doesn’t win with some authority after ALL THIS FUSS then something is very weird in Iowa. Good Lord, even Balloon Juice has gone full Clintonista.
If I was an Iowa voter, I’d have shut the hell up long ago, since my preferred choice did ask us all to tone things down (Hillary people seem not to have got, or not been given, that memo, but that’s just how it is in power politics).
I’d have laid off fierce arguing and matching namecall for namecall, just as I pretty much did on Balloon Juice where I’ve even got countertopped by Clinton people (doubting that the stuff I said was even true, cue facebook posts and opening myself to potential doxxing and harassment).
I’d have just laid low, maybe not even got involved in polls and such because I was sick of everything becoming a fight as soon as I said I was for Sanders. You wouldn’t see me or hear of me.
And then I’d vote. For Sanders. And then I’d go home.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens.
p.a.
Wocka wocka Ted Crudz campaign pulls a Rethuglican on fellow Rethug voters! Wonkette link, nothing unsavory. Voter intimidation, it’s what’s for dinner!
bin Lurkin'
@Brachiator:
Well yeah, that’s kind of what this entire primary is about, one side thinks Hillary is dancing with those that brung her and the other thinks she’s drinking their booze and so forth and voting against them.
A piece of evidence to support Ivins’ view.
Applejinx
@Ked: Clinton did lose in 2008. It might be ugly to non-Sanders fans, but I’m heartened to hear it :)
Irony Abounds
@Cacti: I don’t disagree, however this time the insane have a choice of two clearly insane candidates and The Donald, for reasons that can only be ascribed to insanity, seems to be popular among some of the evangelicals.
geg6
@Cacti:
Typical Bernistas. What really matters is that Hilary took time out from Iowa ( yes, for a fundraiser) to fly back east and meet with fifty African American pastors. Who, apparently, were all about taking her to task over her support for Bill’s anti-crime stuff and who left the meeting having fallen in love. Bernie hasn’t done that and won’t be seeing many AA votes in Super Tuesday states. But the Bernistas won’t want to talk about that.
Anoniminous
Path to winning Iowa is the I-80 corridor. Des Moines will go for Clinton. Johnson and Story counties for Sanders so it’s up to Cedar Rapids, Council Bluff, and the Quad Cities. My guess is Clinton takes it by a couple of percentage points because of her support among women.
On the Gooper side I’ll go with: Trump, Cruz, Rubio although Rubio just might squeak through if the people in the upper tier of counties don’t turn out.
Chyron HR
@Applejinx:
Translation: “People who’ve been visiting this site for years don’t appreciate having half a dozen Sanders campaign operatives show up out of the blue one day screaming at them to Feel The Bern. They must love Hitlery SOOOO MUCH!”
joel hanes
@joel hanes:
Replying to self :
The caucuses are tonight, Monday, and not tomorrow, Tuesday.
Tuesday’s weather will be largely irrelevant.
I am once again exposed as a buffoon.
Anoniminous
@smintheus:
Trump has a 22% lead over Cruz and Rubio in New Hampshire. This year it looks like Iowa and NH will agree.
DCF
@El Caganer:
You’re no John Kennedy – but then I don’t expect you to be….second, you might alter your opinion if you read some of my writing(s), but I don’t expect much curiosity in that regard either…the point, EC, is that monies given are gifts come with expectations…in this case, ‘ …don’t rock the boat enough to make a real difference in the lives of the American populace’…I regret to say that your cynicism (defeatism?) is all too prevalent a feeling/belief in this country….
Maybe this will make you feel more ‘aspirational’:
Bruce Springsteen The Promised Land (1978)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWj75407fYY
John O
I think Cruz wins because IA GOP members are so conservative, and people will freak out when the rubber meets the road. (Cruz also being powers of 10 more frightening to me than The Donald, who will blow with the wind, so I may just be freaking out about Raphael.)
Clinton in a squeaker. I’ll have my doubts if she hasn’t learned her lesson from 2008.
Schlemazel
To me the big question, the one that can start to answer a lot of questions is “Will the Dumpsters supporters actually get off their fat asses and do something for him?” There is a huge difference between saying you love ignorant, racist, homophobic, misogynistic, xenophobic bullshit and actually getting up from Sports Center, driving across town and voting. If his supporters turn out in real numbers & deliver it could make his campaign. If instead (and I see this as a real possibility) they pop open another $4/case off-brand Light and flip to see what Reilly has to say he is dead meat maggots.
Baud
This poor Google translation from the original Russian isn’t even accurate. It’s not more possible because our side doesn’t show up for mid-terms, and only likes exciting candidates.
Princess
It looks like the Quinnipiac and Emerson polls for both races got basically the same numbers as each other and applied different voter screens. I think Emerson will come closer to the truth for both parties.
joel hanes
@geg6:
Bernie hasn’t done that
Instead, Bernie has authorized Cornel West to bitterly criticize the nation’s first black President, in Bernie’s name. Black voters are not amused.
Completely tone-deaf; a dick move that could doom Sanders in the general election.
NobodySpecial
Until someone gives me proof that Turnip has a serious ground game in Iowa, I’m gonna say Cruz. Polls are nice, but Cruz has the fundies who work the room like Huckabee and Santorum had in years past.
Otherwise, I think Clinton edges out in IA, loses in NH, and then crushes in SC and Nevada, and the race is declared essentially over.
Mary G
I keep thinking that Trump’s rallies are full of people who just want to see a free show and won’t vote for him or vote at all. I think Cruz is too unlikable even for rightwingers to take. Hillary got stomped by Obama in 2008 and is too smart to let that happen again, so I feel pretty sure she’s got this.
Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class
@DCF:
So fucking what?
FlipYrWhig
@Applejinx: “Oh, why must other people take exception to my Very Excellent Political Views about how Hillary Clinton is an untrustworthy corporate corrupt uninspiring grimly inevitable slow motion catastrophe? And they say SUCH MEAN THINGS too!”
bin Lurkin'
@joel hanes:
Happens to all of us.. It was a great theory though.
VFX Lurker
@DCF: What you call “cynicism,” I call “pragmatism.” I’m voting for Hillary this June because I trust her to better achieve liberal goals than Bernie.
Applejinx
@Chyron HR: Hey man, if not for Balloon Juice I would not twice have been an Obama campaign operative and would not be working for Bernie.
It’s Balloon Juice which brought the attitude of ‘donations and snarking on blogs are not enough’, it’s Balloon Juice which had the call to get involved and go out and DO something actually productive, and I learned.
You’re talking like I’m some guy who got hired to come and Astroturf, which is straight-up bullshit. I learned to go out and work for liberal political campaigns HERE.
But I do admit I voted for Bernie long ago and you’ve got me to blame for him being here as a Senator…
I’m from Vermont :)
chopper
@Chyron HR:
it’s so frustrating when everyone doesn’t just up and acquiesce to your superior wisdom. the nerve!
dogwood
I understand that Chris Bowers believes in the revolution, but in 2014 38% of Americans identified as conservative with 24% as liberal. Moderates about the same as conservatives. Unless the remaining 10% are die hard socialists, which is highly unlikely, I don’t see how the revolution comes about.
Iowa Old Lady
I think Trump will win but I’d love to see him be a loser!
FlipYrWhig
@Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: Representative of the saltiest salts of the earth, Glenn Greenwald, sure knows how to land a zinger. Didn’t Omidyar promise to spend $250 million on the First Look empire?
Schlemazel
@Chyron HR:
THIS!
These children do not understand that they are irritating potential Sanders supports while making the meme that they are ‘bernbots’ more believable. Its as if there is a wing of many campaign committees to just piss all over every liberal site in hopes of convincing people their guy (or gal) is the one true christ and only fools would not see that. It is a stupid way to go
Cacti
@joel hanes:
Don’t forget Killer Mike.
On another lefty website, I saw a Bernfeeler post excitedly and without a trace of embarrassment: “Bernie ate SOUL FOOD at an Atlanta restaurant with Killer Mike!”
Some wiseacre (not me, I promise) spoofed it with a copycat thread: “Hillary ate TACOS in L.A. with Antonio Villaraigosa!”
Applejinx
@Schlemazel: I do wonder whether the amazing flood of vituperation going the other direction will have an effect. I guess we’ll wait and see, huh?
I feel I’ve got screamed at by Clinton people and called names enough. Laters. I have a long day of volunteering tomorrow, in NH.
FlipYrWhig
@Applejinx: Didn’t Vermont almost elect a Republican governor last time around? Where was the holy Political Revolution then?
Applejinx
@FlipYrWhig: Lighten up, Francis :)
Anoniminous
@Baud:
True but we have evidence from the last two Kentucky elections our side doesn’t come out when the Democratic candidate is a Stand for Nothing incompetent. In New Mexico we had the votes to unseat Martinez but the Stand for Nothing incompetent bought the nomination and then whiffed it.
Since three points define a plane … ;-) … maybe people would turn out if the state parties didn’t nominate Stand for Nothing incompetents. Worth a shot, at least.
FlipYrWhig
@Applejinx: OH THE VITUPERATION I SHALL SURELY SWOON AMID THIS NEST OF VIPERS
WarMunchkin
I honestly think Clinton by a solid amount. I do think a Clinton win will shut down economic liberalism (not even socialism, just vanilla Keynes) for a while in the party though.
On the Republican side, I think Cruz. 27% for Trump.
DCF
@Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class:
An articulate, considered response…SBJ….
Baud
@Anoniminous: The problem is there isn’t much in the way of a counterexample either.
If liberals want to convince the party to be more liberal, they need to strat winning some state and local and congressional elections outside of safe districts.
El Caganer
@Anoniminous: I’ll not only stand for Nothing, I’ll man the barricades for Nothing! WHO’S THE FUCKING NIHILIST HERE!
FlipYrWhig
@Anoniminous: Non-Senator Ned Lamont says hi.
dogwood
@Applejinx:
This isn’t meant to be an attack. I’m seriously interest in your answer. What on earth does Bernie have to gain from hooking up with Cornell West? I seems like someone should be fired for campaign malpractice. And it insults a good share of a crucial democratic voting block.
chopper
@Applejinx:
WHY WON’T YOU STOP YELLING AT ME??!?
Anoniminous
@joel hanes:
Sanders didn’t “authorize” Cornel West to do anything. Prof. West was criticizing Obama long before Sanders thought of running for president.
Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class
@Chyron HR:
He sold out progressives!!
Schlemazel
@Applejinx:
Come on, it can’t take that long to visit a bunch of liberal sites (although you know nothing about them so they may be hard for you to find without help) and drop insulting comments on people you know nothing about. You have no idea who I am supporting but assume. Please do show yourself out & please don’t come back unless you want to honestly join in and not just shit on people because you THINK they don’t support your guy.
FlipYrWhig
@WarMunchkin:
What possible justification do you have for saying that? Clinton is running a liberal campaign. Terry Freakin’ MacAuliffe ran a liberal campaign for governor of Virginia. I don’t know where you guys are getting this stuff.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Anoniminous: maybe Bernie should broaden the scope of his “revolution”?
and yes i know he has Said Things. Show me the money he’s raised, the great candidates he’s recruited
DCF
@VFX Lurker:
The Politics of Pragmatism
http://crookedtimber.org/2008/12/12/the-politics-of-pragmatism/
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Anoniminous: and St Bernard “authorized” the bitter old crank to come campaign with him, because all the kids love Cornel
raven
I predict it’s bullshit!
gwangung
@joel hanes: I think this move needs a little nuance and sophistication in campaigning. An approach of “Obama is a disappointment” is not a starter for people satisfied with his work (and that’s the VAST majority of IA Dems, and probably a solid chunk of the Dem electorate) and probably isn’t a good path for people who didn’t think he went far enough (particularly when a) they saw a good reason for a lack of progress and b) they don’t see any trace of an idea of how Sanders is going to remedy that).
Bobby Thomson
After your NFL picks, I’m not sure what to think.
DCF
@VFX Lurker:
That’s ‘neoliberal goals’ – and I’m a ‘progressive’ (as opposed to a ‘regressive’)…AND I’m from Vermont….
Baud
@Bobby Thomson: Betty didn’t predict Baud! to win, so I still have a shot.
bin Lurkin'
The fact that this conversation is being had at this time is indicative of a powerful undertow in current American politics. The conventional wisdom has been that Sanders is nothing more than a fringe candidate and yet here we are in a nail biter. And if anyone had told me in 2014 that Donald Trump would be leading the Republican field in Iowa 2016 I’d have snickered..
Baud
@bin Lurkin’: Yes, this year is wacky. I blame Obama.
VFX Lurker
@DCF:
I didn’t think I could convince you, so I won’t try.
I’m voting for Hillary to defend and advance liberal causes.
Bobby Thomson
@schrodinger’s cat: at the precinct level, proportionate to viable vote. At the county level, based on prior Democratic vote including midterms – so yoots are penalized for sitting out 2014. Yay!
FlipYrWhig
@bin Lurkin’: Or maybe the Sanders phenomenon in Iowa in 2016 will have the same lasting impact as the Santorum phenomenon in Iowa in 2012!
sparrow
@Brachiator: it is adorable that you really think Hillary is taking Goldman Sachs money with the idea of turning on them in order serve us poor plebeians out of the goodness of her pure, pure heart. That money is just a way to stick it to the man, yup. Good grief. And Bernie supporters get accused of being in a cult of personality!
David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch
NobodySpecial
@FlipYrWhig: Like it or not, she’s both tied to her husband’s Third Way positioning from the ’90s and her statements about things like the TPP being ‘the gold standard of trade agreements’. She’s been all over the board on trade, for just one example: Supported NAFTA, now opposes it. Voted against CAFTA, did legwork and press for TPP. There is no consistent dialogue from Clinton on several of these subjects, but there IS a consistent pattern of moneytaking from heavy corporate interests that are inimical to liberal economics.
As people have been quick to say on this site about Obama’s campaign versus various things that have been done in his administration: Words are easy, doing’s hard. It’s much more logical that she’s saying the words than supposing that she’s come to Jesus this late in her political career. That’s why it’s good that she has a strong challenge from the left, isn’t it?
dogwood
@Anoniminous: So he’s not stumping for Sanders? Sanders voters shouldn’t want him out there. He’s a narcissist, and he’s not going to help Bernie. He’s still butt hurt over not getting tickets to the inauguration. Sorta like Gingrich shutting down the government because he didn’t like his seat on AF1.
Anoniminous
@FlipYrWhig:
In 2008 there were 257 Democrat held seat to 178 Republican in the House and 57 Democrat seats in the Senate to 41. In 2016 there are 188 Democrats to 247 GOP and 44 Dems to 54 in the Senate.
To me that’s a notable loss, but YMMV.
WarMunchkin
@FlipYrWhig: I’ve been seeing a lot of ‘social liberal, fiscal conservative’ stuff at an alarming rate, to the point where it’s been painful to bear now. I think a lot of the opinion makers believe this (remember when pundits kept assuring everyone that we are a “center right” country?) Obviously, these folks reject Republicans completely, but I worry about that enduring zombie narrative that reassures people that the “sensible” knee-jerk disbelief of economic liberalism is the right way to go. Not really intended to be an indictment of Clinton or anything, it’s just that for a lot of upper-class social liberals I know in NY, fending off Sanders is a relief for that particular frame of mind (they’re also the type to believe in Grand Compromise about SS). I don’t like it when they feel like they’ve won. I do my best to non-confrontationally push back when I’m in those circles, but eh.
El Caganer
@FlipYrWhig: I think we’re all grateful that we were spared the Tsantorum Tsunami.
Brachiator
@bin Lurkin’:
Sorry, Ivins did not stalk purity unicorns. I have a lot of respect for Sanders, but politics ain’t pure, and it ain’t for the pure of heart. Ivins understood this. Some of the people quoting her do not.
Many Sanders supporters look back to FDR as the Patron Saint of all things Progressive, and his great work the New Deal. But FDR was also savvy enough to pass over the relatively pure Ferdinand Pecora and make Joseph Kennedy the first chairman of the SEC.
Asked why he had tapped such a crook. “Takes one to catch one,” replied Roosevelt
geg6
@Anoniminous:
Yes, and the fact that Sanders decided that the bitter guy who whines continuously about that terrible, mean and Oreo president who dissed him, the great Cornell West, by not giving him tickets and placing him front and center at the inauguration was the best person to do outreach to the AA community tells me everything I need to know about the competence of his campaign. Every time Cornell West shows up at a Bernie rally, Sanders loses votes and royally pisses off the most loyal Democratic voters in the nation. Idiots all the way down.
debbie
@Elizabelle:
Did you see Cruz’s response to the complaints?
Bobby Thomson
@smintheus: she’ll lose NH big regardless. I would have written it off months ago.
dogwood
@bin Lurkin’:
Bernie is not a fringe candidate. That’s why I’m concerned about some of his campaign strategies. His standing with young people and new voters is terrific. He doesn’t need to turn off Obama voters to maintain that support.
Baud
@geg6:
If that’s true, it’s a problem that will take care of itself.
sparrow
@VFX Lurker: Hillary is not a liberal. She is a center-right politician by any reasonable metric. She is also a flaming neoliberal, which will probably be the worst thing about her presidency, should that come to pass. The best thing about her is that she is sane and wants government to more or less function. She is also not overly interested in sticking it to women and gays (so long as it’s politically expedient), but I seriously doubt she will do anything to move the needle on income inequality or institutional racism once in office.
different-church-lady
@scav: I think you’re dead on for a sub-set of Sanders supporters.
They’re the dismaying part of his group. A whole lot of Sanders supporters actually do believe in progressive values, and I believe Sanders himself is utterly sincere. But there’s that “harness the monster” element of his campaign that reminds me a little too much of how we ended up with Palin.
goblue72
@geg6: Hyperbole much? Or are you still pissed off that Sanders isn’t a “real” Democrat and why should he get to run as a Democrat anyways?
Your one note band is getting awfully dull.
debbie
@geg6:
I don’t know whether or not Sanders authorized Cornel West, but I do know Sanders was pretty magnanimous (and non-political) when he said Hillary’s emails weren’t an issue. I think this counts for something. I can’t imagine Hillary reciprocating. She’s too much of a political animal for that.
goblue72
@different-church-lady: Really? Seriously? Palin = Sanders?
Some of your squishes really need to calm the heck down. You just make yourselves look like a bunch of political neophytes.
Brachiator
@sparrow:
Where do you get that I am a Hillary supporter? Where?
My point, simply, is that I reject the puerile notion that if you take Wall Street money, you are incapable of dealing with them. Anybody who seriously believes this needs to grow the fvck up.
The rest is commentary.
Ultraviolet Thunder
My problem with Bernie is something that doesn’t seem to get a lot of coverage: he’s not a Democrat. He hasn’t raised money for the Democratic party and he doesn’t have party support. No matter how compelling his speeches or how laudable his positions, and I find both very encouraging, he’s at a tremendous disadvantage in a national campaign as a Democratic nominee who has never been part of the party.
Baud
@Ultraviolet Thunder: I think he calls himself a Dem now to get on the New Hampshire ballot.
MomSense
@WarMunchkin:
It doesn’t make any sense. How we spend our money is the way we demonstrate what we value.
goblue72
@sparrow: Pretty much. And double much on the neoliberalism. Way better than even odds that a Clinton Presidency involves bombing/invading with actual “boots on the ground” in some random foreign country – along with the obscene waste of money it will entail. Granted, most likely more of a Yugoslavia level intervention than GWB Iraq style intervention.
J R in WV
@joel hanes:
Dude,
The Iowa semi-primary is tonight, not Tuesday. The reporters may have trouble getting out tomorrow, but the voters can go to their meetings, do their thing, and get home before the storm hits. I think…
Take it easy,
JR
gwangung
@dogwood: Moreover, he shouldn’t make rejecting Obama a centerpiece of his strategy.
There’s a number of campaign moves that have me shaking my head; They’re markers of a minor league operation, and not anywhere near ready to run a country. Ideas are good, but your team and how you execute are also part of the package you’re selling voters on.
Ultraviolet Thunder
@Baud:
I think he would have to. Tomasky pointed out that as well as fundraising for her own campaign HRC has raised $15M in this election cycle for the party and for other candidates.
That matters, and that’s just the money issue.
different-church-lady
@geg6:
You mean bankers, right? She only ever meets with bankers. She only understands and likes bankers. I know this because I read the internet.
dogwood
@Baud:
I think that’s true. I just don’t think he can get enough AA votes in states where they reside to make him even competitive. And the sad thing is he hasn’t even tried. He should know what a self-absorbed clown Cornell West is. There’s no excuse for that. He should know how popular Obama is among Iowa democrats and show some restraint. It wouldn’t cost him a single vote. That’s why I’m apprehensive about him as a general election candidate.
different-church-lady
@DCF: Knock it off, Doug J.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@goblue72: why will you never tell me where and in which campaigns you’re advancing the Revolution?
@debbie: Sanders was campaigning with West in Iowa this weekend. What do you think he name recognition is among Iowa Democrats? He’s entertaining as hell, a brilliant scholar, but politically, West has no constituency outside the Obama-sold-us-out brigade. He’s there because St Bernard likes what he hears.
He also blurbed a book by Bill Press (“Buyer’s Remorse”). Of course as Sean Hannity’s long time patsy, Bill Press is who we all turn to in order to find out how real progressives get things done.
srv
If Hillary wins in Iowa, can congress start impeachment proceedings on a nominee?
FlipYrWhig
This “Goldman Sachs paid speeches” thing… what exactly do people think she was paid to do? I’m imagining it was something like a commencement address, like, “I’m Hillary Clinton and here are some of the things I’ve done and said and the challenges I faced and what I think the future holds,” and that the pull of a headliner like Hillary Clinton is that people actually come to the speech, whereas if it’s someone else, they don’t show up. What’s the alternative exactly? Goldman Sachs bribing her to stop regulating them and they can split the loot?
Noclue72
@goblue72:
Good work comrade! You’ve caught these neoliberal boomer squishes with their pants down. Now here’s your complimentary Scowling Bernie picture to fap to.
Brachiator
@goblue72:
Can I borrow your crystal ball? I need to lay down my Super Bowl bets.
joel hanes
@Anoniminous:
So West’s gigs introducing Bernie Sanders at a rally in S. Carolina and appearing with Bernie on stage in Iowa were accidents ?
Bernie had nothing to do with choosing him for these roles ?
debbie
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I’ve listened to West’s and Tavis Smiley’s Obama bitch fests. Very pathetic. I’ll have to take your word on Saunders’ sharing West’s opinion on Obama because I haven’t heard that from him (I make no claim to having heard everything Saunders has said).
goblue72
@FlipYrWhig: If Leiberman had accepted losing the primary, Lamont would have walked away with the election. Party bolting “independent” runs have a way of upending any normal electoral process and strategy. See Eliot Cutler in Maine and why Maine is saddled with that nutbar Paul LePage – who is a two-term governor in spite of never winning a majority of the vote.
ThresherK (GPad)
@Elizabelle: The Onion is just barely keeping ahead of GOP reality.
Archon
@dogwood:
I gotta say I was shocked to see West introduce Bernie Sanders at an event. Having Cornell West around suggests the Sanders campaign doesn’t have a single person of consequence working there that is in tune with the black community.
I’m a fan of Bernie but he really dropped the ball on this one.
FlipYrWhig
@goblue72: Do we know anything about what a Bernie Sanders foreign policy would entail? Or are we just guessing based on his state of origin and hairstyle?
dogwood
@debbie:
Bernie has changed his tune on the emails.
J R in WV
@joel hanes:
You aren’t a buffoon, just off half a bubble… most primary elections are on Tuesday, just not this – sorta, kinda, not really an election.
But you did make me laugh, which is a good thing!!
Schlemazel
@srv:
I sure hope so as it really energized Bill and all Democrats. Had Gore not bought into the beltway bullshit and fought alongside Bill we might have been able to avoid Boy Blunders maladministration.
With any luck that giant turn Robertson will reissue the Clinton FIles video with all its easily disproven insanity
goblue72
@Brachiator: I don’t need a crystal ball to make probabilistic statements made on the basis of years and years statements made by candidate Clinton. Her foreign policy views are to the right of Obama. This is pretty obvious and well documented.
But please – keep punching the hippies. Its not like the hippies were ever right.
hilts
@Applejinx:
Well stated.
Check out this link:
“9 Reasons I Choose Bernie Over Hillary”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kris-seto/9-things-that-i-just-cant_b_9111540.html?
FlipYrWhig
@goblue72: So… then… if you’re an insurgent candidate from the liberal end of things, a center-right candidate from the other side can still beat you, with the nefarious strategy of “getting more votes”?
VFX Lurker
@sparrow: I still trust Hillary more than Bernie to advance and defend universal health care, civil rights, gay rights and women’s rights.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@FlipYrWhig: good intentions will prevail
Schlemazel
@hilts:
So you are in a hurry to leave but you had time to create a second account? Please.
debbie
@dogwood:
Sorry to read this, but i suppose I was bound to be disappointed.
different-church-lady
@dogwood:
Internet Bern-feelers don’t do that because they need to. They do it because they want to.
WarMunchkin
@debbie:
He was misinterpreted. He was trying to say that Democrats shouldn’t go for a candidate shrouded in controversy. In any case, he went back on this yesterday, saying that the e-mails were a serious issue.
@MomSense: I’m with you there. I so dearly wish we had spent much more in 2009. I attribute our 2010 loss and the Tea Party uprising directly to an insufficient recovery package and ‘Summer of Recovery’ rhetoric/belief, despite the popular idea that it was some sort of progressive backlash. For the people I seem to encounter, the government as household analogy is easy to think about and a hard myth to break. For upper-middle-class or wealthy people in intellectually higher-up circles, the two-party ‘balance’ belief and worship of the church of the moderate is also viewed as nod-your-head-enthusiastically wisdom (not just in professional punditry).
@different-church-lady: My question to a lot of people here is something like: do you actually believe that there’s a large, appreciable number of Sanders supporters who are pox-on-both-your-houses voters? My sense is that it is a rounding error. My somewhat annoying thing to say to some of my horse-race minded friends is that elections aren’t really that complicated outside of politically obsessed circles. If you believe that job losses were caused by Wall Street and are upset and deeply passionate about rigged justice, you’re probably identifying with Sanders. If your passion is seeing intelligence and competence in office or personally admire Clinton’s resilience over the years, you’re identifying with Clinton. And what camp you identify with will determine how you perceive the other side’s supporters. For instance, Sanders supporters are more likely to believe that a Bloomberg candidacy will grab a-non-rounding-error amount of Clinton voters.
different-church-lady
@goblue72: No, Sanders = .1 of McCain. The part of McCain that thought, “What the hell, let’s whip up some passion here.”
ETA: might have the math backwards on this. There’s a little part of Sanders that’s thinking he can harness the beast, whereas McCain was all-in until he realized there was no controlling the monster. Any rate, the point is it’s a small part of what Sanders is thinking — so small he doesn’t see the corrosive part.
dogwood
@Archon:
Not a single Sanders supporter here seems to care about Bernie’s problems with AA’s I don’t see how he can win in Novemeber without enthusiasm from that demographic. I guess he’ll expect the failure of a president to do that for him.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@goblue72: are you a hippie? I kinda suspect you’re a useless self-righteous poser
and being mocked on a blog isn’t being punched
different-church-lady
@Brachiator:
Well it’s simple: if you’re not all in for Bernie, you MUST be for Hillary. Magnets, how do they fucking work and all that.
FlipYrWhig
@WarMunchkin:
Do you know how condescending that is? You’re basically saying “if you care about issues and the present moment, you like Bernie Sanders, but if you care about personality and the past, I suppose Hillary Clinton will do.”
different-church-lady
@Ultraviolet Thunder:
He declared himself a Democrat when he applied for the ballot in New Hampshire. His statement was unequivocal.
I am surprised by how many of his own on-line supporters don’t seem to know this themselves.
goblue72
@FlipYrWhig: Are you too lazy to Google?
Hillary Clinton: “The failure to help build up a credible fighting force of the people who were the originators of the protests against Assad—there were Islamists, there were secularists, there was everything in the middle—the failure to do that left a big vacuum, which the jihadists have now filled.”
“Great nations need organizing principles, and ‘Don’t do stupid stuff’ is not an organizing principle.”
Sanders’ foreign policy section of his website is called “War and Peace” – and it has a very strong bent towards diplomacy and the use of force as the absolute last resort, as well as including a statement about cutting the Pentagon budget – https://berniesanders.com/issues/war-and-peace/
Clinton’s is kind of vague, but the overall tenor and theme is about “strength, strength, strength” – and does not suggest she will take on the military industrial complex – https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/national-security/
gwangung
@different-church-lady: Coates, Angry Black Lady, Goldie Taylor, Arthur Chu et al has certainly experienced that.
goblue72
@FlipYrWhig: It can easily be read the other way, bub. The statement states that if caring about “intelligence and competence” is important, you will vote Clinton. Which implies that if you don’t care if the candidate is smart or competent, then Bernie is your man. Which is just as condescending of Sanders supporters.
I suggest putting the pipe down.
different-church-lady
@FlipYrWhig:
I hear she promised Jamie Dimon the codes to the nuclear football.
WarMunchkin
@FlipYrWhig: That certainly isn’t the intent of my statement. I meant it literally and genuinely. As in – many Clinton supporters express genuine admiration for what she has had to deal with over the years and how she has persevered. This is not some sort of flippant insult meant to reduce these people into dilettantes without policy chops. To turn this the other way, you could just as well accuse me of reducing Sanders supporters to people exclusively motivated by anger. There’s no there there, man.
goblue72
@FlipYrWhig: A third party vote splitting candidate that runs under neither Democrat or Republican nomination. But please, twist the words, bub.
goblue72
@VFX Lurker: Fair enough. Why?
different-church-lady
@FlipYrWhig:
North Korea will stop being a threat when their GDP equals South Korea’s.
El Caganer
@different-church-lady: I thought it was those State Department emails. Damn. And I try so hard to keep up.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@goblue72: why will you never tell me where and in which campaigns you’re advancing the Revolution?
Don’t be shy, Puddin’, go ahead and brag a little
Brachiator
@goblue72:
Years and years of statements? You’re not making probabilistic statements. You’re making shit up.
Most hippies weren’t right. They were mostly a bunch of drugged up fools. Being a hippie is not the same thing as being an activist. And the best activists are marked by their actual engagement, not navel gazing over how often they are “right.”
hilts
@Schlemazel:
This is not a second account. Keep spinning your conspiracy theories.
Cacti
Bernie wants to run against Obama, but also have the Obama coalition vote for him.
Case in point:
Bernie writes endorsement for Bill Press’s new emo tome: “Buyer’s Remorse: How Obama Let Progressives Down”.
Not to mention. How tone deaf can a white a liberal be, to suggest that he and his “bought” the black POTUS?
Archon
@dogwood:
Black people are political pragmatists and know better then anyone what the other side represents so Bernie would get 90+ percent of the black vote in the general regardless of Cornel West’s antics towards Obama or the campaigns general ambivalence on “black” issues.
I just don’t understand their primary strategy to the nomination that doesn’t involve winning ALOT of black votes.
different-church-lady
@WarMunchkin:
Any estimates I make would be nothing but a guess. But I have seen the sentiment expressed frequently enough that I believe the subset exists, and my feeling is that the internet expression is far higher than the general electorate.
Anyone who says they’re considering Trump OR Sanders is simply politically incoherent. The sole thing the two have in common is the politics of resentment. That might get you traction, but does not bode well for governance.
goblue72
@different-church-lady: What corrosion? And what whipping froth?
Have you actually attended a Sanders speech or event? Or for that matter, politically involved in anything approaching actual progressive circles? Or is this all just voices inside your head?
Jesus H Christ on a stick. When Ted was still alive (and at the time of my residency, my U.S. Senator), his average stump speech was more froth whipping than anything I’ve seen from Sanders or his campaign. Shit, Ted would set the populist mob on fire at a fricking ribbon cutting ceremony (and then be followed by Kerry, who would immediately proceed to put everyone asleep.) And Ted was called many things over his life, but demagogic fringe radical wasn’t one of them.
Ultraviolet Thunder
@different-church-lady:
Yes Bernie is a Dem NOW, but it might be a bit late. A lot depends on support of the party in a national election, and I can’t see local and state politicians coming out for him with quite the fervor they would for someone who has been a member of their party for decades rather than months, and has raised money for them.
If he got the delegates and the nomination, the party would support him because the alternative is unspeakable. But how many people’s hearts would really be in it for a latecomer?
Mike E
@raven: Fuckin’ A
goblue72
@different-church-lady: Whatever lady. And when Bush ran for office, every other squish on the Internet claimed they were going to move to Canada if he was elected President. Last time I checked, Canada did not experience a tidal wave of political refugees from the U.S. in 2000 or 2004.
And dare we bring out the quite loud Clinton supporters of 2008, with the PUMA thing?
Iowa Old Lady
Cripes. Caucus starts in 55 minutes and I just got a call from a woman saying she was at the caucus site and hoped to see us there. Whatever you think of Clinton, she has a hell of a ground game.
Cacti
@Ultraviolet Thunder:
Bernie is a Democrat of convenience. No getting around it.
He’s pointedly refused to call himself a Dem despite caucusing with them for a quarter century. His alternative was to caucus with the Republicans. Now he’s the house guest who thinks he owns the place.
chopper
man, given the extra froth of the usual suspects, bernie’s internal polling must not be looking too great today.
different-church-lady
@goblue72:
I have not. Nor have I for any other Democratic candidate this cycle. (Nor Republican for that matter.)
The times I have been fortunate enough to do so lead me to believe that those people would think 97% of everything everyone says on the internet is bullshit.
PsiFighter37
I think both Clinton and Trump win, and I think both win by more than the polls predict. I also think Marco Rubio comes in a surprise second, beating out Tailgunner Ted, making him the establishment’s golden boy and thus engulfing him a golden shower of rich white-man money.
None of it will matter, though, as I think Rubio has a marginal shot, at best, of winning any of the early states. And when folks actually listen to what he says, he comes off as downright brainless and without an original thought. People thought Obama was the teleprompter politician? Marco couldn’t fucking campaign for his life if he didn’t have his lines memorized.
I also decided I won’t drink tonight, which is likely a poor choice, but I figure I will only watch a modicum of the talking heads blather about how important Iowa is before I go to sleep.
ETA: I totally agree with everyone who is pointing out that Bernie is NOT a Democrat, and that a real risk of nominating him is to simply destabilize the Democratic Party thoroughly. He has zero interest in party-building. Say what you will about the Clintons, but they are proud Democrats and are not afraid to let people know.
goblue72
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: He raised $20MM just in January.
As for candidates he’s recruited – show me the candidates Clinton has recruited? Show me her coat-tails.
Do you even know how Google works?
Ruckus
@raven:
I think I know you better than to say you always take the easy road but in this case…….
raven
@Ruckus: Reading this douchebag goblue is enough to tell me I’m right.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
how’d he spread it around
Bernie’s the one promising– the whole logic of his campaign is a “political revolution”
if i google will I at long last discover your secret activism? crossing the border to campaign for maggie hassan? what effect is Bernie magic having on her numbers?
Schlemazel
@hilts:
When I see two brand new, never before appeared on BJ commentors and the second just happens to be so deeply moved by the first it is a natural reaction.Maybe if “either of you” bothered to stop by for a visit before dropping in to piss of the neighbors (including at least on Sanders supporter) I would not be so suspicious. The list of assholes who just happen to drop by here is long & goes back well before even Obama’s election,
kc
@Cacti:
So you value form over substance, that’s cool.
gwangung
@Ultraviolet Thunder: that’s where his non campaigning for down ticket Dems is hurting. How is he going to get his vision into reality. Use either the Dens or a slate of his own, but he needs a large Congressional bloc. As of now, it seems like he’s cutting his own coat tails.
Cacti
@kc:
I know a hypocrite when I see one.
Too good to be one of us for his whole career, right up until he decided he wanted to be POTUS.
Whatsamatter, Bern? The Democratic Socialist Party not have the resources you need?
scav
@different-church-lady: My Reverend, as in ordained, Aunt is exactly one of those. And she’s in Iowa, and going to caucus. In one of the scary counties. We all nearly fell off our chairs when she was going for Trump earlier because she’s generally far from politically incoherent or mean or insane but there it is. I think I dropped predicting anything about that conversation.
Cacti
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
The reason the Bernie campaign is so emotionally satisfying for people like broblue72 is it lets him and his fellow bros imagine themselves as Che Guevara because they waved a “Feel the Bern” sign around at a rally.
Ultraviolet Thunder
@kc:
A political party is an organization with a lot of goals besides what’s going on in Congress. If you’re part of that organization sometimes you put your own goals behind what the party needs at the moment for the health and growth of the organization. Take one for the team.
To continue with the sports metaphor, Bernie is trying out for quarterback after skipping practice for a couple of decades.
bin Lurkin'
Sanders is doing the Democratic party and us a favor by running as a Democrat, as an independent he could easily draw enough votes to sink Hillary.
Youthful enthusiasm in 2008 was great,in 2016 it’s damn dangerous and needs to be nipped in the bud.
chopper
@kc:
it’s the political party that gets major shit done.
Ruckus
@PsiFighter37:
I also decided I won’t drink tonight, which is likely a poor choice,
Not listening will probably help out with that. I’d say not a poor choice, politics today would make Carrie Nation drink.
dogwood
There is something a bit off about a candidate like Bernie who claims to be something new, yet hires Tad Devine to run his campaign. Nothing revolutionary or innovative about that. Devine is from the Bob Schrum school of political consulting. I thought democrats had given up on the old school hacks like Devine. I don’t trust Devine to do a good job in the general.
Ruckus
@raven:
Yeah, I pied him a couple of weeks ago. He’s FB level crazy and I don’t need that.
Baud
@bin Lurkin’:
Then he should have. I don’t care who you support, no one is God’s gift to Democrats. No, not even Obama.
kc
@Ultraviolet Thunder: @chopper:
Okay, so the fact that he’s been caucusing w/the Dems for years means nada. Got it.
Ruckus
@Schlemazel:
hilts has been around for a quite a while. Can’t say how long and doesn’t comment real regular but has been around. Not a defense for him/her just saying…..
raven
@Ruckus: Good move.
chopper
@kc:
that’s exactly what I said. bravo!
kc
@Cacti:
You’re a white dude, aren’t you, bro?
Mnemosyne
@Archon:
This. If the Democratic Party is not actually majority minority at this point, it’s damn near as makes no difference. Also, it’s pretty well accepted at this point that McAuliffe won Virginia by courting and mobilizing the African-American vote.
If Bernie thinks he can win the Democratic nomination solely with white voters, he’s got another think coming, and fast.
Ultraviolet Thunder
@kc:
The Dems have had his vote in Congress and that’s not nothing. But if he wanted to support the party and its goals he would have joined it. He didn’t. And now he wants the party to support him.
different-church-lady
@Cacti: Too harsh, IMO. It’s a side effect, not the cause.
Cacti
@kc:
Maybe you could ask his Senate colleagues…
None of whom have endorsed him.
kc
@chopper:
Oh, apologies if I misread your helpful explanation of how parties work even though it was utterly non-responsive to my original post.
chopper
@kc:
i’m just sad that it even needed explaining, but apology accepted nonetheless.
DCF
@Brachiator:
Sanders has been in the political world for the majority of his adult life. Ivins was a superb observer of political psychology – and a woman with few (if any) illusions about the human frailties which so often lead to dismal result(s)…having lived in Vermont (again) for the past 35+ years, I’ve had the proximal opportunity to observe Sanders from his election as Burlington (VT) mayor (1981) to his Representative and Senate terms (=> 2016).
Bernie accomplishes things…as mayor of Burlington, my birthplace, he enlivened and revitalized a city that had become borderline-dormant, overcoming hostile Republicans and establishment Democrats. His Representative and Senate record(s) reveal a consistent history of bipartisan accomplishment. He is not a man given to ‘illusions’, nor does he couch fear of failure and neoliberal equivocation as sufficient rationales for surrender to a plutocratic/oligarchical style of government….
I blame Reagan, in large measure, for advocacy of the so-called ‘Me’ decade and the subsequent focus (indulgence?) upon the rabid individualism that overwhelmed the collective – and cooperative – good of our nation. “Greed is good’…please, for the love of the FSM….
Sanders is not ‘pure’, in the perjorative sense you imply here…any individual that wins the most recent Senate election with 71% of the vote (25% of Republicans here voted for him) is a potentially formidable candidate in the general election, one who would draw from the Republican electorate as Donald Trump would draw from working-class democrats and others….
Look at the head-to-head polling results of HRC vs. Trump, Cruz or Rubio…and then compare the BS numbers opposite his potential Republican rivals…he bests her significantly….
The Progressive movement is afoot, and it will continue to evolve and flourish in the present (and immediate future) of this country.
different-church-lady
@Mnemosyne:
I doubt he thinks that, but how to do something about it seems to be eluding him.
chopper
@Cacti:
you’d figure that someone running for the job of national head of the democratic party would be a registered democrat for more than a few months, but times they are a-changin’.
PaulW
I predict most of the GOP delegates go between Trump and Cruz, I doubt any of the others will clear the minimum requirement hurdle for any delegates at all. If Trump gets the same proportional turnout that he’s getting in the polling, that’s a bad sign that Trump *can* win the nomination.
PaulW
I also predict there will be more people tuning in to watch a Darin Morgan X-Files episode tonight than they will turn out for the caucuses.
kc
@DCF:
Not if the BJ geezer commentariat has anything to say aobut it.
DCF
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
If Sanders walked on water, I believe several of the Commenters here would ask why he’s not breathing it as well….
Cacti
@kc:
Because everybody knows, “geezers” don’t vote.
The campus community is the real power broker in our national politics.
DCF
@kc:
Agreed…much of the HRC fervor here feels like a Reagan hangover….
different-church-lady
@DCF:
Wait, he doesn’t?
Ruckus
@kc:
As many have said the party is more than the sum of it’s parts. And Sanders has been and somewhat continues to be an outsider more than a part of the whole. He’s been in congress as both a rep and a senator for what 25 yrs and yes he’s voted on the liberal side of the aisle but as a member of the party I’ve been more loyal, and you probably have been as well. And all of you berniebots don’t get me wrong or peghole me at all, I like Sanders, I like a lot of his policies. But like single payer, HOW are you going to get any of them done? For that you need a party, and it has to be the dominate party in congress by a good margin to make any of that happen. We have two, this isn’t a parliamentary country that forms power by many small groups looking out for their biggest common interest, we have two parties. They take their power by being part of one or the other. He hasn’t done that for his 25 yrs. He’s not doing that now, when he needs that support most. That’s not smart politics. It won’t get things done.
chopper
@Ultraviolet Thunder:
i’m just wondering how someone who has adamantly refused to join the democratic party for decades, to the point of slagging the party repeatedly over that time, is going to turn into the greatest party builder in the democrats’ history. which he would have to be in order to create the sort of record-shattering coattails he needs to have a congress that will allow any of his policies out of committee.
Ultraviolet Thunder
(Obligatory Mumia Sweatshirt reference)
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@DCF: If his campaign were based on growing gills: yeah, i would.
Brachiator
Gawker is suggesting that Heidi Cruz can’t stand those stinky, ordinary Iowa caucus people. Poor dear.
Rumor: Heidi Cruz Is So Repulsed by Iowans She Has to Shower Multiple Times a Day
Paula
@Ruckus:
No way — you mean showing up every 4 years to vote isn’t enough?!
DCF
@Cacti:
The ‘Geezer’ characterization is about ‘spirit’ and ‘aspiration, not age…as a ‘Sputnik’ baby, I can state that with some measure of authority….
kc
@Cacti:
Cool story, bro.
Schlemazel
@Ruckus:
Can’t say I have ever seen them. But lets pretend both of them had been here and active. I am sick to death of assholes who claim to be Dems and then do everything they can to slime other Dems with Republican-friendly slime. If the case you want to make is Hil is Mitt Romney in drag ore Bern is the second coming of Lenin then just fuck off. Tell me what it is that would make me want to support one or the other. If your argument would help the GOP then just STFU. Whats good about your candidate? I was sick of that shit 8 years ago (well, really long before that but you know it has gotten worse since ’94.)
Cacti
@kc:
Does Sanders share his friend Cornel West’s belief that Obama is the “first niggerized President”?
Mnemosyne
@different-church-lady:
I was pretty hopeful this summer because he seemed to be able to pivot and address the concerns of the BLM protesters and other people/groups who were nervous about him on racial issues, but somebody seems to have convinced him that running against Obama is a winning strategy for the Democratic primary, which is making me scratch my head. Democrats — especially the Democrats who vote in the primaries — LOVE Obama, so who’s the genius that decided Bernie should downplay his connections to Obama in the primary?
J R in WV
@different-church-lady:
So he has been kind of a Democrat for a few months? I’ve been a Dem for decades! and I want candidates who have been in MY party for as long as I have.
Hillary has been a Democrat for as long as I have, and Bernie has not. End of story, pretty much.
raven
@Mnemosyne: Mr Charlie
different-church-lady
@DCF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG7suS4YJWk
Baud
@Brachiator:
Not repulsed by Ted; repulsed by Iowans.
Hmmmm.
Baud
@Mnemosyne: I don’t know how true that is. It’s not as if Bernie is doing as poorly as O’Malley.
mdblanche
@schrodinger’s cat:
I believe this video provides the clearest possible explanation.
Gimlet
What place will Rahm have in Hillary’s administration?
kc
@Ruckus:
I agree with that much; it’s frustrating sometimes to see so much attention, energy, and time devoted solely to the presidential race.
Well, Bill & Hill between them have had many many years in positions of considerable power and what progressive gains do we have to show for it?
I mean, I’ll vote for HC if she gets the nomination, because the Republicans are so much worse, but ugh.
Baud
@Gimlet: All of them, Katie.
DCF
@different-church-lady:
I knew that was coming, and wondered who/what would take the bait…thanks for answering my curiosity…a response of that nature is emblematic of the anomie that has enshrouded the Democratic party for the past 25 years…perhaps we need to reconsider the two-party system, behaving as it is like an entropic game of Tic Tac Doe….
Mnemosyne
@DCF:
And much of the anti-Clinton fervor feels like people who actually thought there was something scandalous about Whitewater or Travelgate or any of the other bullshit smears of the 1990s.
Schlemazel
@kc:
Has Bernie added to the Dem Senate campaign committee? Has he used his reputation to try to get other Dems elected? Has he helped to raise funds to elect more Dems? I can support Bernie IN SPITE of his failing to do so but I can see a lot of people resenting that & holding it against him. He comes off as more interested in himself.
kc
@Cacti:
I dunno, bro; has HRC apologized for her racist 2008 campaign yet?
dogwood
@DCF:
I don’t expect him to walk on water, I expect him to respect the entire democratic voting bloc, not just white progressives and young people. That’s not too much to ask.
Betty Cracker
Gyad, Chuck Todd is a dolt.
@Keith G: Thank you!
Schlemazel
@Gimlet:
He was an Obama loyal, not a Clinton loyal, nice smear though.
Bobby Thomson
@Anoniminous:
Grimes ran harder against Obama than the gubernatorial candidate and got more votes. I don’t think the race in Kentucky was decided by disaffected liberals.
Baud
@Schlemazel: He’s worked for both.
kc
@DCF:
Yep. :D
different-church-lady
@J R in WV: I’ve been saying that Sanders is the opposite of a DINO — he’s a democrat in everything but name.
I think the “He’s not a Democrat!” charge is overplayed. Certainly he’s not embedded in the party the way other candidates would be. This is a positive for his supporters (who I believe tacitly, at best want to see the party rebuilt from scratch, and and worst want to see it destroyed and don’t care if anything replaces it) but a negative for his campaign itself.
Me, I believe he’d be a faithful democrat. But whether he knows how to strengthen the party (in the down-ballot sense) is something I think it’s reasonable to be skeptical about.
Paula
@Mnemosyne:
Well, he doesn’t have as many connections as Hillary, so it would be a losing point.
It’s also worth pointing out that a strategy of trying to bring in disaffected voters a la Trump would necessarily include downplaying his connections to the (Black) POTUS. And that may be the key to Sanders’ mysterious incompetence on racial justice — he thinks he can get away with redistributive measures if he can dance around those minority issues that cost other left pols votes with otherwise middle of the road whites: immigration, policing, guns (which is at heart a white power issue).
It’s a fair interpretation, as seen by Trump’s success.
However, for someone who’s nominally a Dem and quite left-wing, you will eventually run into the fact that there’s a lot of white people out there who like the idea of welfare for themselves but not for Those People. It’s why, IMO, single payer is about as possible as reparations, because the root of the argument against both is rooted in the same American racism.
Gimlet
@Schlemazel:
Wiki
Working early in his career in Democratic politics, Emanuel was appointed as director of the finance committee for Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign. In 1993, he joined the Clinton administration, where he served as the Assistant to the President for Political Affairs and as the Senior Advisor to the President for Policy and Strategy before resigning in 1998.
different-church-lady
@DCF: Sooooo… you set up a punchline, so you can scold the comedian? Okay then.
Mnemosyne
@Baud:
Nobody really likes O’Malley — he’s just not sufficiently interesting and he has a lot of negatives.
Cacti
@Paula:
He’s chasing the Reagan (aka racist) Democrats who haven’t voted D for going on 40-years now.
Brachiator
@Baud:
Had more time to build up an immunity to Ted.
Baud
@Mnemosyne: But the point is, not enough of Bernie’s supporters care enough about his stance towards Obama to prevent him from being competitive, at least in these early states.
Cacti
@kc:
Not sure, bro. Has Bernie apologized for voting to support the Minutemen border thugs yet?
Mike J
@kc:
Don’t ask, don’t tell was actually the first step towards marriage equality. Clinton wanted to simply allow gay people to serve openly in the military, but there were veto proof majorities in both houses ready to make the old, “do ask and hound people forever until you throw them out of the military with no benefits” rule the law. Don’t ask, don’t tell allowed people to serve and stopped a regression.
That step led towards Obama being able to allow gay people to openly serve. It would have never happened without Bill Clinton making gay rights an issue. That led not just to changes in the military, but in the rest of society. That’s not to denigrate the hard work that many others did, but Clinton’s was the first public policy step.
David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch
Big endorsement —–> Kid Rock endorses…………….trump
*
the most luxurious, classiest endorsement – evah!
Baud
@David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch: I’m surprised that hadn’t happened already.
Brachiator
@DCF: Good stuff on why you like Sanders. Thanks,
Schlemazel
@Baud:
as a low level functionary not CoS, it is a smear. Why not ask what role he will have in a Sanders administration? in fact why not ask Him who all would staff his admin? That would be a fair question for either candidate but to suggest there is something wrong with either of them because they happen to have a relationship with some other politician is to not understand what it takes to get to the position of having a successful campaign & guilt by association. It would take a lot more than “well X was involved in some aspect of Ys history and it turns out they are assholes therefore Y should be prohibited form the office” without a lot more evidence
Bobby Thomson
@WarMunchkin:
And that’s why he prefaced his remarks with “this isn’t good politics, but”? And that’s why when his people got caught with their hands in the cookie jar, Sanders supporters said that Clinton needed to return the solid from Sanders?
Uh huh.
dogwood
@Schlemazel:
You’re wrong. Rahm is a Clinton guy. He certainly wasn’t anti – Obama, and didn’t endorce in ’08, but he owes his political career to Bill Clinton. I think he was in the Clinton White House all 8 years.
Schlemazel
@Gimlet:
I was aware of that, see above
Mnemosyne
@Paula:
It would be a very tricky tightrope to walk in the general election since Bernie would basically have to continue distancing himself from Obama while winking and nodding to minority (not just black) voters to reassure them that he’s not abandoning them. But when 81 percent of Democrats approve of the president (per today’s Rasmussen tracking poll), I’m not sure how you get the Democratic nomination in the first place.
David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch
2-Minuet Warning
Ripley
I predict old white people will win the primary, leaving the old white people who lost at a decision point. Subsequently, the old white people who comment on this blog and whose old white person won the primary will hurl insults at the old white people who comment on this blog whose old white person lost. Those insulted old white people will then reciprocate.
Democracy!
Mike J
@David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch: I just sent my harpsichord out to be tuned.
kc
@Cacti:
Stop calling me bro, bro. I’m a woman.
Mnemosyne
@Baud:
That’s why I said above that I’m curious to see how the actual voting and/or caucuses go now that people actually have to get out of the house and cast a vote. Lots and lots of people on the internet loved Howard Dean and he polled well, but they mostly didn’t show up to vote for him.
Cacti
@kc:
Whatever you say, bro.
Felonius Monk
I can’t wait for tonight’s caucus to be over so we can all go back to just shouting at one another.
Baud
@Felonius Monk: Fuck you.
Baud
@Mnemosyne: Agreed.
hilts
@Schlemazel:
My goal was not to piss off anyone, I was calling attention to a link that I thought would appeal to Applejinx. May the better person between Sanders and Clinton win.
For your info, I have posted on this site for several years.
Lighten up.
Paula
@Mnemosyne:
Well, Sanders’ base characterizes itself as being anti-milquetoast Dem and Obama specifically because they’re disappointed with what he (the pres) hasn’t done. He’s representing his base correctly. But obviously that’s not enough … Candidate Obama at some point pre-Iowa realized he had to start kow-towing to the “establishment” because he needed their endorsements. The endorsements get you access to specific constituents.
Sanders’ crew, were either not allowed to or didn’t care about getting these contacts before the election. Probably because they honestly thought they were staying the lovable, idealistic long-shots and didn’t have to think about the practicalities of actually winning nationally.
dogwood
@different-church-lady:
Until now, the only time I ever saw Sanders show any interest in the Democratic Party was in 2011/12 when he was urging dems to primary Obama. Why he didn’t join up and do it is a mystery if his motives are always so pure.
Mnemosyne
@dogwood:
I think Rahm is too damaged to be brought into a Hillary Clinton White House. Though it would give him a good excuse for resigning as mayor.
Baud
@Mnemosyne: Ambassador to Russia. He and Putin deserve each other.
Nom de Plume
Just so everyone knows, the old “I’d totally support so-and-so if it weren’t for his/her obnoxious supporters” argument is not actually an argument, nor is it the slightest bit rational.
magurakurin
@raven: about goblue. There is a lot of money floating around out there this cycle and it seems pretty clear that there is a fair amount of ratfucking going on. This cat always shows up near the middle or end of threads and is particularly confrontational. But today I noticed something weird. Well weird to me. He keeps using the term “squish.” I’m not the best judge of current slang terms, but it isn’t a word I am real familiar at least in its slang and or derogatory sense. I did some checking and found this:
Is it wrong to speculate? It would be wrong not to.
Mike J
BTW, Bill Clinton lost both Iowa and New Hampshire when he wasn’t the incumbent.
raven
Cmon Betty Boop, new thread.
Felonius Monk
@Baud: Et tu, Brute?
Gimlet
@Schlemazel:
to suggest there is something wrong with either of them because they happen to have a relationship with some other politician is to not understand what it takes to get to the position of having a successful campaign & guilt by association.
Snopes
Chelsea Clinton has in-laws now. You wouldn’t know it from the coverage. There were no pictures of them and nary a mention of them.
The Clintons and Mezvinskys have long been political allies and friends.
In 1993, Margolies-Mezvinsky, then a freshman Democrat, cast the vote that got President Bill Clinton’s controversial tax package through the House of Representatives.
Edward Mezvinsky was elected to Congress as an Iowa representative in 1972, and he won a re-election campaign in 1974 before losing a bid for a third term in 1976.
Ed Mezvinsky habitually dropped the Clintons’ names and boasted of their friendship during the 1990s as he defrauded friends, family members and institutions out of more than $10 million.
Ed Mezvinsky was sentenced in 2003 to serve 80 months in federal prison after pleading guilty to a massive fraud that prosecutors said amounted to a Ponzi scheme. He was released from custody in April 2008, but remains under federal probation supervision.
Both he and his wife were forced into bankruptcy, and they quietly divorced in 2007, court records show.
According to ABC News, Mezvinsky’s downfall stemmed from an activity that has long been the subject of one of this site’s most frequently-accessed articles, the ubiquitous Nigerian scam (also known as 419 fraud):
Baud
@Felonius Monk: I’m just practicing my pandering.
raven
@magurakurin: That would help his east bay badass cred.!
kc
@Cacti:
Typical white bro behavior, trying to LITERALLY erase my identity.
White male privilege, you’re soaking in it.
David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch
Entrance poll says Hillary winning women 55-40
Who knows if it’s accurate, but if it is, then Sanders will need a lot of men to offset.
Mnemosyne
@Paula:
I’m curious to find out how Sanders’ ground game has been in IA and NH. I know that Iowa Old Lady said she had been contacted multiple times by Hillary’s campaign to make sure she knew where her caucus location was, if she was going, etc, but I’m not sure she was getting similar calls from the Sanders campaign.
Like I said, though, we have now reached the moment of truth where we see whose campaign is actually getting voters to show up and whose isn’t. On the Republican side, I think fewer people are going to show up for Trump than his campaign thinks, but he’ll probably still squeak by.
Baud
@Mnemosyne: IOL was an early declared Clinton supporter. She might have been taken off the Sanders list early on.
lgerard
After my dream the other night I am convinced that America is trolling Trump
Rubio by 2!
Don’t care who wins for the Dems, because unless they nominate Kim Kardashian, Bill Cosby, or the Cedric the Lion Guy. they get my vote
Mnemosyne
@Gimlet:
So I’m assuming everyone in your family married perfect paragons of rectitude going back three generations? You have absolutely no embarrassing in-laws who you hope don’t show up for family events?
Felonius Monk
@Baud: A very necessary skill in today’s political environment, especially here at BJ.
Baud
@lgerard: Yep. No one is objectionable on our side
Ultraviolet Thunder
OT: My SIL is a (very!) vocal Bernie supporter, for all the right reasons. She’s a liberal and makes no bones about it. Her husband is a 4th generation Republican and also very outspoken. Or he was until he had vocal chord nodules removed this week. It’s … interesting over there lately.
Baud
@Felonius Monk: You are so right.
Gimlet
@Mnemosyne:
They were long time family friends of the Clintons.
Baud
New thread up BTW.
Mnemosyne
@Gimlet:
Yes, and? You’ve never, ever heard of anyone who got married whose families knew each other beforehand?
I guess Chelsea was supposed to put her choice of husband up for a vote by the general public so we could all decide that for her instead of letting her marry someone she’d known for years. Because, you know, it’s so SCANDALOUS that people actually know each other before they get married.
magurakurin
@Mnemosyne:
Of course there is always that slightly sinking, embarrassing feeling I have gotten when I realize that that person might actually be me.
magurakurin
@Baud:
so, no TBogg unit?
Paula
@Mnemosyne:
Well, certainly the reason Obama 2008 is a template for many candidates now is because it was unique at the time. Unique and clearly difficult to replicate.
I am reminded by the nets, however, that Sanders doesn’t have to win IA to remain competitive. The last 2 R winners have gone on to lose. He’s winning NH.
The issue, again, is AA voters, because of SC. Lose that and you can’t be the Dem candidate for president.
Ruckus
@Mnemosyne:
I’ve had immediate family members that I used to hope wouldn’t show up for family events. None of the secondary or farther removed are assholes that I know of.
Ruckus
@magurakurin:
I have found that not discussing religion(or lack thereof), politics or who or what you’ve had or wish to have sex with helps not being pushed into the category of the family asshole.
mclaren
Hillary Clinton will not be the Democratic nominee. Hillary has no chance of winning the general election.
Panurge
Who would she lose to? Trump? Cruz?
fuckwit
Meh, political campaigns are drama-rama’s.
I remember in in 2012, hearing people I worked side-by-side with in the Obama campaign say, “well, no matter what happens, at least we’ve had a Black President, and our children will grow up in a country that has had one, and nobody can ever take that away”. I have to guess that was after the first debate, perhaps.
Nevermind that Obama in 2008 lost New Hampshire, and he gave us that amazing “YES WE CAN” speech and slogan out of that. That was a stellar speech, probably one of the best 5 of his career so far.
Campaigns have their ups and downs.
I give negative fucks who wins Iowa. The states with huge delegate counts are all still to come…