Rebecca Traister, in NYMag:
… Democrats have two candidates about whom voters feel passionate. The [Iowa caucus] win/tie is tremendous for Sanders, the long-shot challenger from the left. But it’s also pretty great for Clinton, who could have decisively lost Iowa but hung on, and who also became the first Clinton (and the first woman ever) not to have outright lost the state.
Clinton’s approach tonight — her ballsy power-play move of stepping over Republican winner Ted Cruz’s victory speech, and her happy-warrior tone — showed a marked contrast from her 2008 loss in Iowa, a night when she came in nine points behind Barack Obama and one point behind John Edwards. Back then, her concession was dismal, wan, practically consumptive. Eight years later, she was energetic, brassy, and seemed to show she’s learning something about navigating the choppy waters of running for president while female…
Recall the days following the 2008 Iowa caucus, when the media took advantage of Clinton’s defeat to let loose with their resentment and animosity toward her. That was when conservative Marc Rudov told Fox News that Clinton lost because “When Barack Obama speaks, men hear ‘Take off for the future!’ When Hillary Clinton speaks, men hear ‘Take out the garbage!’” It was in the days after Iowa that Clinton infamously got asked about how voters believed her to be “the most experienced and the most electable” candidate but “are hesitating on the likability issue.”
What was true in ’08 remains true this year. From her entrance into the campaign, Clinton has been tagged as unlikable, as the practical buzzkill, the boring one with the wonky facts and figures and experience who’s going to show up and tell you that your big plans are impossible, but that she’s thought of some smaller and more doable fixes. Meanwhile, Sanders, who entered the race shouting righteously and correctly about a system that’s broken, has, as his campaign has strengthened, become the unlikely vehicle of idealistic hopes and dreams for America — Free college! Free health care! A $15 minimum wage! The breakup of the big banks!
His vision of revolution, as Bryce Covert wrote in Monday’s New York Times, differs significantly from Clinton’s approach, which Covert described accurately as “pragmatism incarnate.” Critics argue that his promises have no chance of coming to fruition, but their soaring scale — and the righteous ideals to which they speak — make him a candidate it is infinitely easier to feel emotionally inspired by. Clinton’s realism may in fact be one of the reasons that her supporters believe that she’d make a more prepared and effective commander-in-chief than Sanders — something that in fact provokes rational excitement, especially by those thrilled at the idea of an experienced, capable, hard-assed Democratic woman president. But hers is not an easy pose to pull off, if you’re trying to win the hearts of America…
So here we are! On our way to New Hampshire, a state that inspiring Bernie Sanders is overwhelmingly favored to win. But for one of the first times, in her speech in Iowa, I saw Clinton work effectively to turn the pragmatic ship around, to take what she wants to say — that Sanders’s soaring promises are empty but her more modest proposals might come to pass — and make it sound almost exciting.
jo6pac
While Female?
Neo-con of Death, sorry I don’t see her any other way.
Voting Green for Jill Stein.;
Howard Beale IV
Anybody see this?
singfoom
Oh boy, another thread for Hillary supporters to bash Sanders / Sanders supporters and for Sanders supporters to bash Hillary / Hillary supporters.
Should we start a drinking game?
dr. bloor
@jo6pac: What are the pundits saying about Stein’s chances of breaking .5% this time around?
Princess
Re the ground game: I just heard from my kid who lives in a state adjacent to Iowa. He said a bunch of his friends went to Iowa to canvas for Bernie, and they outnumbered the Hillary canvassers in the small town they were in about 20 to 1. This may be hyperbole, but if true it is a story the national media totally missed.
Gimlet
“pragmatism incarnate.” ?
raven
@Princess: I used to fish in Keokuk!
Iowa Old Lady
@singfoom: It’s like waking up and hearing mommy and daddy fighting AGAIN.
I’m sliding past a lot of comments and reminding myself that people are tense and BJ fights are epic.
WaterGirl
@jo6pac: I am not a fan of Hillary, but I’ll definitely vote for her if she’s the nominee.
I hope you enjoy President Trump, President Cruz or President Rubio, the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the further erosion of voting rights and the loss of health care for millions of americans. To name just a few.
A petulant vote for Jill Stein will do absolutely nothing to move this country forward OR to keep us from losing the gains we made under President Obama.
MomSense
@Howard Beale IV:
I read it earlier today. Horrifying. I wish I could believe it was an isolated incident but the hate has been ratcheted up to scary levels on the republican side.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Howard Beale IV: Holy shit, an attempted conversation.
Tissue Thin Pseudonym
Well, I now have 181 copies of Becoming Phoebe. Time to start autographing and getting copies into the mail.
Joel
Traister has done a much better job covering this election than she did in 2008.
WaterGirl
@Howard Beale IV: I had not seen that. Interesting to not know who the writer was until the end.
So many crazy people being worked up by all the hate that’s coming from the Republican candidates. This level of hate being “okay” started, I think, with Sarah Palin. Ugh.
WaterGirl
@Tissue Thin Pseudonym: It must be a total thrill to see your books in print and to hold them in your hot little hands! So proud of you and excited for you!
cmorenc
@WaterGirl:
Not just that. Try the destruction of gains made under:
LBJ (medicare etc.)
FDR (social security etc.)
TR (the foundation of public lands and environmental protection burned down to the ground, salted, and given away to the likes of Clive Bundy)
The GOP’s current vision is to restore the good old days of the 1890s, before Mckinley was assassinated, opening the door for VP Teddy Roosevelt to become President and harsh the mellow of the golden days of the USA.
Don’t let the unattainable perfect be the enemy of the attainable good.
MomSense
@Tissue Thin Pseudonym:
Congratulations! In going to check it out.
kc
@singfoom:
I’m a Sanders supporter but I do love that HRC stepped on Cruz’s speech. :D
Nate Dawg
@Just Some Fuckhead: God you are a fuckhead. I’m going to trust her instinct. Reading the story, it’s apparent something was about to go down.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@singfoom: we could talk about downticket races. which ones interest you?
Frankensteinbeck
I was very, very interested in the poll… yesterday? The day before? The one that showed Clinton voters were as enthusiastic or even very slightly more than Bernie voters. Crowds at rallies do not tell the story of the whole electorate. If you’d looked online in early 2012, you’d have thought Obama was unpopular and the Democrats unmotivated, but he was and is a much-loved president. I think Hillary will be in good shape in the general.
WaterGirl
@cmorenc: Good point. It’s beyond frustrating to see otherwise intelligent people be willing to risk everything we have and gain nothing except perhaps a feel-good moment while voting.
The Thin Black Duke
@WaterGirl: It’s called “privilege”. I wish you and I had the luxury, but we don’t.
WaterGirl
@Nate Dawg: You may have correctly interpreted JSF’s comment, but I took it as a compliment to Howard Beale’s attempt to start a conversation.
Communication is a complicated thing. That’s why I love this comment from George Bernard Shaw: “The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
WarMunchkin
@Gimlet: Yeah, I facepalmed hard at that. It’s going to be a long season.
Howard Beale IV
@jo6pac: Then continue to throw your vote away like the Ron Paul cranks do.
Nate Dawg
@The Thin Black Duke: Ding ding ding.
If you have the resources to protect yourself and your family from the FREE MARKET HELL the Republicans will unleash upon us all . . . then you may be more willing to roll the dice on Bernie.
If you’re living in a Red State and watching good people get squashed by local Republicans, you probably aren’t so gung-ho for him.
redshirt
Is there anyone here sincerely fired up about Hillary?
I’m not particularly, but I know she’ll win the General.
That’s all that matters.
I’m not convinced Bernie can.
Nate Dawg
@WaterGirl: That’s a rather straight reading of the resident Fuckhead. I mean, his nym is “JSF” after all. But you could be right; I don’t know.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Nate Dawg: I read the whole thing three times looking for a threat. There is none. She’s deliberately vague on the details that would matter, how close he was, how close were the students that were near her, what he was saying, why getting up and standing behind a table would dissuade him from murder and cause him to run. It’s a ridiculous story. There’s no motive, means or opportunity established. Sorry that low bar makes me insensitive.
Hillary Rettig
As much as I’m trying to be impartial, I just can’t see how HRC can enter the race with a vast advantage in name recognition, money, and institutional support, wind up tied, and still be considered a winner.
WaterGirl
@The Thin Black Duke: Funny you should say that. I almost wrote something about privilege in my previous comment but couldn’t find the right words.
On an unrelated note, I thought of you when David Bowie died. Is the origin of your nym related to David Bowie?
gogol's wife
@redshirt:
I’m sincerely fired up about Hillary when I think of President Trump, Cruz, Rubio, and the Supreme Court they will create.
redshirt
@WaterGirl: I think he was joking about the Stein vote.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Hillary Rettig: that’s nice
redshirt
@gogol’s wife: I’m fired up for voting against whatever Republican is puked up.
NotMax
@singfoom
It’s become cud chewing by now.
“She’s the Maggie Thatcher of the left!”
“He’s a cross of King Canute and Mao Tse-tung!”
And so it goes.
Nate Dawg
@Hillary Rettig: Maybe because she won? I don’t know. Just a hunch.
WaterGirl
@Nate Dawg: You were right, I was wrong. But my point on communication still stands! :-)
@Just Some Fuckhead: I wonder if you could make that same comment if you were female. We will never know, of course, but I doubt that you would.
schrodinger's cat
Listening to old ghazals (Urdu poetry of the romantic kind). Very Zen. I have had enough politics for the day.
Adam L Silverman
@Howard Beale IV: She is very lucky to be alive. She should make a full police report and they should be able to pull the video surveillance from the hotel lobby and from the outward facing cameras from the hotel.
Germy
@Hillary Rettig: I have a hard time understanding why Rubio is considered a winner, after coming in third. Low expectations?
Nate Dawg
@WaterGirl: Would you believe that I find your naievete endearing?
WaterGirl
@redshirt: “I think he was joking about the Stein vote.”
I hope that you are right! I read JSF wrong, too. Maybe it’s time to get into my PJs and put the computer to sleep.
WaterGirl
@Germy: Because he’s Republican and darling of the media, of course!
schrodinger's cat
@Germy: Because he is special.
Chyron HR
@Hillary Rettig:
Nate Dawg
@Just Some Fuckhead: This reminds me of some of the police officers who were involved in the investigation of a sexual assault of a family member that I was unfortunately present to witness (the investigation, not the assault).
There are plenty of reasons to be fearful of someone before they act. Our animal instinct is very good at determining threats. The conversation she quotes, the fact that he was getting close to her, and I assume his demeanor and speech (spitting the words with vitriol) all contributed to an immediate sense of a threat.
Also, how do you explain “Why I am doing *this*?” <— There's your clue.
On that note, most professional bullies / psychopaths are smart enough to not make direct threats, and smart enough to know they don't have to. Body language and other cues are more threatening than direct speech. It keeps them out of the law's grasp but allows them to bully people. Experienced this first hand recently, and it's maddening because unless the threat is direct, there's jack shit you can do about it legally.
Mandalay
@Germy:
Because horse race.
SATSQ.
Nate Dawg
@Adam L Silverman: Police wouldn’t do anything about it. He did nothing illegal. See above.
Trust me, police don’t get involved in anything until there is physical violence. Abuse can take all forms, but unfortunately police are extremely reluctant to pursue any abuse other than physical abuse (sexual, emotional, financial, etc.)
WereBear
I do wonder if there are Republican chat rooms where they are discussing their race:
“I love Cruz, he’s been anointed by God!”
“I’m still voting for Santorum. I just don’t read about him on the Internet.”
“Trump will make America great again. It says so on his hat.”
I’m just guessing. Because I’m not going there.
WaterGirl
@Nate Dawg: I’m not quite sure how to take your comment, so I’ll just assume you meant it in the nicest possible way. :-)
Frankensteinbeck
@Chyron HR:
C’mon, man/woman/adult/child/animal/plant/object, let’s wait until someone shows up actually throwing those kinds of crazy theories around. It’ll happen, unfortunately.
Nate Dawg
@WaterGirl: That’s the spirit!
Felonius Monk
@WaterGirl:
I’m not YELLING. I’m talking so you can hear me. :-)
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@Adam L Silverman: I agree. What some folks fail to understand is how people who have faced violence learn to sense danger from being crowded by someone who’s so very – and specifically – angry. I completely honor my instincts about such things and often request (not always politely) that people in in space back away. Women especially are sensitive to these kind of boundary intrusions, and sadly, have often been socialized to ignore them in order to avoid seeming impolite.
Speaking of boundaries, any thoughts on the continued occupation at Malheur?
Just Some Fuckhead
@WaterGirl: I’ve been at gunpoint twice and the victim of attempted robbery a couple times and it’s actually a pretty physical thing that features physical contact and/or grappling and weapons.
No one is stopping the writer from sharing the details that would establish motive, means and opportunity. This lack of detail was a choice the writer made.
Nate Dawg
I think it’s more likely that the GOP pushed the scales in favor of Rubio. Given how much Trump scares the establishment, it wouldn’t shock me.
The main evidence being how Rubio kept gaining on Trump throughout the night even thought votes were evenly distributed. He made a remarkable jump from 15% to 24% throughout the course of the evening, and even inched up 2% after votes from all over the state were counted and there were no regional hotbeds outstanding.
Uncle Chuck
Oh, for dog’s sake, people. Listen to Noam Chomsky. If you live in a “swing state.” vote for the Democrat. If you don’t, vote for whoever you want to. Pay attention to the anachronism that is the Electoral College. Take a freaking civics lesson. It’s a damn shame low information voters aren’t exclusive to the other side.
Nate Dawg
@Just Some Fuckhead: Maybe if you hadn’t been such a fuckhead, you would have perceived the threat earlier and wouldn’t have been at the end of a gun. Just a thought.
Adam L Silverman
@Nate Dawg: Actually this counts as a simple assault in most places. So she can, at least, make the report and file charges. Whether or not he’s prosecuted at this point is less important than 1) get the police to intervene and starting a formal paper trail and 2) finding out who he is.
Cacti
@Hillary Rettig:
There’s another name for moral victories.
Losses.
Howard Beale IV
@Adam L Silverman: It might have more weight if it came from you. She originally posted it on the University’s website, but Crooks and Liars picked it up, and they Tweeted it.
WereBear
@Nate Dawg: I understand Rubio is being financed by Microsft. So it will be inevitable that he will randomly crash, can’t find his water bottle when he wakes up in the morning, and will be constantly coming down with viruses.
Nate Dawg
@Adam L Silverman: yes, I totally agree. Getting info reports is absolutely essential. Police are very unlikely to use resources to follow up on a simple assault charge when the elements of assault (in this case) are totally subjective (the threat of harm is subjective, that is. He didn’t raise an arm, etc.). They’d probably do it for Harris-Perry, though.
The Thin Black Duke
@WaterGirl: Yes, it is. Maybe it’s silly, but Mr. Bowie meant a lot to me, and his loss still resonates.
Adam L Silverman
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q): Those four people are nuts and Cliven Bundy is too. Also, things are starting to get ugly in town as a protest and counter protest yesterday came very close to violence. I fully expect things to get worse before they get better. I also expect Ammon and company to turn their trials, if not every court appearance, into a zoo.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Nate Dawg: Perhaps the writer barely averted death. However, there’s nothing in the details of the story that would support that. I’d like the details I noted that were missing and I’d like to see the police report.
Joel
@Just Some Fuckhead: Occupying someone’s personal space is a threat.
NotMax
@WereBear
So he’s PC?
Tissue Thin Pseudonym
@WaterGirl: My favorite quote about communication comes from Gopher head coach Brad Frost, when asked what was the most surprising thing he’d learned since he started coaching women’s hockey: “Communication on the ice. I never realized it was going to be so hard to get twenty young women to talk to each other.”
Pogonip
@dr. bloor: Well, she has nowhere to go but up!
Baud/Jane 2016: Because It’s A Jungle Out There. And Because Thurston Won’t Stop Barking Until They’re Elected.
Adam L Silverman
@Howard Beale IV: I can’t really see what she’d get out of it had it not happened. Does she have a history of making false accusations or something?
As for me, it wouldn’t happen to me. Or, rather, it is highly unlikely to happen. I am very large (5’11, 265 lbs), and unless I’m with a group of people I know, I don’t sit with my back to a door or to where I can be approached from behind. Also, I don’t go on MSNBC.
Mandalay
@Hillary Rettig:
You answered your own question: her vast advantage in “institutional support”. Look at who is declaring her “the winner”.
The repulsive Joan Walsh was on TV this evening pretending to provide objective analysis of the result from last night, but was at pains to state “Clinton won” and “Sanders lost”. I despise establishment fuckers like her and Donna Brazile who put on this phony act of being impartial analysts, yet constantly skew the discussion in favor of Clinton.
Adam L Silverman
@Nate Dawg: I’m tracking on your point, both in this and the initial response. And I agree with them. But if you have the ability, either because you’re close to the cultural and societal centers (white, male, Christian, well off) or because as in Professor Harris-Perry’s case you’re a semi-celebrity, to direct Law and its application in your favor then you should. Even if you have none of those advantages you should do so anyway. The paper trail could become important. And finding out who the creep is will be invaluable.
Nate Dawg
@Just Some Fuckhead: I think the fact of the matter is she didn’t *know* what she was avoiding, but she knew it wasn’t good.
I dont’ think you can quite appreciate the position women, persons of color, gays, etc. are in (women, in particular) where they are subject to random acts of abuse and violence for nothing other than daring to exist in a public space. Maybe he would have just yelled and screamed at her? That still would have been abusive. She was avoiding more trauma. As a trauma victim, she’s obviously sensitive to it. I’m gonna trust her instinct that some abuse was brewing. That’s the problem with being a victim, you don’t know what level of abuse you’re about to get when it starts. You just know it’s bad.
Also, you keep making it sound like nobody should ever feel abused unless they are in threat of their life at the end of a gun. Sorry, but there are lots of awful things that happen to people short of murder and without weapons.
WereBear
@NotMax: Good one!
Frankensteinbeck
@Adam L Silverman:
Aren’t some of them Sovereign Citizens? They’ve spouted similar claptrap. The whole Sovereign Citizen movement is based off of turning courtrooms into zoos. They might get professional zoo-creation advice, even.
Baud
Haha. Christie calls Rubio the “Boy in the Bubble.”
Just Some Fuckhead
@Joel: I’d have to see the law on that. Cites?
Groucho48
@Just Some Fuckhead:
So, you are saying that she made it up? That she was over-reacting? I rewad this:
and it sure seemed clear to me that he was menacing her. I know I would feel menaced if that had happened to me.
Renie
one of the problems i’ve found with hillary is people say you can’t trust her and she’s not ‘likeable’. when i ask them to tell me why they think that, they have no answer. i think these views are the result of the media trashing the clintons for the past 20+ years
benw
@singfoom:
We’d all be passed out in minutes. I think we should all get assigned call numbers depending on our Hillernie preference. Then, when anyone starts in on the Bernillary bashing, we can just sound off in the comments:
“Sanders 7, standing by!”
“Clinton 4, standing by!”
“Sanders 12, standing by!”
“Clinton 3, standing by!”
“Sanders 5, standing by!”
“Clinton 2, standing by!”
Iowa Old Lady
@Germy: Because they are covering their eyes and pretending Trump and Cruz can’t possibly really be in first and second.
NotMax
@Tissue Thin Pseudonym
Obligatory link.
Nate Dawg
@Adam L Silverman: Yah I’m totally with you. I guess my point is just a general frustration that victims of abuse are rarely successful in pursuing charges, because of institutional apathy. Rape victims being the most prominent example, also domestic violence. Sucks.
Pogonip
@Howard Beale IV: I tried to but it kept kicking me out. Can you, or anyone who was able to read it, please summarize it?
Adam L Silverman
@Frankensteinbeck: Yes they are. The statements that Bundy put out through his paid attorney are already coded for the various sub-cultures he’s trying to speak to. That’s why he said he accepted the jurisdiction of Article III courts and Article III judges.
Interesting note: the other 10 or so charged among his followers, including his brother, have or are getting public defenders. He’s the only one with a defense attorney billing by the hour.
nutella
@Just Some Fuckhead:
What kind of miserable over-privileged fuckhead demands that no one can mention a hostile encounter with a stranger unless they include the stranger’s motive, means, and opportunity?
You seem to be suggesting that every belligerent bully is guaranteed not to be any threat at all. That a person who feels threatened by a belligerent stranger cannot mention it to anyone or tell the story from her own point of view.
‘Insensitive’. Right.
Adam L Silverman
@Nate Dawg: Our system has issues.
Pogonip
@Tissue Thin Pseudonym: Congratulations! May you be as prolific ( and as rich) as P. G. Wodehouse!
Mandalay
@Uncle Chuck:
This.
It’s reasonable to discuss whether a vote for the Green Party in (say) Florida or North Carolina is a wasted vote, but anyone who says a vote for the Green Party in (say) California or Oklahoma is automatically a wasted vote is just clueless.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Nate Dawg: de Becker’s The Gift of Fear talks about some of these things. We have millions of years history that gets passed down to us, to varying degrees, by surviving. One generally should listen to those little voices that tell us something is wrong.
I found the book to be a good read, but it was a long time ago. I hope there’s no quiz tomorrow. :-)
Cheers,
Scott.
Nate Dawg
Occupying someone’s personal space can be evidence of an element of assault. Definitely.
Um, just re-read the whole piece. The “rise to power / Nazi Germany” thing is the ultimate tell. Considering she is a celebrity who receives death threats (ugh), the police would at the very least probably wanna follow up and make sure this was just some drunk loon and not a genuine stalker.
Best case scenario: Drunk asshole trying to “speak his mind to the _____”; gets scared off because he’s just a drunk loon.
Worst case: White supremacist terrorist stalking her.
How is she not supposed to worry about that JSF given the circumstances?
(And yes, I agree it would be helpful if she could remember exactly what he said. That would be extremely useful. Memories suck when you feel threatened, though.)
Felonius Monk
@Adam L Silverman:
We can officially refer to them now as Meal Team 4 and everything they are doing indicates that they are operating a few rounds short of a full magazine -– so, yeah, nuts.
The reports I read said they were sitting around a campfire eating hamburgers. The question is how long does this thing go on?
I also understand that Franklin Graham has been communicating with them. I suppose he told them that this is all the fault of Satan Obama, but if they are patient and hang on until Obama is out of office next year, all will be well and they can go home.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Nate Dawg: No, I actually didn’t say what you said in your last paragraph. I said I’ve been at gunpoint AND the victim of attempted robbery. Both guns and fisticuffs.
As I have a wife and 20 year old daughter, I certainly understand the very real fear they face from violence. However, that doesn’t make nothing into something. The best we can divine from the details of the story is that the writer had a panic attack. There is literally no evidence for anything else. Again, the writer could have supplied more details and cleared up any confusion. As it is, the story is a litmus test upon which we project our own sensibilities. Mine may not be the university-approved ones but I can still defend them.
SarahT
@The Thin Black Duke: Not a silly nym at all – quite the opposite. However, had you chosen Thin Black Vigoda…
MomSense
@Nate Dawg:
Even if it was just Intimidation, that is as unacceptable as an explicit threat. Intimidating someone physically and verbally is a hostile action.
Baud
Ugh. Chuck Todd will moderate the next Dem debate with Maddow.
NotMax
@Mandalay
Ditto for Hawaii.
And sometimes it even gets a result.
Just Some Fuckhead
@nutella: What hostility occurred?
Anne Laurie
@redshirt:
Yes.
The fact that older women are the least likely to interrupt other peoples’ conversations to rant about how our candidate is the best candidate doesn’t mean our opinions are less strongly held, young fella.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@WereBear: :-)
Cheers,
Scott.
Iowa Old Lady
@Felonius Monk: These people showed up and started trouble and now want everyone to declare bygones.
Frankensteinbeck
@Adam L Silverman:
Jesus. Then ‘zoo’ will not begin to cover that trial. P. T. Barnum will take off his hat – in his grave – and bow in awe of the circus Ammon’s trial will become. I’ve read up on Sovereign Citizen insanity, and judge reactions to it. On top of their legal alchemy, trying to choke the court process with as much chaff as possible is specifically one of their techniques.
SarahT
@Anne Laurie: Word.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Anne Laurie: I will crawl over broken glass to vote for her if she gets the nomination.
No, when she gets the nomination.
Howard Beale IV
@Adam L Silverman: Wouldn’t happen to me either (6’1″, 260, martial arts knowledge)
He knew she was credentialed or he knew her from watching her on TV. Adding the fact that she was female weighed in on the intimidation factor. If it wasn’t for the fact the she had another person with her things would have probably gone south very badly very quickly-in which case instead of the caucuses being the story this would have become the story of the Iowa caucuses. That’s the last thing the GOP needed.
Its sad to say, its now getting to the point where we now have to practice the art of sousveillance. It sucks, but what are you going to do?
Mandalay
@Baud:
A loudmouth who is so obese that he hasn’t seen his cock for twenty years is calling Rubio a “boy” and telling him to “man up”. Oh the ironing.
It would have been funny if anyone but Christie had said it.
Adam L Silverman
@Frankensteinbeck: they had one of these in Chicago where they went after the judge and her husband.
Heliopause
Uh, yeah. Alabama could have decisively lost to Southwest Missouri State but hung on for a 48 point win. Got to admire those plucky underdogs in Tuscaloosa.
Nate Dawg
@Just Some Fuckhead: I just think you implied it. Someone else above put it better. Basically, your argument is: We should dismiss stories of being bullied / feeling threatened unless the storyteller can substantiate the threat with concrete evidence.
I’d point out that intuition and emotions have a long history of being dismissed (and feminized). But no one here wants to form a lynch mob. Just saying it sounds messed up, and given that she is actually a victim of death threats (unlike you were) and a public person (unlike you) and a person of color (unlike you) and a female (unlike you), *then* maybe they should follow up and figure out if there was a real threat.
BTW: I’ve been on the end of a gun too. Was mugged in Chicago. It’s a different thing than a bully that is actually intending you harm and not just wanting the green in your wallet.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@Renie:
I have always ignored the press stories about the Clintons that always end up being walked back, or panty sniffing, or more bullshit !!!BENGHAZI!!!, but what I don’t trust is her instincts – maybe she doesn’t trust her own instincts either – so consequently I don’t trust her judgment, and it’s why she has no real record of accomplishments because she’s too much of a weathervane. She’s a wonk though, and much better at doing tasks set by others, than boldly leading the way. Bernie’s instincts are much better than Hillary’s and like Trump, he’s been able to conjure up millions of supporters out of nowhere by saying “follow me”, but his brand is gadfly, and I’ll take wonk over gadfly all day.
NotMax
@Uncle Chuck
Noam (linguistics professional) dejected over the use of whoever in place of whomever.
/pedant
:)
SarahT
@Renie: Totally agree.
Miss Bianca
@Adam L Silverman:
Where are they holding the trials? And how far away from Burns?
Starting to feel lucky that the right-wing craziness in my county has so far limited itself to an alternate ‘news’ rag, and the huge convergence of open-carry nuts on our Fourth of July parade…
Just Some Fuckhead
@Groucho48: How did he menace her? By asking her questions?
Adam L Silverman
@Miss Bianca: The Federal court for Oregon is in Portland. So that’s where everything is for now.
MomSense
@Iowa Old Lady:
They’re just waiting for the sheriff or FBI to say olly olly oxen free.
Smiling Mortician
@The Thin Black Duke: It’s not silly. It’s cool.
Anne Laurie
@Hillary Rettig: As much as I’m trying to be impartial, I can’t see how Sanders entering the race with the full force of the Media Village Idiots arrayed in his favor (on the D side), plus all that enthusiasm of inexperienced young voters’ immersion in 30 year’s worth of Repub lies about Hillary, means he still couldn’t do better than almost-win in his second-most-favorable state.
Right now I’m afraid that if Hillary, goddess forfend, were to be assassinated before the general, Sanders’ defeat would finally give poor George McGovern a break in the worst-ever-wipeout statistics.
Mandalay
@NotMax: Whoa!….she has one of the coolest names ever.
Frankensteinbeck
@Anne Laurie:
I love Hillary. When I started seeing snippets of her actual positions and statements, I went ‘Damn, this woman has LEARNED.’ She really knows what’s important and what’s wrong with our country. I happen to like that she cares more about fixing the banking system than punishing it. She early declared that institutional racism is one of America’s biggest issues. That one makes a difference for me, not because I’m affected, but because the Republicans have made that the primary battleground of our politics and we’d damn well better recognize it.
Nate Dawg
@Just Some Fuckhead: 1) Refusing to answer her question (this wasn’t a normal conversation) 2) Asking her repeatedly why they chose *her* [what kind of question is that? It’s not the same as “how did you land this gig?”) 3) Personal space 4) Rise to power / Nazi Germany 5) The unspoken physical and verbal cues that TWO WOMEN perceived as threatening enough to have a visceral flight response.
Please stop throwing out number 5 and ignoring 1-4. Obviously no one knows for sure, but it would be prudent for her to follow up with police.
Eric NNY
@WaterGirl: here, here.
Baud
@Anne Laurie: I will crawl over the people who have previously crawled over broken glass to vote for Hillary if she is the nominee.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Nate Dawg: I’m simply pointing out the story doesn’t support a threat of violence or death. Speculating someone has a knife or gun under their coat doesn’t put one there. Saying someone suddenly ran away from you who was only seconds from assaulting you doesn’t comport.
Where’s the police report? Where are the relevant facts?
lgerard
I just saw a Christie PAC ad attacking John Kasich.
Is there really a difference between fifth and sixth place in NH?
Emma
@Hillary Rettig: With EVEN SUPPOSEDLY LIBERAL DEMOCRATS spouting Republican garbage about her, most of her so-called advantages disappear rapidly. This is what’s making me crazy. There have been people in this blog that sound like we’re back in the freaking 90s. Then there have been mind-readers who have told us how she’s going to start wars, steal from the poor to give to Goldman-Sachs….
Advantages my arse.
NotMax
@Felonius Monk
Unless they brought in or were provided firewood, one questions what they are burning and the legality of its acquisition.
Also willing to bet a hefty wad they’re not gonna break into a rendition of Kumbaya.
Elie
@Renie:
I totally agree and have observed same. Every mistake or misstep is reinforcing evidence of her poor character and basic wickedness.
As I said previously, I will vote for the Democrat who wins the nomination but I prefer Hillary for many reasons including her experience and readiness to govern. I like Bernie but not buying his stuff. He IS passionate but startingly unrealistic and incredibly arrogant. He still is not tuned in to our multi racial country except as a throw away liberal ideal talking point. Again, I will definitely vote and work for him if he is the nominee but if he is I am going to sweat all the way through the day of the ballot. And he is too old. Seriously. So is Trump and Hillary is on the border. This is a very tough job and the only person who I think gets it is Hillary. Bernie thinks he is being elected King and will live by decrees that skip needing Congressional support. His attitude (and that of some of his supporters) is that the Kneegro Obama just didn’t pound the bully pulpit hard enough and he would and magic would happen. Its not only wrong, but insulting and blind to the last fucking 8 years that he must have slept through. As you can tell, I aint a fan, but I will vote and work for him over any Republican.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Nate Dawg: Has she even filed a police report? Or is she letting a killer just roam free?
Anne Laurie
@WereBear:
Hell, just from my carefully limited reading of the Twitter streams, I can assure you there are plenty of mainstream venues where idiot Repubs reassure each other that their Guy is the best Guy. We make well-deserved fun of nimrods like the NRO jerks or Erick Erickson’s abandoned Red State Trike Farce, but if you check out the responses to their every post or tweet, well…
Felonius Monk
@MomSense:
I think, if that was in the cards, it would have been done already. Those 4 twits just don’t realize it yet.
Eric NNY
@Anne Laurie: I call bunk Anne Laurie. Real Clear Politics has poll results of various repugs vs. Hillary and Bernie in the general. Bernie does better than Hillary against Cruz AND Trump. Hell, the averages have Cruz ahead of Hillary at the moment. This argument has been and will continue to be BS made by people unwilling to do the research.
Nate Dawg
@Just Some Fuckhead: Yeah, all true. But I’ve been bullied like that before. Someone else who wasn’t there could easily say “he was just making conversation!” Doesn’t change the fact that I was being bullied, and they were projecting to me that they were a threat, and that I did, in fact, feel threatened.
Like, let’s give her the benefit of the doubt and let her air her experience without dimissing it as “attempting to start a conversation.” Especially as someone who gets death threats for being an outspoken female PoC activist. And I imagine she’s knows the difference between harmless conversation and a threatening presence.
Anyway, I’m gonna drop it. Not gonna change your mind. Arguing with JSF at this point.
NotMax
@Igerard
Kasich has been creeping up under the radar in NH. In some polls he’s shown up in (or else just shy of) third place.
JPL
@Nate Dawg: True. The whackos don’t like her and someone could know about her reporting for MSNBC, without watching the show. All they have to do is listen to Rush and google her name.
Baud
@NotMax:
Third is the new first.
SiubhanDuinne, Annoying Scoundrel
@Baud:
Being a glass-half-full person, I would like to rephrase that as:
JPL
@SiubhanDuinne, Annoying Scoundrel: haha
Miss Bianca
@Anne Laurie:
Yes, my hat’s in the ring for Hillary, and enthusiastically this time. I was, like so many others, prepared to go for her in ’08, but was then completely swept off my feet by Obama- the only time I have ever felt so strongly about a political candidate, and likely ever will. But I’ll be happy – more than happy- to caucus for her this year!
Just not feeling the Bern – and I, former Wobblie and lifelong radical, would qualify as a Socialist in all my political leanings. That’s the difference between me at 25 and me at 50, I guess. Were I 25, I’d actually believe a self-described Socialist, sans functioning Socialist Party, could barrel into the White House and get something done. At 50, I say…”wow. Really. Huh”. Oh sure – I still WANT someone to promise me a pony. But I also want that someone to tell me how he’s going to do it and how much it’s really going to cost – and what sacrifices I have to make to keep it.
(Standard caveat applies that Of Course If Bernie Is Our Candidate I Will Vote For Him Without Hesitation).
Frankensteinbeck
@Adam L Silverman:
Yes, the side lawsuits should be fun, but I’m looking forward to the daily packages of photocopied forms turned in to the judge that say that by opening the package he agrees to not find Bundy liable for anything. He probably won’t pull the Social Security, Commerce Clause, and Name Copyrighting tricks because this isn’t financial, but if he goes Sovereign Citizen, the judge will reach a point where he/she/it has no choice but to blanket ban motions from the defense.
El Caganer
@Adam L Silverman: I thought we sent terrorists to Guantanamo. Why are they still in the US?
PatrickG
@Anne Laurie:
Just so you know, some young(ish) white male lurkers (me, if that weren’t clear!) are pretty damn pro-Hillary, too. My baby sister* describes her feeling for Hillary as “a fire in her heart” and finds her personal story incredibly inspiring.
* I should note that I am formally required to stop calling her that, now that she and her husband are actively trying to spawn. I argue that I now have two reasons to call her a “baby sister”!
Mandalay
@Emma:
You have it completely backwards. Clinton doesn’t give to Goldman Sachs. She TAKES from Goldman Sachs. And Citigroup. And JP Morgan. See a pattern here?
Frankensteinbeck
@SiubhanDuinne, Annoying Scoundrel:
I look forward to the first presidential moderator debate. Chuck better hope Maddow doesn’t bring a knife.
Baud
I will use a broom to clear a path through the broken glass to vote for Bernie if he is the nominee.
redshirt
@Mandalay: Wow! My eyes are open!
Elie
@Miss Bianca:
Amen, Miss Bianca
Baud
@SiubhanDuinne, Annoying Scoundrel: I might need a full glass to get through a Chuck Todd moderated debate.
Kalimama
@Just Some Fuckhead: Your name is so apt.
Betty Cracker
@redshirt: If Clinton wins the nomination, I will be sincerely fired up about the prospect of a smart, capable female Democrat breaking men’s 200+ year lock on the presidency. It’s a big fucking deal.
Anne Laurie
@Eric NNY:
RCP leans Republican/conservative, and they particularly hate HRClinton. I trust them when it comes to intra-GOP warfare, am willing to listen when they’re talking about ‘low info voters’, and take everything they say about us Democrats with my salt shaker in hand.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@Adam L Silverman: Ammo is the only one with a patron, is my belief.
Renie
@Eric NNY: Don’t forget that if Bernie gets the nomination over Hillary we have Bloomberg threatening to run 3rd party. Then the Democrats are really in trouble. Is it a reason no one should be behind Bernie or vote for him – no – but it is an issue that is out there. With Bloomberg running, Sanders running, we could wind up with President Cruz. And THAT would be a disaster.
Keith G
@redshirt:
I am, as much as I get fired up about politicians. I do not get attracted to politicians as if they were rock stars or some symbolic representation of me and those like me. Political leaders are a means to an end – hopefully a useful implement that can be utilized for a bit before they are ultimately discarded.
I want to see a Hillary presidency. I think that she will be a damn good chief executive. I will not agree with all of her choices just like I have not agreed with all of the choices of any of the presidents that I voted for. I think that she is a good fit for the office and will do good work and I look forward to her battles with the GOP. I bet they will be more entertaining than Obama’s.
But ultimately, I view her as a place holder, keeping the desk in friendly hands/cheeks while we search the next generation’s leadership for our new political leaders.
Groucho48
@Just Some Fuckhead:
Nate Dawg gave a better answer than I could. Many of the folks reading this thread agree. Maybe, in the same position, you wouldn’t have felt menaced but that doesn’t invalidate other folk’s feelings and instincts. Why are you making a big deal out of this? A guy got in a woman’s face and acted strangely enough that she felt uncomfortable and threatened. Why can’t you simply accept that is how she felt?
NotMax
@Baud
MSNBC missed a bet in not assigning him the weekend slot.
“Up Chuck.”
WereBear
@Baud: Baud! It’s a plan.
Nate Dawg
@Eric NNY: Okay, this is a fair point. I think the problem is that relying on polls this far out, before Sanders has become a nationally recognized candidate and been “vetted” is absolute bunk.
Those of us who think HRÇ is strong than BS in a general are not going to be dissuaded by a poll this far out. Especially not against Trump or Cruz. Let’s say it’s Rubio.
Now we have a young, energetic “moderate” the media will call him, Republican versus a fringe non-Democratic Socialist old dude….I think many of us just instinctually feel that the prospects of winning that in the U.S of A. are quite abysmal. Quite. So that’s where we are at. We have to win in places like Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Wisconsin…..that’s the rub. We are scared of Republicans and want a safe bet.
Baud
As president, I will issue an order banning people from breaking glass around polling stations so the American people can safely exercise their right to vote.
Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class
@jo6pac:
That’s Doctor St. President Jill Stein. She rides a winged unicorn Pegasus through ghettos and trailer parks, throwing $100 bills that were printed on the skin of wealthy people.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Kalimama: Yes, I know. Take comfort in the fact I’m single-handedly destroying Bernie Sanders shot at the Presidency.
benw
@Anne Laurie: speaking of irrational Clinton-hate, I’m staying the hell away from the NYT if she gets the nom. I may even have to give up my Krug-fix for the time being, because just reading the headlines and pull-quotes for the sneerin, dismissive rubbish that the useless dickwads Doubtat and Brooks will write about her will make me break glass. That I will then have to crawl over to vote for her.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Baud: I wanna do my part. I will vote early in the morning and leave a trail of broken glass for y’all to crawl over.
Suzanne
@Hillary Rettig:
She’s considered a winner because she got more delegates.
Fucking rules and procedures, how do they work?
John D.
@Hillary Rettig: Because it is not a tie.
Out of Iowa’s 52 delegates, 27 are currently pledged to Clinton, 21 to Sanders, with 4 not yet pledged. Barring a faithless elector situation, Sanders cannot catch Clinton. How is that a tie?
The SDE numbers are nice in a narrative sense, but meaningless in relation to the election. People keep making this mistake, and it drives me batty. The *only* number that matters in a primary is delegates. Everything else is dross.
Schlemazel
@Miss Bianca:
I’m like you but older. I am a die hard socialist but I have not yet decided who I will caucus for. I see things in both candidates that make me willing to support them as well as problems with each. It pisses me off to see supporters of each attacking the other mostly over bullshit. I will volunteer for either one & work my ass off again because either is a million miles better than the shit stains on the right. We can have a discussion of ideas without resorting the GOP tactics of slime and innuendo. If the argument you want to make for your candidate consists of whining about perceived problems with their opponent just STFU. There is a hard fight ahead and attacking our allies is not helping
Nate Dawg
@John D.: We remember damn well in 2008 how it came down to the delegates and the media kept proclaiming Obama dead (especially after Super Tuesday) without realizing that he was right on target. That is working in HRC’s favor, but let’s be more honest–Sanders can game the western caucus states all he wants, and he’ll still lose. If he doesn’t make gains in the South, he’s toast. That’s the likely scenario.
Baud
@John D.:
It was unclear, but Maddow suggested that O’Malley had a few delegate points that, if they went to Sanders, would give him the lead. I don’t know if that’s possible or if it changes the “winner.”
JPL
@John D.: Earlier, I found this on a Washington Post tweet
Politics: Guy who finished 3rd won. Woman who finished 1st lost. One guy who finished 2nd lost; other guy who finished 2nd won
Joel
@Just Some Fuckhead: IANAL
In most states, an assault/battery is committed when one person: 1) tries to or does physically strike another, or 2) acts in a threatening manner to put another in fear of immediate harm.
See more at: http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/assault-and-battery-overview.html#sthash.zxUmaYS2.dpuf
By the way, you’ve really lived up to your name on this thread. Disappointing from you. Perhaps you should take a break from the internet; I mean that sincerely.
Miss Bianca
@Schlemazel:
I bow respectfully in your general direction, and applaud your sentiments. Right on! (Or shall I say, “Left on”?) : )
And yes, I will work for either candidate. Because eyes on the prize…
Renie
@benw: don’t forget Maureen Dowd – she is horrible
JCJ
@redshirt:
Sincerely fired up? I suppose not. At least not like I was in 2008 for Obama. On the other hand after Obama I feel more strongly for her than any other Dem I have voted for since 1980.
Also, if the winner could implement his/her agenda 100% then I would support Bernie more. Since my pony long ago was sent to the glue factory I know that isn’t happening.
Baud
@Renie:
Fixed.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Joel: I should give up my internet privileges because we disagree on something?
How does that make any sense?
Weaselone
@Hillary Rettig:
1. Hillary is fairly or unfairly a polarizing figure. It was nearly inevitable that Hillary’s advantage in name recognition and cash would erode once people realized that Bernie was running for President, not the mascot for a chicken restaurant. The big accomplishment is that he was able to capture the not Hillary vote so quickly and efficiently instead of fighting over it with O’Malley and Webb.
2. Being the establishment candidate isn’t really an advantage in this election from a raw vote perspective, hence why Bernie is running as the anti-establishment candidate despite having spent decades as a lawmaker in Washington.
3. Demographics in Iowa were favorable to Bernie winning the state. If he didn’t win Iowa, despite having spent a lot of effort developing his ground game there, how is he going to pick up states with less favorable demographics and a less robust ground game?
4. From a delegate standpoint whether Bernie or Hillary won the state is pretty inconsequential. Polls were basically showing it was going to be by a couple of percentage point margin either way which translates into a handful of delegates. It’s really about the narrative, which is why Sander’s surrogates are either a. arguing that Bernie actually won (but was cheated out of it) or b. arguing downs expectations after the fact as you are doing.
Clinton’s Iowa victory is more a blow to Bernie than a big win for Clinton. Getting a win in both Iowa and New Hampshire might have given Bernie the boost he needed to help close the gap with Clinton in other states. Splitting Iowa and New Hampshire just isn’t as solid a narrative.
MobiusKlein
@Nate Dawg: Being subjected to random acts of violence are terrifying for straight honky men like me too! Several times in my life even.
The o.p. jibes with my subjective experience, so I take it as true enough.
Joel
@Eric NNY: Those head-to-head general election polls are meaningless at this juncture.
A great example would be Obama versus McCain.
On February 2, 2008 the projected general election polling had McCain with an 0.2 percent lead on Obama.
SiubhanDuinne, Annoying Scoundrel
@Baud:
Could be worse. Could be Tweety.
Or Halperin & Heilemann.
MSNBC is full of scary.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@SiubhanDuinne, Annoying Scoundrel: Joe
& Mika
Scamp Dog
@Pogonip: Here’s an excerpt on Crooks and Liars. It’s about someone getting right up close to Mellissa Harris-Perry and going into a rage.
I’m glad I found it because now this conversation is comprehensible. I’m with the people who think that MHP had legitimate cause for concern.
Nate Dawg
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: OMG Joe and Mika would be so cruel. Thank Dog it hasn’t happened yet.
Eric NNY
@Anne Laurie: but they’re averaging national polls. Yes Rasmussen and Fox, but Quinnipiac and others are on there. Make your arguments as you see fit but “Bernie is unelectable in the General” has been debunked.
Andy
@Suzanne:
Coin tosses=”Fuckin rules and procedures”, your words.
SiubhanDuinne, Annoying Scoundrel
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
:: runs screaming from the room ::
Eric NNY
@Renie: point taken.
Miss Bianca
@Adam L Silverman:
Wait a minute, wait a minute…are you telling us that these gubmint-hatin’ Freedom Fighters are getting PUBLIC DEFENDERS? In Portlandia?
(Not that I disbelieve you. And not that that’s not their right. Their ACTUAL right, as opposed to their fantasy rights. But…I think my irony meter just blowed up real good.)
Ruckus
@Anne Laurie:
You don’t have to be an old woman to be fired up about Clinton. I wasn’t in 08 because she hired some major assholes and ran a crappy campaign. I didn’t dislike her policies all that much but hiring good people is a massive requisite for president and she failed at that. (And after seeing Rahm in action President Obama seems to have made at least one major mistake as well!) I really like that she accepted the SoS position from the person that she lost to. To me that showed a lot of class and that she really wants to be part of the team, not just be in power. That she seems to have done well is a bonus.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Eric NNY: as long as no one runs against him, he’s unbeatable!
Weaselone
@Eric NNY:
I wouldn’t put much faith in Hillary and Bernie’s relative performance in such polls. Hillary’s advantage is that she still beats most of the Republican candidates in all the polls and most of them even in Republican biased polls like those from Real Clear Politics despite having been the victim of the Republican slime machine for the last 25 years.
Bernie’s performance in these head to head polls does not yet reflect the impact of the Republican attack machine. Those attacks will come if he wins the nomination and he is far more vulnerable to them than Clinton.
Nate Dawg
@Eric NNY: Uh, no it hasn’t. A poll this far out has zero predictive value. So set those aside. What we have left to evaluate the claim is history, demographics, intuition, etc.
So confident a self-proclaimed Socialist can win? I wouldn’t be so sure. I’d be listening to others who say “maybe not”.
Heliopause
@Hillary Rettig:
Fascinating to read the reams of gendered condescension leveled at this comment.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Groucho48: I can accept that she was panicked. I already indicated that. I’m willing to admit I am completely and totally wrong about the situation. However, I stand by my assessment that the details provided in the story don’t support an assault or death threat.
The Thin Black Duke
@Scamp Dog: It’s easy to be dismissive of other people’s concerns when you’re not the target.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Heliopause: anyone who criticizes Hillary is a sexist?
Tripod
Technically no delegates have been awarded. The Democratic Party Iowa caucus is a multi-level marketing opportunity designed to get marks (aka “fucking retards”) indoctrinated into the party apparatus.
Last night they got the delegates to the county caucuses lined up (that’s what the coin flips were for, you morons, not the nominating delegates), then they have those and vote for the state caucus delegates, where they finally get together and vote for who goes to the convention. By that time, even the most strident Berniebot will be singing the praises of Hillary, explaining how ACA was the best we could do given the political constraints, and selling us all out to Goldman-Sachs.
Gin & Tonic
@Just Some Fuckhead: Way to misread. The suggestion was maybe you’ve painted yourself in a corner you don’t want to be in, in which case a little break might be helpful.
Gin & Tonic
@efgoldman: We keep missing each other. I replied to your earlier comment downstairs. Also gave a little quiz.
Eric NNY
@Joel: As meaningless as the assumption Hillary fares better in the general? I think not friend.
Look, like I said, that particular argument is BS. I like both. Leaning Bernie. But enough with general election argument.
benw
@Renie:
for sure. In fact, she’s the first one of the NYT opinioners that I bailed on, to the point that I stayed away from the Sunday page, and did in fact manage to forget about her!
Keith G
@Hillary Rettig: HRC’s win was not spectacular, but it was good.
I agree with you that one might wonder how the odds on favorite could lose her initial large lead and then have to do a bit of a scramble for a good outcome. But, this is Hillary were are talking about and she has a history.
More that anything else this narrow win showed that she could win, and win in a way that can start to vanquish the memories of 8 years ago. She had done her homework it seems.
That is the big win and the take away from last night AFAIC. They seem to have payed attention the the early organizational issues. I still have some issues with some of her personal choices as a candidate, but I think that their grasp of the mechanics of this have improved.
FlyingToaster
@Renie: Empty Threat.
If Bernie were to have swept the first 10 or so caucuses/primaries, Bloomberg would have time to get on the ballot in most states; he’ll need a month or more before the filing deadline to get the required signatures in each state. The deadlines range from April to September. Per Ballotpedia.
Tom Q
To address two of the thread’s burning questions:
This will be my 12th presidential election vote, and, while Hillary won’t match Barack or Bill on my personal excitement barometer, she’ll finish well ahead of anybody else except maybe Jimmy Carter the first time. I won’t remotely have to drag myself to vote for er; I see her as uniquely qualified and will cast my ballot with enthusiasm. (And I’ll bet a whole lot more people feel that way by November. Because I’m old, I remember when all kinds of people in Spring ’92 moaned and groaned about having to vote for Bill — the guy who’s now considered such a gold standard communicator.)
As to Hillary Rettig’s “how can it be a win if such-and-such..?.” — the Sanders people and the Clinton people have very different takes on last night’s result, and each, from their own perspective, are right: Sanders people (of which Hillary R. is one; don’t feign objectivity) correctly think they did awfully well going against a juggernaut. But Clinton folk can accurately rejoinder that Sanders is incredibly lucky the season kicked off in one of the states that most emphatically leans his way, and the fact that he only managed a near-tie there bodes very ill for the 40+ states not dominated by white/very liberal Democrats),
Nate Dawg
@Tripod: Yeah and Bernie’s gonna single-handedly reconstruct our nation so that it is fair & equitable and abolish the two party system that has gamed elections for so long. He’ll get rid of gerrymandering, the electoral college, the Senate’s overrepresentation of rural voters, midterm elections. He’ll institute mandatory voting, publicly funded elections, and make it a federal crime to form a political party. The revolution is coming!!
Suzanne
@Andy: Coin tosses are the accepted procedures of the Iowa caucuses. I agree that it’s dumb procedure, but it was decided well in advance of this event. Clinton won, narrowly, because she and her staff knew the rules and procedures and worked them to her advantage. That’s called winning.
Gin & Tonic
@srv: I bet Hillary understands these statistics very well.
Gin & Tonic
@Nate Dawg: Wow. Where do I sign up?
redshirt
@Nate Dawg: PONY TIME!!!
Nate Dawg
@Eric NNY: You can’t just dimiss *the* most important factor in selecting a candidate and say “enough of it!” because conventional wisdom goes against your theory. The magical thinking in Bernieland comes from the top, though, so I guess it’s understandable. Candidate who has no way to secure his promises also has no way to secure his election. But vote for him anyway BECAUSE CROWDS. Sheesh.
Emma
@Mandalay: Yeah. A famous person gives speech for an honorarium to a large business group. So?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Nate Dawg: and then you just was for the second Hundred Days!
Redshift
@Uncle Chuck:
If you are minimally politically active enough that voting is the only way you are going to participate in the election, then sure.
Democracy is something you do, not something that is. Voting is the bare minimum.
stinger
@Renie: I know, right? Gallup poll, Dec. 28, 2015: Americans have named Hillary Clinton their “most admired” woman for TWENTY out of the past 22 years. Yet we keep hearing that “people” think she’s unlikeable and untrustworthy. ?????
Smiling Mortician
@Miss Bianca: Thank you for writing exactly my truth.
Well, except I’m 55.
Joel
@Eric NNY: Again; the head to head polls are meaningless this early in the election, especially when the primaries are still being contested.
Nate Dawg
This all reminds me of what a miracle Obama was. I seem to recall Republicans scoffing at the idea that he would win the general, but the fundamentals were very very different. Bush’s popularity was in the toilet, so a Dem was going to win almost assuredly, and he had political gifts like no one else running then or today. That coupled with the large AA vote turnout, and there was a plausible argument to be made for his viability. General election viability was probably the most discussed topic on forums between HRCers and Obots back then. Constant tea leave reading, and he was even down in the polls for a while in early summer, I think. Of course, the stock market crash and McCain blunders sealed the deal, but he was a very special case, and I wouldn’t be so sure we could hope to pull that off again this time (outsider, liberal candidate).
Bernie is a socialist, also. So there is that.
Mandalay
@Ruckus:
Oh please. Is it really completely unpossible that she still wanted to run for president again, and the best possible thing she could do to aid that cause was to accept the SoS offer?
Imagine the other scenario: suppose she turned had turned down the SoS position in 2009, and was running for president now. Wouldn’t you have real doubts about the credibility of someone who had done that?
She took the job, she handled it pretty well, and now she’s bragging that President Obama really wanted her to do the job. Good for her – she’s fully entitled to do that. But let’s not kid ourselves that accepting the job was some classy and noble act of self-sacrifice on her part.
Miss Bianca
@Smiling Mortician:
Heh. It’s kind of nice to realize we’re something of a demographic. Pragmatic Socialist Olds, Unite! We have nothing to lose but the chains on our reading glasses!
SarahT
@Miss Bianca: I wear contacts, but can I please sign up anyway ?
Groucho48
@Just Some Fuckhead:
Because when his voice got loud and she got up and moved behind a table, other people noticed and when he saw that, he left.
He may not have been going to assault her, because there were other people in the immediate vicinity, but, a spittle-filled hate rant directed at her was a pretty likely outcome. And, violence, while maybe not likely, is certainly a possibility in that kind of encounter.
Miss Bianca
@SarahT:
Yeah, why not. I said “pragmatic”, not “dogmatic”. Otherwise, I’d say, “CHAINS WILL BE ISSUED!”
Just Some Fuckhead
@Groucho48: Was “spittle filled hate rant” in the story? I missed that.
SarahT
@Miss Bianca: chain belts can be pretty cool, though – I’ll take a few of those.
Groucho48
@Just Some Fuckhead:
When you’re that deep in a hole, you should stop digging. You can’t salvage your position; trying to just shows desperation. People are going to start laughing at you if you continue on the path of total denial.The guy was in her face ranting about Nazi Germany and ignoring her personhood. He was escalating until other people moved closer. If he was acting that way with your daughter and you saw it happening, I’m sure you would have let them both be. After all, he hadn’t pulled out a gun or anything. That look of apprehension on her face was probably just silly womenfolk stuff.
Omnes Omnibus
@SarahT: Chains can also be useful in a brawl. I would, however, go for a motorcycle chaiin as opposed to a reading glasses chain. YMMV.
SarahT
@Omnes Omnibus: I will heed that advice for my next regularly scheduled brawl.
different-church-lady
@Just Some Fuckhead: Would you like turn down service and a mint on your pillow as well?
Omnes Omnibus
@SarahT: I try to be helpful. On occasion.
Adam L Silverman
@El Caganer: I’m not in shipping and receiving. I’m in tedious explanations. Please refer your request to the appropriate section.
More seriously, in order to be sent to GITMO you have to be an enemy combatant, and more specifically, one picked up on foreign soil. Anyone arrested on US soil is going to be handled through the domestic system.
Omnes Omnibus
@Adam L Silverman: Bingo.
Matt McIrvin
@Nate Dawg:
It was in the early fall, after the Republican convention. Basically, McCain had a significant but short-lived convention bounce associated with the first flush of Palin-mania, before people fully realized that she was just embarrassing. He was actually leading Obama in the popular-vote polls for a little while, after trailing him all summer.
And then the markets crashed.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Groucho48: So no, then?
Adam L Silverman
@Omnes Omnibus: Did I win a gift card?
Omnes Omnibus
@Adam L Silverman: Sure. I’ll, like, mail it to you and stuff.
AnotherBruce
@efgoldman:Anyways, let them get a few contempt of court charges. It makes the time these maniacs have away from the public that much longer.
Ruckus
@Mandalay:
You ever enter any kind of race? And lose? And on the level of the race for president? You can’t run for that position without a pretty good sized ego, maybe/probably an over sized one. If ego is all you got you will probably be hammered good. You have to be able to admit that you lost to a better person to accept that and yes it takes a lot of class to do that and then turn around and be subordinate to that person. And many people with an ego large enough to think they could be president could never do that. She could and she did, so yeah class. And I respect people that have that level of class.
Irony Abounds
I will view voting for HRC in the general election much the same way I view doing what needs to be done the day before a colonoscopy. It’s not at all pleasant, but it is necessary.
Original Lee
@Just Some Fuckhead: Jeez, dude. Stop channeling Sheldon already.
Anne Laurie
@Omnes Omnibus: Think garrottes, my friend. Two olds distract the troublemaker from the front, while the third climbs up his back & uses the reading glasses cord expeditiously.
Motorcycle chains are good & all, but some of us have arthritic joints, the extra weight isn’t worth the trouble.
mclaren
@Keith G:
So…basically you want an Executive Branch staffed with ex-Bush and ex-Reagan hardcore Republican fringe lunatic conservatives, and Dubya’s policies with a kinder gentler female face as the frontwoman?
Good to know.
Me, I’d prefer not to revisit the Cheney years. Another Republican secretary of Defense, another Republican Secretary of Labor explaining why we need to outlaw unions and slash the minimum wage to “get the U.S. economy growing again,” more endless unwinnable foreign wars, more collapsing bridges and rotting highways here in America…nuh-uh.
Been there, done that. I prefer fast forward to the rewind button.
mclaren
@WaterGirl:
Actually, it started with Ann Coulter getting picked up by major media outlets. It’s really…special when a rabid hatemonger like Coulter can say something like “I’ve never seen a bunch of bimbos as delighted to see their husbands killed as those 9/11 wives who came out against the Iraq War,” and watch CNN anchors nod and cluck appreciatively, instead of turning pale and putting their heads down and vomiting.
mclaren
@Keith G:
A 0.3% difference, much less than the statistical margin of error for these kinds of polls, is not a ‘win.’ The Iowa result is a tie by any statistical definition.
Basic statistics fact: when the two candidates poll within each other to less than the margin of statistical error of the poll, no one can be declared a ‘winner.’ The margin of error on the Iowa caucus vote is plus or minus 4 percent. Your alleged “win” is 0.3 percent, 1/9 of the statistical margin of error on that poll.
Please bone up on your Basic Statistics 101 before you try to purvey more of this kind of bullshit.
Bobby Thomson
@Hillary Rettig: Scoreboard. That’s a weird tie where one candidate winds up with more delegates than the other. Whatever you have to tell yourself to keep the dark voices away, I guess.
Bobby Thomson
@Hillary Rettig: Home field advantage stolen.
Andrey
@Just Some Fuckhead:
Yes, that is a spittle-filled hate rant.
If a stranger angrily tells me “I want you to know why I am doing this” as he approaches me talking about Nazis, I am going to assume they intend me harm. That is a reasonable assumption even for me as a 6’4″ white male.
Emerald
@mclaren: “So…basically you want an Executive Branch staffed with ex-Bush and ex-Reagan hardcore Republican fringe lunatic conservatives, and Dubya’s policies with a kinder gentler female face as the frontwoman?”
Ah, that old lie. I remember it well from 2000: “Gore is the same as Bush.”
Updated version told to us again by mostly the same people but with some help from Karl Rove this time.
Worked back in 2000. Worked great. Put Bush in the White House.
Kay
Not a great example of the unimaginable and impossible, in my opinion.
The demand for a 15 dollar minimum wage has been an unqualified success as a tactic and strategy. The labor-funded city and state effort has actually increased the minimum wage at the city and state level. They also brought out tens of thousands of people and got huge media coverage on a whole range of workplace and economic issues.
They knew it was a high demand and there was consensus opinion at the time that it was asking way too much. Then it started to work and consensus opinion changed and every increase after was pegged in relation to the high demand. It’s probably the best example I can think of that goes against starting low and you can see it in Clinton’s campaign. Democrats started at $10.10. She went to $12, 2 years later.
I don’t think it will work with everything but the 15 dollar minimum wage is a political and substantive success, and Bernie Sanders didn’t invent it and the Democratic Party didn’t fund it or organize it. He’s simply backing a 5 year local and state effort at the federal level.
Kay
Fight for Fifteen is now so mainstream that a leader introduced the President at a DC summit on “worker voice”.
They went from people like Keith Ellison supporting them 4 years ago to an invite to DC as the spokespeople for low wage workers. By the third year they had college adjuncts marching with them, because apparently they don’t make enough to live on either, although they obviously have one or more college degrees.
D58826
One of the many problems with the soaring promises is there is no such thing as a free lunch. Bernie might like the idea of European democratic socialism and he may be able to convince a lot of voters of its virtues BUT he never will be able to sell the tax rates that make the vision possible, Even Nancy has said the necessary tax increases would be DOA in a democratic House.
Applejinx
@Kay: Yeah. The thing about Bernie vs. Hillary is that the Overton Window is pushed two ways.
One, popular support directs the environment in which politicians operate. That’s the traditional Overton window, in which activists try to widen the range of the possible and the pols passively triangulate in a rather mechanical way and it’s all about pragmatism. Hillary continues the Obama theme of ‘make me do it’, and the few areas where we feel she’ll show initiative are not positive (hawkishness in foreign policy). This is one approach.
Two, the other way is for a politician, as a politician, to try to shove the electorate in a direction through speeches and propaganda. Bernie hammering on true things that nobody argues with as facts, is like this. The idea here is that everybody knows the system is ruined almost past hope of repair, but everybody’s RESIGNED to it. In this approach, the politician is manipulating the art of the possible by producing a massive groundswell of popular support for the desired thing, ignoring that the system is hopelessly broken.
That’s why we call it a revolution. That’s what the rightwingers did, and what the Kochs got behind, and you can see how well it works by looking at how very broken things are right now.
Arguing that you can’t have a socialist revolution to save the country and our economy, while rightwingers are STILL trying to push the ol’ pendulum so far to the right that it’s creaking under the strain, is pretty laughable. It has never been easier to do a socialist, FDR, ‘I welcome the hatred of the uber-rich finance fatcats and speculators’ campaign.
They wear the faces of Martin Shkreli and the Koch brothers. They are REAL and they’ve been winning for so long that right now, it’s nearly impossible for them to keep swinging right. There IS no more right for them to go to, they’re there, and the whole system is absolutely rigged to support them and only them.
To treat this as a stable, unfortunate government that must be worked within, is utter folly.
To frame everything as ‘realistic within the sadly flawed system we have’ is utter folly.
THAT is why ‘unrealistic Bernie’ arguments don’t fly with me. He’s doing exactly what he has to do: mobilizing popular opinion in a way that can’t be ignored, to tell the truth about our hopelessly unrealistic and broken SYSTEM before it’s too late. This is not a time for incrementalism, and you can’t do revolution unless you have clear goals and extensive public support.
There are many rich fuckers who would take their winnings and shut up, bitching mightily as they start to get hit with Reagan-era taxes for a change, because when they’re not idiots (and many of the really rich ones are NOT idiots) they know how hard they’re pushing it, how very lucky they are.
bemused
@Just Some Fuckhead:
I’m a woman who has been around for many decades, never even been close to being assaulted but I sure know instantly when a male is being threatening towards me and who would do me some harm if he could get away with it. It’s an instinct that most women have learned early in life because it is real. Maybe you should explore why you are being so defensive on this.
D58826
@Applejinx: I’m sorry I just don’t buy it. Ultimately it comes down to election math. In order to take back the Senate and the House the D’s are going to have to elect a large number of those ‘hated’ blue dogs from red gerrymandered districts. They also are going to have to elect a large number of moderate/progressives to make up for the inevitable loss of the blue dogs on many of Bernie’s proposals. Remember Obamacare only passed the House with the minimum 218 votes. The blue dogs all voted against it, not that it did them any good in 2010. The Senate is the same. It will probably take more than just 60 senators to overcome the filibuster to make up for any defections. Again remember Obamacare,, it took the vote of the much hated Lieberman to get the job done. Sure FDR was able to pass significant progressive legislation but he had much larger majorities than even Obama had and it was at the depth of the worst depression in American history. A 25% unemployment rate will focus the mind of even the most anti-government voter.
FlipYrWhig
@Applejinx:
And when a groundswell of popular support fails to persuade elected officials who disagree with the sentiments of that groundswell, then what happens? If a school full of dead children can’t make a dent in gun laws, because politicians care more about their donors and think their voters either have short memories or won’t hold their bad views against them come election time, why would any of these other things ever come to pass? I don’t get why anyone still believes in this. You have to push _and then vote the bastards out_ when they don’t budge. Has that ever happened? One single time? I’d like to _see it_ happen _at least one time_ on a progressive issue — it happens quite often on conservative ones — before trusting that it’s the best approach moving forward.
FlipYrWhig
@D58826: There are a lot of moderate-to-conservative Democrats in the Senate. They act in an amoeba-like way instead of as a solid bloc, so sometimes it’s easy to miss how many there are. And they all have the power to nibble away at the edges of policy initiatives they don’t care for, either out of ideology or out of political self-interest (real or imagined). _We have seen this happen time after time._ I don’t understand how this just gets waved away by saying, well, because Bernie Sanders is running and can fire people up, that will pull so many new liberals into the process that Joe Donnelly and Joe Manchin and Michael Bennet and Claire McCaskill et al., will have to get in line if they know what’s good for them.
negative 1
@Applejinx: If there were a way to bronze comments, this should be one.
FlipYrWhig
@negative 1: I agree. Bronzing IS a good way to make something heavy enough that it sinks to the bottom.
D58826
@FlipYrWhig: The thing is the system is rigged to tilt ‘conservative’. It has been since 1787. While I don’t think the framers were thinking in terms or liberal/conservative as we understand them today they did give the small states a disproportionate share of power.And today those states just happen to be red.
Today small red state Montana has as many votes in the Senate as large blue state California. Two small red states with 2 conservative senators each can block anything that HRC or Bernie propose. At the federal level it is just easier to push right than left. As I said before even if you can pick up a few red state senate seats they will not be reliable progressive votes. So you have to pick up enough blue senate seats to compensate or eliminate the filibuster. While the red states do not have the same level of control in the house as the senate, with the current gerrymandered districts it is going to be hard to pick up a lot of seats from red states. Heck even in sorta-blue Penna. your have the Philly/Pittsburgh blue and the deep red middle. Penna. just elected a moderate democrat as governor and sent even more conservatives to the legislature. The result is grid lock and a school funding crisis that is seeing districts go had in hand to the banks for money to keep the doors open.
Short of another depression I don’t think that groundswell of public opinion is going to result in major changes. Sure some small things like the minimum wage or maybe changing medicare part d so that the government can negotiate prices but not single payer or breaking up the banks.
FlipYrWhig
@D58826: Yup. I think a liberal groundswell is a wonderful idea. Make it a loud one! Let the nation know we’re here! That doesn’t happen nearly enough.
But it has to have reach, and it has to have teeth, and I don’t think we’re there yet. And there’s shit we need to deal with NOW.
IMHO, as much as his campaign rhetoric clunks and grates with me, especially the overemphasis on campaign finance and the power of the “billionaire class,” I’d love to have Bernie be Mr. Outside and Hillary be Ms. Inside and work together, even through rivalry and contention that pisses off blog commenters, to try to reshape left-of-center politics in the USA.
D58826
@FlipYrWhig: They killed the public option. This is going to be a long term slog I think. Assume HRC is POTUS for a second. She gets two or three Scotus nominations that tilt the court at least to the middle if not out and out liberal. They reverse Citizens united and decide that gerrymandering is unconstitutional. They also decide that voter-id really is a form of a poll tax and therefore unconstitutional At the same time The D’s start taking back some of the state governments so that by the time the districts are realigned in 2020-2022 they are more favorable to the democrats. Maybe then things will begin to change but it will take a number of election cycles to do it. r
D58826
@FlipYrWhig: Bernie provides the vision and HRC the nuts and bolts. works for me. What we also have to keep in mind is politics is the art of the possible and it moves in fits and starts. Major shifts in the American political system usually require a major crisis. The depression in the 30’s to get progressive legislation and WWII/cold war to defeat isolationism are two recent examples. In 1964 it looked like liberalism was hereto stay and Goldwater was just a bad joke. Well the GOP went to work nibbling around the edges and building an infrastructure and in 1980 they elected Reagan. Nixon signed a lot of progressive legislation in order to buy political peace for his foreign policy. The D’s have to do the same thing. They also have to remember that there are more moderates than liberals so there has to be a moderate/liberal coalition. As long the GOP can pick off those moderates the D’s/liberals don’t have a chance
FlipYrWhig
@D58826: I have to say, I was stunned by the caucus-goers’ entrance polls that I saw, where it looked like about two-thirds of Democrats were identifying themselves as either “very liberal” or “somewhat liberal” and maybe a quarter described themselves as “moderate.” That’s WAY higher for some flavor of liberal than I’ve ever seen before. Usually it’s more like half and half. That’s either an outlier (Iowa specific? Caucus fever?) or an omen of a substantial shift in how Democrats see themselves.
Marc
“it’s hopeless to try and change things, settle for muddling through” is a pretty depressing campaign theme, and I really hope that Clinton avoids it. It’s also a terrible tactic for convincing young idealists.
If neither Democrat can pass anything, what’s the point of either of them proposing anything? Why are Clintons not-gonna-happen plans different from those of Sanders in that scenario?
FlipYrWhig
@Marc: Neither candidate’s grandest plans will ever pass through Congress, but IMHO Clinton’s plans have a bigger chance of unifying at least the Democrats, while Sanders’s plans strike me as the sorts of things that make even center-right Democrats balk. And agitating the center-right of his own party was what made Bill Clinton’s presidency such a slog early on (gays in the military, for one). Obama’s team seemed dedicated to not duplicating that mistake — which is one of the things that occasioned hue and cry from the blogosphere starting in about, oh, January 2009.
Marc
I think that moving the ball against the plutocrats has a real chance of catching fire. Wall Street trading fees vs. free college tuition, for example, is the sort of thing that really could take, like raising the minimum wage did.
I’d rather see candidates have a vision and push for it – then compromise – than have them not have a vision in the first place. If Clinton carries some of Sander’s issues through to the general, that’s a good outcome in my book.
D58826
@FlipYrWhig: I was surprised at the 4 in 10 identifing as socialist. In middle amewricas Iowa!!
@Marc: Yes a bit more pie in the sky from HRC would probably help but the Obama hope and change idealists were quickly disillusioned when the pink unicorns failed to materialize in every garage. ‘Clean with Gene’ in 1968 resulted in lots of idealists staying home rather than voting for dull old HH and we got Nixon. So I’m not sure how you transfer that enthusiasm and prevent it from turning to disappointment when real world politics intrudes on the dream. I voted for Obama but didn’t rewally thing ‘hope and change’ was going to get very far so wasn’t disappointed when the world did not change. I guerssd that is the proce of getting old and cynical./
and OT. Rand Paul is dropping out and the US Govt is reportinmg that the plane that made the emergency landing yesterday in Somali was bombed.
D58826
@Marc:
I think you selected two issues that summarize the dilemma. Free college education, as nice as it sounds, is expensive and will not happen any time soon. It probably will require a middle class tax increase which isn’t going to happen Trading fees on the other hand is an issue, like the minimum wage that you can build support around. Since it’s a ‘fee’ the democrats can argue that even Saint Ronulus the forgetful wasn’t opposed to fees and it doesn’t look like it is hitting real people. Just have to pick your target and build a marketing campaign around it.
D58826
This may just be wishful thinking on my part but here goes. The GOP game plan is to impede the function of government at every opportunity and then say see it doesn’t work. They actively work to make it fail. Now if the d’s can continue to get some small things passed, such as the minimum wage, wall street fees, etc as well as some structural changes like SCOTUS/federal court appointments then maybe they can take that back to the voters and say see in spite of everything the system can get things done for people. If you give us more democratic members then we can get more things done. It won’t convince the Ted Cruz hard right but it might appeal to what used to be called the Rockefeller republicans. I know there are not a lot of them but if they can be captured by the d’s it might just make a difference in the purple states. But HRC/Bernie have to show results. Going down in flames for the sake of purity or the vision thing won’t do it.
Howlin Wolfe
@Just Some Fuckhead: The fact that the guy ran away and didn’t protest, “I only wanted to ask a question!” tells me her instinct was sound. Why do you think he ran away? Because Melissa Harris Perry is so, so scary?
If you just doubt her veracity, well, that’s up to you, but seems to me you want to 1) disbelieve her story (like men do many rape victims and victims of SA) and 2) deny her experience as a rape survivor. I know you’re just some fuckhead, but try not to let that cloud your thinking.
Howlin Wolfe
@Just Some Fuckhead: ??? I’m sorry that you experienced being robbed at gunpoint, it must have been scary. Does that make you an expert on what level of detail was necessary for her to be believed? To validate her own sense of danger? What detail was she supposed to disclose that would convince such a hard-nosed skeptic as yourself that she had this sense? Maybe she was too startled by his demeanor to take careful notes of the physical traits conveying the menace she felt. Or are you saying she’s a scaredy cat, and should have tried to engage the creep? That she should have ignored her feelings? You are engaging in second-guessing here.
Tell you what, why don’t you contact MHP and ask her. She’ll give you some details, alright.
Howlin Wolfe
@Adam L Silverman: A very weak case of assault, unless MHP can articulate better why she felt threatened. Unlike JSF, I don’t disbelieve her and think she was very wise.
As for a paper trail, that seems pretty unlikely. The only place the paper trail leads to is the victim.
Edited to make the last sentence clearer.