1.) Maybe I misinterpreted AL’s post, but I always thought hysterical had sexist connotations and I was aware of that from a Women’s studies course I took one summer as an undergraduate.
2.) This piece by Bill Curry in Salon on the Clinton campaign is just SCATHING. So, for the haters, there ya go.
FlipYrWhig
But Salon is usually so sympathetic to Clinton and her campaign!
randy khan
@FlipYrWhig: You took the words right out of my mouth.
Amir Khalid
Tsk, tsk, Bernie.
Germy
I didn’t watch the superb owl last night (snacks, Downton Abbey and Drunk History) but this morning I’m hearing things about the folks at foxnews being outraged at Beyonce’s tribute to the Black Panthers and BLM.
So this morning the conservatives are hysterical.
Peale
Caucuses – how to they work?
mapaghimagsik
Oh Salon, why must you clickbait so?
Chyron HR
Gosh, why won’t that evil scheming bitch just concede already? Doesn’t she know our rightful president has at last come to take his throne, like a grouchy Viggo Mortensen?
FlipYrWhig
@Germy: I missed the reference entirely. I thought it was a tribute to Janet Jackson’s Rhythm Nation.
Jim, Foolish LIteralist
I think Curry’s a crank, and this is Politico, but it sounds all-too-familiar, like déjà vu all over again. Has my head looking for a desk.
Matt McIrvin
Ted Rall was crowing about how Hillary was done the moment the email story broke, almost a year ago.
Applejinx
On the side of the lovers and not haters: today in the Bernie Sanders office phone banking, we have a set of adorable Danish teen students! They apparently came here to volunteer. (cue stories about nefarious shipping in yoots from socialist countries, because obviously we can’t get decent home-grown socialist yoots nowadays)
They’re poring over phone lists, talking Danish to each other.
:)
Germy
@FlipYrWhig: Fox and Friends thought Beyonce’s act was unwholesome. This from a network that looks like the “Basic Instinct” interrogation scene every time they have females on the air.
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/02/fox-news-trots-out-rudy-guiliani-attack
Peale
@Chyron HR: LOL. She continues to fight when the election is all but over! She’s so stubborn.
Salon, where the urban hipster sophisticates long to have their choices decided by Iowa.
If she wins, what will they say? What if its an open referendum on a rigged system and the voters say “I prefer the current rigging. Thanks.”
Germy
@Matt McIrvin: I stopped looking at Ted Rall comics when they started being all about Ted Rall.
WarMunchkin
Is it scathing? I can’t tell if that’s sarcastic. I’m relatively sympathetic to Sanders compared to most here, and even I thought that article was just wanking into the void. There is no revolution; there is no demand for middle class uprising, the popular vote doesn’t matter (See Clinton, Hillary 2008) and the fundamentals of electoral politics have not changed.
This though:
Yeah, fair.
Tractarian
Curry:
Just… wow. He actually thinks that anyone who’d ever think of voting for a Democrat must be down with voting for the old Jewish socialist. The Democratic party is a big tent and, out here in the sticks at least, includes a lot of people who self-identify as (yep) conservative And as a reminder, more Americans say they would be willing to elect a gay person or a Muslim than a socialist.
His last point would be valid if Hillary had been proudly calling herself a corrupt fascist for the past thirty years.
Amir Khalid
Is there no end to Ted Cruz’s jackholery?
AliceBlue
@Chyron HR:
“grouchy Viggo Mortensen”
LOL!
John Cole
@Amir Khalid: NO.
Betty Cracker
I have a new personal rule: Any piece of analysis, comment, etc., that attempts to make hay of Hillary Clinton’s turn as a “Goldwater Girl” in 1964 will be immediately deemed a steaming pile of horseshit. I will stop reading and consider that author full of crap on the topic of Hillary Clinton forever after. I’m only sorry it took Curry so many paragraphs to get to that.
C.V. Danes
We have a long way to go yet, and if Sanders continus to be strong, we could very well find ourselves with a brokered convention.
My concern in all of this is that the petty virtual knife fighting going on on the Dem side is going to cause lasting damage when the real enemy is the rat f’kers across the aisle. We can have a heated debate about the future of the Dem Party, and we should, but don’t ever forget who the real enemy is.
FlipYrWhig
@Germy: Hey now, Ted Rall is an inspiration: lacking even rudimentary skills at “drawing” and “joking” need not hinder your path to a career in cartooning!
gene108
I do not usually read Salon, but that article was a waste, with little insightful analysis. Bernie’s doing better than people thought he’d do.
But he’s still not the run away leader in the polls.
The article seems to imply that he’s basically going to win outright, because he’s tapped into populist anger and there’s nothing Hillary can do, so she might as well concede right now.
It’ll be interesting to see how this primary shakes out, but Bernie has his flaws, which are glossed over in the piece.
Germy
@Amir Khalid: He’s such a fundamentally dishonest campaigner he makes Nixon look like Eugene McCarthy.
I can just imagine what he’ll say when questioned about it: “I make no apologies for anything I do to get people to open their mail…”
Germy
@FlipYrWhig: But does he have a career?
gene108
@FlipYrWhig:
I was thinking Janet Jackson Rhythm Nation too, when I saw Beyonce’s half-time show. Glad I’m not the only one.
C.V. Danes
@C.V. Danes: And make no mistake, these rat f’kers are the real and true enemy of democracy.
Germy
trump does one campaign appearance a day, and then takes a private jet home so he can sleep every night in his own bed?
Does he have the stamina to be Leader of the Free World?
He doesn’t look good. Puffy around the eyes. The tanning parlor just makes him look more unhealthy.
Germy
@gene108:
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/02/angry-cops-throw-a-hissy-fit-over-beyonces-anti-police-super-bowl-halftime-show/
FlipYrWhig
@C.V. Danes: I’m hoping to see Bernie Sanders leading the charge to get new voters and energized voters into the process, feet to the fire and all that, with Hillary Clinton doing all the, you know, presidentin’.
feebog
@Amir Khalid:
Yeah, read that article. It’s about 2 on a scale of 1-10 of dirty tricks. The business with the tweets and phone calls about Carson quitting in Iowa are far, far worse.
jl
@Germy:
” I’m hearing things about the folks at foxnews being outraged at Beyonce’s tribute to the Black Panthers and BLM. ”
Damn. sorry I missed it then. I guess I would have liked the half time show, for once. I thought it was going to be that Bruno Mars doofus. Though he is not actually a doofus, he’s actually quite acomplished, I just think his music is boring.
My plans to take some junk food over to a Suberb Owl party and eat and pay attention to the football stuff in between bites was destroyed because I misplaced my keys, and by the time I found them, too late.
mapaghimagsik
@Amir Khalid:
No. It’s like the miracle of the loaves and fishes. Rubio was worried there wouldn’t be enough jackholery to go around, but Ted had faith.
And there was.
rikyrah
I really liked A Ballertina’s Tale: for me, it was the tale of Black women uplifting Misty every step of the way, pushing her towards this moment in history.
…………………………………..
Tonight: Nelson George’s Misty Copeland Doc – ‘A Ballerina’s Tale’ – Premieres on INDEPENDENT LENS
By Tambay A. Obenson | Shadow and Act
February 8, 2016 at 1:44PM
Tonight on PBS’ INDEPENDENT LENS film series, Nelson George’s “A Ballerina’s Tale” makes its TV premiere, so many, many more of you will finally be able to check out the documentary for yourselves, in the comfort of your homes.
The film explores the rise of Misty Copeland, who made history as the first African American female principal dancer with the prestigious American Ballet Theater. It gives audiences an intimate look at a groundbreaking dancer during a crucial period in her life, as she makes the transition.
On June 30, 2015, Copeland became the first African American woman to be promoted to principal dancer in ABT’s 75-year history.
Germy
@jl: Drunk History and Downton Abbey for us. We don’t follow teh sportz
Bobby Thomson
Curry has been butthurt ever since Obama didn’t give him a job. If he had any political instincts maybe he wouldn’t have been beaten do badly by an out and out crook.
schrodinger's cat
@FlipYrWhig: It is like Already Pretty being considered a fashion expert.
Brachiator
I don’t agree with the Salon piece, but I don’t see it as just hating. It is passionate in its defense of Sanders. Not convincing for me, but I understand the passion. And it is interesting that Curry apparently was White House counselor to President Clinton and not just some Fox hack pundit.
I’m lukewarm toward both candidates, but leaning toward Clinton. I wish, though, that she would do more than give me more than “My time has come, vote for me dammit” vibes. I also wish that Sanders had more than stale simple minded solutions, wanting to implement 1930s solutions to 21st century problems.
But if Sanders knew better how to appeal to black and Latino voters, he would have this shit locked up.
Punchy
I took Womens studies all four years. In class and out of class, mostly in bars and parties, I was always studying the women.
jl
Which reminds me, if Cole is reading the comments. does he not think a grouchy pestering digital assistant would be a great idea? I could use one, and described how it would work in TL’s grace note to AL’s post.
Like yesterday. a digital assistant that had a super precise GPS and could ID whenever I was about to ingress or egress a keyed facility (like my apartment) and said “Hey, stupid, where are your gawdam keys? Where you left ’em now, asshole?” would have been very useful.
schrodinger's cat
@jl: We can make the digital assistant super sarcastic and voiced by grumpy cat.
Matt McIrvin
@Germy: This wasn’t a comic, it was a long think-piece article.
Loneoak
@gene108:
The recently released video for the song she performed, Formation, is flooded (heh) with black power imagery, both obvious and non-obvious. It was definitely a highly political halftime show choice, and I bet 99% of it went over the wingnut heads or else there would be riots. I especially liked how she marched some classic Oakland Black Panthers imagery right into the heart of Silicon Valley.
Tim C.
@jl: Lewis Black to provide the voice?
Monala
@FlipYrWhig: Unlike the half-time show, the official music video does explicitly support BLM. Beyonce drowns on a police car in New Orleans, and a young boy dances in front of a heavily armored riot squad.
Brachiator
@C.V. Danes:
Sanders hasn’t actually demonstrated much strength yet. Iowa and New Hampshire are two small states full of white people. Sander’s balloon may get popped by South Carolina.
jl
@Tim C.: Sure. But would probably suggest too much booze and gambling.
glory b
@C.V. Danes: Yep. Someone here a week or 2 ago quoted some academic who has correctly predicted presidential votes for the last 30-35 years said that the longer and more acrimonious a campaign season, the less likely that party is to win. too many hurt feelings, acrimonious staements that can’t be taken back, too many divisions without enough time to heal.
Also, Hillary has announced 170 African American female surrogates and supportes who will fan out across the country for her.
Includes mothers of Trayvon Martin and Jordan Davis, Congresswomen (Donna Edwards FTW!), performers, writers (Shonda Rimes), academics, union leaders, business leaders and members of the ministry.
Amir Khalid
@jl:
I know! Have a button at the end of John Cole’s posts. You press the button, and his mom’s voice reads the post aloud for you. Profanities and all.
Matt McIrvin
@C.V. Danes:
I will say it now: this is not going to happen.
This is a two-way race now, and the only support that is up for grabs will be Martin O’Malley’s minute delegate count from Iowa. Somebody could jump in as an independent for the general election, but there’s not going to be any floor fight by convention time. It’ll be Clinton or Sanders, and we’ll know by then.
Monala
@C.V. Danes: I remember people worrying about this in 2008, and what occurred instead was that the Democratic electorate was energized. Because the nomination went down to the wire, every state’s primaries counted. Voters in every state had an opportunity to vote in a way that mattered, and that energy carried over into the actual election. This year might be the same.
Nemo_N
With words like hysterical, I’m not sure what the correct approach is; how many people must remember its baggage for everyone else to stop using it? I mean, not sure if that’s case here, but digging up forgotten meanings to words seems like an odd hobby.
pamelabrown53
Frankly, I’m marshaling my courage to go to the Salon link. Anti-Hillary, anti-democratic party rhetoric only fuels the “Bern”. anyone or any organization has been thrown under the Bernie Bus. Including , people like John Lewis and Al Franken; organizations like PP and HRC totally establishment. Hey, Bernie supporters, how does Bernie and his supporters’ rhetoric actually help change the composition of the House of Representatives?
Brachiator
@Germy:
I worry more about Trump’s lack of brains than his lack of stamina.
Weird that some people have gone from “I want a president I’d like to have a beer with” to “I want a president who is as a dumbass, like me.”
FlipYrWhig
@glory b:
You know, the “establishment.” :P
Ruviana
@Betty Cracker: Whenever I see that reference I remember that Nancy Ling Perry (Symbionese Liberation Army) was also a Goldwater Girl. People change. Obviously in all kinds of ways.
The Other Chuck
@jl: It was that Bruno Mars doofus, as well as Beyonce. They did a duet, or rather, more like a sing-off. It was 170% missable, believe me.
Same opinion of Bruno Mars here: kid’s got talent, but it’s music for tween girls. Me, I wouldn’t even play it for tweens, but they like it so I’m apparently too old to understand.
Amir Khalid
@glory b:
Acrimony hasn’t really been the hallmark of the Democratic primary race so far. Between some of Bernie and Hillary’s less temperate supporters, yeah; but not between the candidates.
Marjowil
Y’all are over-thinking this Beyoncé thing. My husband was looking for halftime highlights this morning (neither he nor I watch the Superbowl; we watched Grease Not Live instead) and instead found a youtube of some lunatic who claimed Beyoncé and Chris Martin were all about the Illuminati and coding for the upcoming race war. So, there.
Brachiator
@Germy:
Let them be outraged. But I bet that a lot of them will be buying tickets for her Formation tour, which was announced shortly after her Super Bowl appearance.
Now that’s how you manage a Super Bowl appearance. And she didn’t even have to buy any commercial time.
jl
@Brachiator: Sanders may have had a slim chance if he started explaining himself in a way that would persuade more moderate and conservative Democrats to overcome HRC’s lead in some of the large primary states coming up. He decided not too.
Sander’s positions and philosophy are closer to mine. But I see HRC being able to evolve and modulate her approach and her political pitch, and I don’t see that from Sanders. Just checked Huffpo Pollster and I don’t see where Sanders is making enough headway in enough states.
Even though I am a Sander’s mega-donor, recently I have been more impressed with HRC. She is a much better campaigner than in 2008. Not sure how much of that is due to the experience of 2008, her experience t State, or learning to adapt in response to substantive challenge from Sanders and 2016 debates. Probably a combination.
So, I don’t agree with Cole’s hater link on HRC, and I don’t see much in the article other than ‘attitude’.
FlipYrWhig
@pamelabrown53: In theory, people turn out who haven’t been turning out, and they vote for both Bernie Sanders and the local down-ballot Democrats, and then the local Democrats owe them for that victory and do more lefty-friendly stuff. Alternatively, in the Mitch McConnell’s window example from the debate, people show up sort of like they do in V for Vendetta in Guy Fawkes masks, and the government–even the Republicans!–is so awestruck they start doing what the angry legions demand.
Loneoak
@Nemo_N: Is it really forgotten tho? Seems like the majority of the time it is used precisely as it was originally intended: to indicate that a woman is constitutionally incapable of reason. We don’t have to be all that deep into etymology to suspect that is not how we want to speak about a woman or women in general.
Applejinx
@FlipYrWhig: For what it’s worth, part of what you like appears to be coming true.
We did some checking around on what was happening when we were getting our people robo-harassed by the predictive dialer: turns out there’s an unexpected explanation that would exonerate Hillary people of any nefarious intent.
Predictive dialer is hooked up to people all around the country. It’s not that we got fed intentionally bad data, which is how it looked when our voters were getting hammered by constant repeated wardialing.
What’s happening is, the numbers of volunteers for Bernie have skyrocketed all of a sudden. I certainly see that in the Keene office: we’re having to ask for other lists because we’ve berned through everything we had to do, insanely fast. The repeat-calling was because people all over the country were able to call our voters urging them to the polls, and the number of people out there for Bernie is HUGE, substantially more than expected.
So we’re feeling pretty good for now, and we got your new voters and energized voters. If the Democrats play their cards right, we can retain this momentum and elect Bernie and also turn out amazing coattails and maybe flip the House? We’re all listening to Bernie for what to do apart from elect him, and there have been some great conversations in the office.
I always tell people to check out Mark Blyth. Economics is Bernie’s big issue and what people are responding to (obviously: though he mentions other issues nobody acknowledges it). This is becoming a referendum on Establishment neo-economics.
pamelabrown53
@Applejinx:
My nephew is doing post doctoral work in Berlin in the field of linguistics. Watching the debates and listening to colleagues/news. He has a different take: Bernie is Bust on foreign policy
Paul in KY
@Germy: He wouldn’t say anything that forthright. It would be some smarmy lie.
jl
@srv:
I heard a news clip of Trump rattling off a long list of countries that he said are stealing US jobs and he was going to shut that shit down, by being tough. Sounded almost like he was advocating foreign trade autarchy
So, if Sanders gets stupid questions about ‘free trade’, Trump should get just as many just as often.
But I guess if a GOPer is loud and sounds tough, from the media perspective, it must make sense, and the bobbleheads will sagely nod their heads, and make up some incoherent nonsense in their heads to make it the default Very Serious Position that is probably true and sound.
Iowa Old Lady
I’ve stopped deliberately reading provocative links. IMHO, in a month, we’ll have a good idea where our candidates stand. I don’t need to pump my blood pressure up.
FlipYrWhig
@Applejinx: I mean, I’m not denying it would be fantastic if it worked… but I cannot imagine it working.
Tim C.
I know I’m preaching to the faithful here, but could someone please… for the love of all that is holy, explain what free speech and civil disobedience actually effing mean to right wing lunatics?
Free Speech involves speaking and writing about your opinions. It doesn’t now or ever has meant armed takeovers and threats to kill people. No, literally. Second, when you practice civil disobedience, YOU ARE TRYING TO GET ARRESTED! THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT! Claiming you shouldn’t be arrested for civil disobedience means you at a very minimal level need to watch Ghandi and do a film report of some kind.
kc
@Amir Khalid:
Nope!
Bob In Portland
Did anyone around here read the article about Clinton money in the New York Review of Books? Seems it’s a bigger problem than merely Goldman Sachs:
http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/01/30/clinton-system-donor-machine-2016-election/
Otherwise, I thought the halftime show was a tribute to Rhythm Nation too. My partner commented that Bruno Mars looked like he was dressed in trashbags. And considering the music, the annual convocation of the kids who run on the field and cheer seemed particularly white this year.
It was the first Super Bowl in a long time where I couldn’t build up a rooting interest for or against anyone. I thought the facemask penalty early on would generate some of my outrage against Denver, but not really. Perhaps if Madeleine Albright had appeared with Coldplay to condemn young women to hell.
Frankensteinbeck
Open thread? Release date on Please Don’t Tell My Parents I’ve Got Henchmen (I’ll throw in the Amazon link, what the Hell. I can allow myself some corrupt self-advertisement once in awhile.) has arrived, and I’m selling at friggin’ Amazon Rank #329 at full price. This is SWEET, especially for a small press author.
I’mma go see a movie to celebrate.
@schrodinger’s cat:
I’m tellin’ ya, GlaDOS. Sarcasm that can cut steel.
kc
Bruno Mars is awesome, you old farts.
schrodinger's cat
@pamelabrown53: His plans are based in fantasy from financial reform to immigration and everything in between. He is the leftie version of the right wingers who say things the base wants to hear knowing fully well he can’t deliver on his promises.
Brandon
I’ve read the whole thread and the one thing that surprises me the most is the almost universal acceptance of the premise that Hillary is a strong general election candidate and a near shoe-in to win once she gets past the primary. My thoughts are a few fold, (i) these head-to-head polls are telling and indicate that Hillary will face a very close general election and one that she has a very realistic shot of losing, (ii) based on the evidence of her last two primary campaigns, she is just not a good campaigner, (iii) although there is a lot of talk of Hillary’s vetting and Sanders lack of vetting (or something like that), there is a lot of material out there of her already that is extremely damaging to her credibility. I’ve already seem some of it and hoo-boy.
I’m still optimistic that a Democrat will win in November, but it is far from a certainty now and frankly I am a bit concerned. And if she does lose, will such a loss break the party? I think there is a substantial risk that it might.
Bob In Portland
@Amir Khalid: OT: On July 22, 2014 SOS Kerry said he had the proof that Russia was ultimately responsible for the downing of MH17. That “proof” is still missing a year and a half later. How long are you willing to wait? It took years before the truth behind the Gulf of Tonkin became public.
FlipYrWhig
@schrodinger’s cat: To me it sounds about one half-step more sophisticated than “Here’s what I would do if I somehow became lord of the universe tomorrow.”
kc
Since this is an open thread: Porn, um, actress drops lawsuit against Josh Duggar
FlipYrWhig
@Brandon: “Shoo in.”
Iowa Old Lady
@Frankensteinbeck: Got it. The cover is really nice.
Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class
@WarMunchkin:
Bless you – you have coined a nym I’m going to have to use:
kindness
There is one thing I see missing from most the screeds. If your guy is Bernie, great, get him elected. If your gal is Hillary, super, work to get her elected. Both camps need to start saying they will support and work for whom ever is nominated to win in the general. Kinda hard to do when you just nailed your opponent’s scalp to the wall. Maybe nailing your same party opponent’s scalp to the wall is a bad way to campaign because there is going to be a General Election. Ya know?
Renie
I heard the ass$hole Mark Penn is back? Anyone know about this?
FlipYrWhig
@Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: @WarMunchkin: That has to be some culture’s creation myth.
Barbara
@Ruviana: One of the Manson girls studied at a convent as preparation for becoming a nun. Needless to say, she did not complete her vows.
jl
@Iowa Old Lady: Thanks good advice. I’ve grown undisciplined recently. Should do that for news talkies too.
Yesterday I subjected myself to the stale hack Dickerson, since he had interviews with HRC and Sanders. But it was a waste of time, and infuriating.
With Sanders, I thought Dickerson started to probe Sanders foreign policy cred by asking him about North Korean bomb and missile tests. But that might risk substance. So, Dickerson used the NK missile test as an excuse to go meta on media narratives that Sanders did not ‘show confidence’ on foreign policy.
I think Sanders said, politely and indirectly, that Dickerson was asking an empty headed question about media narratives, rather than substance.
And Sanders was right. I yelled at the radio “Well, you miserable hack, why not just ask Sanders what he would do about the damn NK missile tests rather than using that as an excuse to blather meta about impressions?” Why do I waste my time with that garbage? I need to take a lesson from those 15 wasted and infuriating minutes.
Brandon
@FlipYrWhig: Thanks for the pointer.
glory b
@Amir Khalid: I’m praying for no spill over.
St. A
@Brachiator: Seems to me she’s campaigning her heart out–I’m really not seeing the ‘time has come’ or ‘coronation’ stuff people are talking about.
beltane
Why all the hate for Bruno Mars? As far as pop music goes, his stuff is pretty good.
rp
Crazy idea for a dystopian scifi story: The other GOP candidates implode, and Jeb is the only one left standing. in the general, it’s Clinton vs. Bush, but Sanders is upset and runs as a third party candidate, arguing that the system is corrupt and that there’s no functional difference between the two major party candidates. Clinton is hated by the media and portrayed as wonkish and unlikeable; definitely not someone you’d want to have a beer with. And despite eight years of successful democratic rule, she’s tainted by her association with Bill Clinton. Jeb is kinda dumb, but his awkwardness is lovable and appealing. In one of the closest elections in history, Jeb narrowly wins after Sanders takes enough votes from Clinton in a key swing state.
beltane
@rp: Bernie would not run 3rd party. Trump might run 3rd party but that’s a whole different plot line.
jl
@beltane:I don’t think i expressed hate. Just indifference, and frustration with what he does compared to what someone with his talent could do.
FlipYrWhig
@rp: Suggestion: could the Democrat be hampered by a desire to create distance from the incumbent president?
Applejinx
@rp: Write it, but na ga ha pen. Nope.
If Sanders was going to run as a third party candidate, there is a great deal of bullshit up with which we would not put.
That’s not how it is. Participate in, and trust the system as we’ve got it. It might be partisan but it can still be representative and we can prevail on simple turnout, which is kinda what’s happening. We didn’t expect THIS much volunteer support.
Brandon
@St. A: I think this is more about the behind the scenes stuff that people suppose has occurred, because it helps explain a lot of strange events and bizarrely ham-fisted party decisions.
rp
@beltane: I agree. I’m 99% just messing around.
jl
@rp: Sanders has pledged to not go third party and I believe him.
I think if HRC is nominee (which I think is still very likely), I think Sanders will campaign hard, pushing his political revolution, and telling his supporters that it will be easier with HRC than whatever toxic fool the GOP coughs up. Also, if he is not the nominee, getting a Democratic Senate is very much in Sanders’ interest, since he will have two years there in majority before he has to run again.
Edit: OTOH Trump will do as he pleases. I heard Trump on the news talking about how this politics thing is so much cheaper and easier and a lot more fun than his business deals. So, I think third party run for him is a strong possibility if he does not get the GOP nomination.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
Could someone walk me through what happens if say, Clinton is the nominee, and something happens to her, healthwise? This goes for the GOP nominee too. What happens between the nominating convention and the election, if the nominee becomes either disabled or dies? Has that ever happened before?
Amir Khalid
@Bob In Portland:
Not this shit again.
Look, as part of his job, I’m sure Secretary Kerry has provided the information to the Dutch authority carrying out the criminal investigation into MH17. These investigations take years. This one in particular involves a poorly secured crime scene in a war zone, where evidence was messed with or stolen. i don’t expect to see findings released or arrests made for some yet.
beltane
@jl: Yes, he could be doing a lot more with his talent but he was OK last night.
Applejinx
@srv: Possibly true. Many rich people aren’t idiots, plus Trump is their competition in those circles.
Underscores the populist, anti-rich theme in that Trump is plainly campaigning as the Anti-Plutocrat: the one who hates the other plutocrats and will rejoice as he spanks them.
I’d watch that reality show.
In real life, Sanders would decimate the guy. Far more believable.
Hungry Joe
Most people are unaware of the origins of “hysterical,” so when they use it they’re not being sexist … just as I wasn’t being racist about 25 years ago when I declared that someone had “gypped” me. A shocked friend told me that it was a slur on Gypsies. (He didn’t say “Roma,” as that word wasn’t yet in common usage). I responded — incorrectly — that no, it wasn’t, the words just sounded alike. Haven’t used it since.
That’s not even taking into account the transformation of the meaning of “hysterical” to be a synonym for “hilarious” — a mistake, but one that could capture the word. These things happen in language, pretty much infuriating sticklers who are around as the change is taking place, but becoming, eventually, mild linguistic curiosities to language buffs of the future.
And sometimes words get thrown out just because they’re in the wrong place at the wrong time. Take “niggardly,” meaning cheap or stingy. My American Heritage Dictionary suggests that it probably comes from Scandanavian — “nig,” meaning a cheapskate. “Niggardly” is entirely unrelated to “the n-word,” but because it 1) sounds so much like it, 2) is an uncommon word, and 3) has a pejorative meaning, using it has become more trouble than it’s worth.
Kropadope
@schrodinger’s cat:
That’s not true. Firstly, he is quite explicit that his goals, particularly his farthest-reaching goals, will be difficult to achieve and will require a more friendly Congress, which is why he is actively encouraging supporters to make sure to vote in every election.
Second of all, contrary to the narrative, Bernie is not only offering pie in the sky. For every stretch goal, he has several other proposals that are much more manageable. He isn’t saying “free college or bust.” His proposals include making government student loans non-profit, lowering interest rates, and allowing refinancing of loans.
Even if he can’t simply break up the big banks, stopping institutions who are rescued by the government from using the money to give its executives giant bonuses and taxing financial transactions to stop the destabilizing practice of high-speed trading are each things that might be a smaller lift.
He has a demonstrated ability to work with his opponents and because we all know that his opponents will sometimes make that impossible, he still has the same tools available to him as other presidents, such as executive orders and making high-level appointments. He does his homework and will have the best people available to him, so I’m sure he understands how to effectively leverage these powers.
jacy
@Frankensteinbeck:
You deserve every success!
OzarkHillbilly
@Applejinx: In real life, Trump gives the rich a big sloppy wet tax cut. In other words, you can always tell when Trump is lying: His lips are moving.
ChrisH
@schrodinger’s cat: I want my digital assistant to either be GLaDOS or Ron Swanson
PIGL
@Germy: The Cold War ended 25 years ago. Could we please drop this bullshit about how the US president is “the leader of the free world”? The office barely leads the USA; it certainly does not lead Canada, Australia or Western Europe. Not anymore. Nobody looks to the USA for leadership in much of anything.
Applejinx
@OzarkHillbilly: In all seriousness: Trump is a narcissist and a psychopath. Since when does he show class loyalty in any sense?
If he actually thought tax cuts for the rich are great for business then he’d continue it. If he wanted revenue for some vanity infrastructure project like the Eisenhower Interstate Highway system, he wouldn’t care where he got it. Narcissist. He doesn’t care what others think, only what he can get out of them.
Won’t matter, he won’t be President.
Peale
@FlipYrWhig: Go luck with that. But keep believing that Bernie will never abandon a “movement” that didn’t exist three months ago.
NonyNony
@C.V. Danes:
Check the math – with two candidates in the race a contested convention is pretty much impossible. You need a 3+ person race to end up with a contested convention even in a normal race. This year, with the lopsidedness of the superdelegates being in Clinton’s favor (because Sanders wasn’t a Democrat before a few months ago) it’s even less likely. Even if they’re neck and neck going into the convention, the superdelegates make it a win for Clinton.
(Where things might get ugly is if Sanders actually wins the popular delegate count but Clinton has more delegates total due to the arcane rules that the Dems use to tally delegates. I suspect that arms might get twisted among superdelegates to move support towards Sanders “for the good of the party” because holy crap that would make for an ugly convention full of protests were it to happen).
The GOP right now could end up with a contested convention because they’ve got (more than) a 3 way split right now, but even there it’s iffy. At least 3 of them would have to stick it out right to the end and not drop out for it to end up that way – if it’s a 2 man race by the end of the primary season then there’s nothing to contest.
Brachiator
@jl:
Good point. Sanders keeps selling his purity, but that’s not enough for me.
He voted against the Iraq war. Cool, but this alone does not give him foreign policy chops.
He doesn’t take money from Wall Street. Cool, but this does not make him an expert on the economy.
On the other hand, Hillary’s failure (so far) to engage younger voters is a real problem. She can’t laugh it off or have her surrogates accuse young women of gender treason.
dedc79
@schrodinger’s cat:
1) Those right wingers are a presidential victory away from delivering on many of their craziest promises.
2) If there’s one place I didn’t expect to see a “Both Sides Do It” argument, it was here at Balloon Juice.
C.V. Danes
@FlipYrWhig: And vice versa, should it shake out that way :-)
nutella
Since this is an open thread, some news from Oregon:
link
Good of him to remind us that most of the people demanding local control for Oregon are actually carpetbaggers from elsewhere.
Not so smart that he doesn’t know that civil disobedience is supposed to lead to arrest.
And that disobedience isn’t very civil (pun intended) when it’s an armed occupation of public land.
Peale
@beltane: He makes me feel like, I’m in heaven for too long.
Amir Khalid
@Germy:
President Trump might disdain the president’s quarters in the White House as not huge or classy enough, and either make it huge and classy enough (gasp!) or live elsewhere for the duration. If he does decide to live there, President Trump will give the White House staff as much grief as humanly possible.
jl
@Kropadope: I think there is just as many of Sanders’ economic proposals have sound rationales as HRCs. And some of them have better economic foundations.
A lot of bogus Washington Consensus economic BS has seeped into foundational assumptions about how people think about things. And I think some of HRC’s economic proposals trade on this seepage. Though of course, HRC is far preferable to anything the GOP can cough up, including the only remotely qualified reactionary they have on offer, which is Kasich.
It is frustrating to me that Sanders thinks it best to stay in stump speech mode and not start explaining how his policies are grounded in good analysis and fit together (Edit: except his single payer ‘plan’ which was a disappointing mess, and hurt his cause on health care reform). I think his decision is a big mistake. But he got umpty-up million bucks to go against HRC from small donations and I didn’t. So I guess we will see in March whether he is right or not.
Gravenstone
@Bob In Portland: Hey look folks, Broken Record Bill is back! Let’s all rejoice. Hopefully he finds himself back in exile, and soon.
kc
Ted Cruz is not eligible to be President. No, really, he’s not.
Germy
@PIGL:
I was being ironic, Pigl.
OzarkHillbilly
@Applejinx: What does class loyalty have to do with the tax plan he has proposed?
Guachi
That Salon piece, which I read on a link by someone yesterday, is hysterical.
FlipYrWhig
@Peale: If you’re looking to lash someone with _too much_ faith in Bernie Sanders, I’m not the one you’re waiting for.
C.V. Danes
@Brachiator: Indeed, or not. But it will be interesting to see what happens. I would hate to see the Repubs settle on a candidate, even if its Trump, while the Dems are still knife fighting over a candidate.
NonyNony
@nutella:
Is it really “civil disobedience” when you take over property by gunpoint?
If they wanted to have a protest using civil disobedience they could have shown up unarmed and handcuffed themselves to the building. But they showed up with guns, took the place over and held it at gunpoint.
It’s the very opposite of civil disobedience in fact. I’d call it an armed temper tantrum.
Matt McIrvin
@Hungry Joe:
Don’t forget 4) is deliberately used as a provocation by racists who want people to freak so they can follow up with “Ha ha, I wasn’t using a slur at all!”, or, alternatively, to make anti-racists seethe because they know that’s what’s happening but will look like fools if they blow up. At that point it basically is the n-word.
Elie
@Iowa Old Lady:
I’m with you… Just trying to stay positive and progressive in my attitude. I don’t want us to be laying major cuts on each other and our candidates. I am most concerned that we defeat the forces of darkness and only want us to be in the best position to do that and not focusing on negative puff pieces and gossip that detracts for no good purpose.
Bobby Thomson
@pamelabrown53: the composition of the House doesn’t matter. That’s just the Democratic establishment, don’t ya know?
C.V. Danes
@Matt McIrvin: I truely hope you are correct. I think Super Tuesday will decide it one way or the other.
Grumpy Code Monkey
@Matt McIrvin:
We’ll know by the end of Super Tuesday. Doesn’t mean the second-place finisher won’t keep campaigning, but by then it will be pretty obvious who will be the nominee.
It’s the GOP side where the chance of a contested (not brokered!) convention is non-zero, but only out to seven or eight decimal places. Much as I want a three-way tie between Trump, Bush, and Cruz, it ain’t happening. Much as I want Christie and Palin to get blackout drunk and find a live mic, it ain’t happening. Much as I want 1968 levels of crazy on the floor, it ain’t happening.
C.V. Danes
@Monala: That would be a positive outcome, for sure. We will need it to take back the Senate for either candidate.
BruceFromOhio
As I commented yesterday when this Salon link was offered, Curry’s definition of “media blackout” differs from mine and it turns what could have been a compelling read into a farce.
@Renie: Just look around for a trail of moist sludge and soiled dollar bills, would lead right to him.
schrodinger's cat
@dedc79: That’s why I want Hillary to be the Democratic nominee. She is our best chance at stopping the crazy. She is better than the airy fairy socialist utopia peddling grumpy senator.
Turgidson
All these people saying Hillary’s campaign is circling the drain will look silly when she’s the presumptive nominee in early March.
I say that as someone who leans Hillary but likes Bernie just fine and might still vote for him if the primary is still contested when it gets here to California. But I don’t see him closing the gap with the non-youth wings of the Obama coalition in the bigger and/or more diverse states. And for all the media bloviating about her faults, real and imagined, Hillary is a much better candidate and running a much better campaign than last time as far as I can tell.
Gravenstone
@Gravenstone: Bob, not Bill. Guess it’s time to top up the caffeine reserves.
/facepalm
C.V. Danes
@Brachiator:
There’s a difference?
FlipYrWhig
@Kropadope:
Do you think Bernie Sanders, Democratic nominee, would gladly make public appearances with the 2016 equivalents of Blue Dog types? I’m thinking of the Class of 2006, Heath Shuler, Melissa Bean, and Mike Arcuri. e.g. That’s what gives me pause. I have a hard time squaring his critique of a Democratic Party captured by big money (which it may be) and his desire to get a Democratic majority when a lot of the Democrats running aren’t going to be particularly Sandersish in inclination.
jl
@C.V. Danes: Sanders has to do in two months in more conventionally minded Democratic primaries what it took him all summer to do in IA and NH. He doesn’t seem to be able to, or want to change how he persuades voters.
I don;t see how it will happen. It might be closer than expected in SC.
The way things are going, I see HRC with a substantial majority of popular delegates by end of March.
I would like a candidate who has most of Sanders’ positions, but who campaigns more like the recent HRC (though she could veer back towards her bad campaign impulses at any time, I guess).
I want Bernally Clinters to be the nominee. MOM could lend the (relative) youth and good looks.
Get that Democrat hybridized candidate research going, right away!
Bobby Thomson
@Gravenstone: I thought the price of oil had dried up his funds.
different-church-lady
@kindness: There’s the goal of getting people elected and there’s the goal of trash talking.
I’ll leave it you folks to decide which goal any given individual here is interested in.
boatboy_srq
I’m hoping that the sexism in “hysterics/hysteria/hysterical” goes the same way the sexism in “nice” has gone.
@Germy: Sure does make you wonder, dunnit? Although on FauxTelevision the sexism is all about the slvts knowing their place and getting slapped back when they don’t.
OzarkHillbilly
@NonyNony:
No. That’s called ‘sedition’.
C.V. Danes
@FlipYrWhig:
That’s one of my favorite movies, by the way :-)
Peale
@jl:
Draft Franken.
jl
@kc:
” Bruno Mars is awesome, you old farts. ”
Bruno Mars sounds old to this semi-old fart.
boatboy_srq
@Turgidson: One more reason I’m happy for the BJ commentariat: I’ve run into Bernibots elsewhere, and honest to FSM so many sound like recycled Paulbots doing cosplay in libprog drag.
pamelabrown53
@Renie:
re:… Mark Penn is back…anybody know? I heard that Bernie’s kibbutz was Stalinist…anybody know?
Brachiator
@C.V. Danes:
The Democrats will be fine. The GOP will continue to have problems if Trump or Cruz ends up their nominee.
Applejinx
@Turgidson: Yeah she is. She’s much better than last time. We still want more, but she’d beat a Republican, even if it’s not by as much.
FlipYrWhig
@C.V. Danes: My dealings with persons lead me to distrust putting faith in the people.
Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism
@Brandon: Got state-level breakdowns on those polls?
The head to head polls I’ve seen are all national polls. National polls are meaningless. We don’t elect presidents via a national vote.
BruceFromOhio
@Applejinx:
Stick with the first two, the third is highly unlikely. Playing your cards right is irrelevant when the deck has been so decidedly stacked by the Great Republican Gerrymander of 2010. The House is lost until that damage has been undone, and even then it will still be two or three cycles.
Brachiator
@St. A:
You’re seeing this in the remarks of her surrogates, such as Steinem, and in recent remarks from Bill.
CONGRATULATIONS!
@Tim C.: Took a kind and gentle college roomie to explain that one to me. Greenpeace/Sea Shepherd. He was constantly getting arrested, to the point where our house phone was most definitely tapped. Wasn’t real thrilled about that. I was trying to show some sympathy – “wow, sucks you got popped, dude” and was more than a bit taken aback when he explain that “getting popped” had been their plan from the start. So he explained. I finally “got” civil disobedience after that explanation, and yes, the entire point of the whole thing is to get arrested, don’t plea out, do the trial with a jury and if needed, do the time. It takes some steely-eyed commitment to see that process all the way through, because these days, just the getting arrested can fuck up your life permanently, and the “doing time” thing locks you out of most of society.
I see very little in the way of actual civil disobedience these days. We’ve made the price too high for most to even consider it.
singfoom
Salon is trash. It’s been trash for about a year now.
As was said upthread, the idea that there’s a “media blackout” on Bernie is hogwash at this point and pretty much kills the rest of the argument.
But hey, it’s a B v H thread, let the flamewar commence. We’ll need a couple two three more of these threads today to keep the conflict going.
C.V. Danes
@Tim C.:
Civil disobedience is, by definition, non violent protest. Whether the protesters get acknowledged, ignored, beaten, jailed, or shot is up to the protestee. It is generally conducted by people who think the system can be ‘shamed’ into fixing itself.
Revolution, on the other hand, is violent protest practiced by people who believe that the system must be destroyed and replaced with something else that favors them.
Ella in New Mexico
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a41872/hillary-clinton-henry-kissinger-endorsement/
Yeah? I mean, Jeezus, why would anyone think you’re the status quo, sell-out, establishment candidate, Hil?
Matt McIrvin
@jl: I think the theory is that when he wins NH, the burst of publicity he gets for that will paint him as a winner and Hillary’s campaign as headed down the crapper, and people in SC/NV and the Super Tuesday states will just start jumping on the bandwagon.
This doesn’t sound plausible to me, but I’ve been wrong before. He’s got a bigger win margin in the NH polls than I expected he would.
OzarkHillbilly
@CONGRATULATIONS!: Black Lives Matter do it all the time.
Loneoak
@Renie: I would be much more enthusiastic about HRC’s campaign if she would commit a ritual murder of Mark Penn and Larry Summers in front of the Capitol as an act of repentance.
AnonPhenom
@jl:
Sure. But do you think HRC & supporters will do the same?
Anywho…
Say we’re swearing in our first woman president in January of ’17 & the Dems have taken back the Senate (at least until Jan. of ’19) …Majority Leader? Shumer or Sanders?
C.V. Danes
@jl: Agreed. If Clinton wins, we will need to keep her from triangulating back to the center once she thinks she has the progressive wing locked up.
singfoom
@Loneoak: With an implement made out of old 100 dollar printing plates? I’m game. Though with our luck she’d end up summoning Ryleh or one of the other elder gods…and then we’re all in CASE NIGHTMARE GREEN.
Bob In Portland
@Amir Khalid: Except that nothing appeared in the Dutch report from the US decisively showing who shot it down. In other words, it appears to be another lie. Which you’ve bought into.
FlipYrWhig
@AnonPhenom: Since the majority leader is selected by balloting within the majority party, I don’t think there’s any possible way that Bernie Sanders would ever be designated such. I don’t think he’s particularly popular there (and I think he probably wears that as a badge of honor). Maybe someone like Brown or Warren or Whitehouse could end up majority leader over Schumer, but of course the reason why Reid had the job for so long is because he was a compromise amid factions of the party and an expert parliamentary rule-monger.
goblue72
@FlipYrWhig: Actually, Salon is sympathetic to both campaigns. I made the mistake of “liking” Salon once on FB and am now inundated with several Salon articles a day. I often see one pro-Bernie article followed by a pro-Clinton article. I assume its intentional. They know their readership is composed of both, so they offer contrasting clickbait – and hopefully get both sides agitated by the other so as to foster more page views.
FlipYrWhig
@goblue72: I haven’t see the pro-Hillary articles but I suppose I’m more likely to be in circles where pro-Bernie stuff is flying fast and furious.
Joel
@singfoom: You meant ten years, right?
Matt McIrvin
@Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism: National polls aren’t meaningless, just limited. The winner in presidential elections usually gets a plurality of the national popular vote. 2000, the great recent exception, was extraordinarily close and even state-level polling wouldn’t have called it.
That said, in the 2012 cycle national polls seemed to have a persistent bias toward Romney that was never satisfactorily explained. But it was only a couple of percent.
I think it’s difficult to argue on that basis that a candidate who does better in head-to-head polls would actually be worse in the presidential election. It’s more relevant that these polls are early and the general-election campaign hasn’t really begun.
rikyrah
The Enduring Solidarity of Whiteness
Black poverty is fundamentally distinct from white poverty—and so cannot be addressed without grappling with racism.
TA-NEHISI COATES 7:00 AM ET POLITICS
There have been a number of useful entries in the weeks since Senator Bernie Sanders declared himself against reparations. Perhaps the most clarifying comes from Cedric Johnson in a piece entitled, “An Open Letter To Ta-Nehisi Coates And The Liberals Who Love Him.” Johnson’s essay offers those of us interested in the problem of white supremacy and the question of economic class the chance to tease out how, and where, these two problems intersect. In Johnson’s rendition, racism, in and of itself, holds limited explanatory power when looking at the socio-economic problems which beset African Americans. “We continue to reach for old modes of analysis in the face of a changed world,” writes Johnson. “One where blackness is still derogated but anti-black racism is not the principal determinant of material conditions and economic mobility for many African Americans.”
Johnson goes on to classify racism among other varieties of -isms whose primary purpose is “to advance exploitation on terms that are most favorable to investor class interests.” From this perspective, the absence of specific anti-racist solutions from Bernie Sanders, as well as his rejection of reparations, make sense. By Johnson’s lights, racism is a secondary concern, and to the extent that it is a concern at all, it is weapon deployed to advance the interest of a plutocratic minority.
At various points in my life, I have subscribed to some version of Johnson’s argument. I did not always believe in reparations. In the past, I generally thought that the problem of white supremacy could be dealt through the sort of broad economic policy favored by Johnson and his candidate of choice. But eventually, I came to believe that white supremacy was a force in and of itself, a vector often intersecting with class, but also operating independent of it.
Nevertheless, my basic feelings about the kind of America I want to live have not changed. I think a world with equal access to safe, quality, and affordable education; with the right to health care; with strong restrictions on massive wealth accumulation; with guaranteed childcare; and with access to the full gamut of birth-control, including abortion, is a better world. But I do not believe that if this world were realized, the problem of white supremacy would dissipate, anymore than believe that if reparations were realized, the problems of economic inequality would dissipate. In either case, the notion that one solution is the answer to the other problem is not serious policy. It is a palliative.
singfoom
@Joel: Eh, somewhere inbetween those two numbers. At some point in the last couple years it became clickbait ADS everywhere bullshit and stopped being worth reading IMO.
That was after Glenn (Yes, he’s shrill) Greenwald left. Now it’s just all clickbait. I think even to the point of the headlines not matching the content of the stories.
PIGL
@Germy: Oh….in that case, I am sorry. It’s just hard to detect the irony some times. That phrase is still used so often, as if the Berlin airlifts were still in progress.
Bob In Portland
@Amir Khalid: Also, the information that Kerry claimed to have was the exact location where the missile was fired. A year and a half. The US allowed the Dutch investigation to go forward without the specific information it claimed to have. Why, Khalid? You don’t know, you just trust.
My point at the time of the shooting was that it appeared to be a provocation. Most Americans don’t understand provocations although they are manipulated by them over and over. They don’t understand propaganda. The Gulf of Tonkin took years to be found as a provocation by the US but by the time it became generally acknowledged by the people who studied it the average public had moved on to the next shiny object.
On July 22nd, 2014 on Meet The Press Kerry said that the US had proof of the exact location where the missile was fired from. The Russians asked the US to release this information. Nothing. For that matter, conversations in the air tower were classified. Don’t expect Ukraine to release them either. I’m just pointing out that you were lied to again and accepted it. I don’t expect you have an answer for this, because there is no answer.
Matt McIrvin
@kc: Posner says:
In the 18th century, almost no Americans were born in this country, because it didn’t exist when they were born. Almost all Americans obtained citizenship by being citizens of a state when the United States was created–a clause in the Constitution that no longer applies to anybody. So I think it’s a stretch to interpret natural-born citizenship by this standard.
Grumpy Code Monkey
@boatboy_srq:
The fact that I understood every word of that bothers me for some reason.
goblue72
Fine. But you do realize that the vast majority of people did NOT take a Women’s Studies class in college? Only 40 percent of working age Americans have a college degree, let alone got to college and take a Women’s Studies class at some point.
There are some words that, yes, its reasonable to assume most people are aware – or should be aware – that are inappropriate to use or have a charged history. The “N” word being the most obvious. As well as words with highly charged racial histories – coolie or tar baby. Or highly charged sexist connotations. The “B” word for one. (Course none of this stopped Governor Jerry Brown from using the word “tar baby” last year in a speech at a convention I was at, in front of several thousand real estate developers and various journalists.) But that universe of words is pretty small. Growing – but small.
I wouldn’t put “hysterical” in that bucket. In that same thread somebody innocently referred to Michelle Bachman as “nuts” or some version of that (I think it was Betty Cracker). Which got criticized for being potential ableist. Etc, etc. None of which is to say the criticisms are necessarily unwarranted. Just that you have to travel in certain circles or come from a certain background to really be down at that level in the weeds of “words with a charged history that delegitimizes certain groups of people”. I don’t think Betty thinks poorly of – or makes fun of – people with actual mental illness. Even though I have tangled with her, I assume the opposite – that she probably thinks mental illness isn’t treated as seriously in this country as physical illness and that your healthcare/health insurance system should do more for people with mental illness. Such that her using the phrase “nuts” about Michelle Bachmann is one of those “meh – there are more important things to get upset about” kind of things.
But whatever, people like to get their outrage on, doubly so online. Activates certain centers of the lizard brain and all that. If it didn’t work, Fox News wouldn’t be so profitable.
Germy
@Bob In Portland:
http://clarissasblog.com/2016/02/04/isis-and-russia/
goblue72
@kindness: Primaries are rough and tumble. Big deal. This obsession with “YOU HAVE TO SUPPORT MY CANDIDATE IN THE GENERAL” at this stage of the game is just nonsense. And believe me, finger wagging at people is just about the worst way to get somebody to agree with you. (I am not singling you out – just that I see a lot of that “we have to focus on the general election right NOW” stuff far too often)
We have had a grand total of ONE primary vote in ONE state so far.
What Have the Romans Ever Done for Us?
Bernie’s people are already on the ground here in Maryland (not a swing State by any means) registering people to vote. I walked by a group of them yesterday. He may be building a ground game to rival Hillary’s. I’d happily vote for either in the general election. Right now I’m leaning Hillary just because everyone in the press seems to hate her, which makes her sympathetic to me if not to anyone else. Besides which Bernie is kind of a broken record. Granted, he’s stuck on an all time great song but he needs to find a few more hits.
goblue72
@boatboy_srq: Funny, because I could just as easily say most Clinton supporters I’ve met remind me of Tracy Flick in Election.
artem1s
@C.V. Danes: but don’t ever forget who the real enemy is.
that’d be nice but if every dollar the Democratic Party has to spend is going towards one candidate, it won’t matter who the enemy is. Lawsuits have been filed in 4-5 states fighting egregious voter ID laws. Guess who is spending campaign money making sure the BernieBros on college campuses can vote come November? Who’s spending money down ticket to try and grab back the Senate? And who’s burning down the party for the sake of their own name recognition?
Matt McIrvin
@goblue72:
The Sanders supporters explicitly telling people not to vote for Clinton in the general might have something to do with that.
Ruckus
@C.V. Danes:
I’ve been beating this dead horse myself. To seemingly no avail.
Ruckus
@Brachiator:
Weird that some people have gone from “I want a president I’d like to have a beer with” to “I want a president who is as a dumbass, like me.”
In many circles these two things are one and the same.
randy khan
@Matt McIrvin:
Personally, I think that pretty much all of the commentary on what the eligibility clause means is pointless, since Congress will decide if it comes to that and is unlikely to decide that anyone born to a U.S. citizen is not natural born. (There are theoretical paths to get to the Supreme Court, but they’re really unlikely in the case of Cruz.)
But even if you imagine that the courts might get involved, there’s a lot of handwaving in this article about how someone born on foreign soil can’t be a natural-born citizen. It mostly takes the form of saying that you’re either naturalized or natural born, and then saying that any citizenship conferred by statute is naturalization.
That’s both a non sequitor and historically inaccurate. The question is not whether you’re conferred citizenship by law (after all, the Constitution is law, too), but when you become a citizen. If it happens at birth, well, the natural conclusion is that you’re a natural born citizen. That’s also consistent with the thinking at the time. The English authorities on this topic at the time the Constitution was written generally concluded that a child born outside of the country to a father who was a citizen (or, more commonly, a subject) became a citizen (subject) at birth. (The mothers generally were not considered at all in the analysis, as nobody really could imagine a wife being abroad without her husband.) So the contemporaneous understanding of the concept pretty clearly would have covered situations like Cruz. Now, given the general dismissal of the relevance of women at the time, there might be an argument that if you were a real originalist, Cruz isn’t eligible because his father wasn’t a citizen, but even Clarence Thomas probably would balk at that one.
gwangung
@C.V. Danes:
Center? Between where she is now and the Republicans? Or where she is now and the right-leaning parts of the Democratic Party? Two different things, and one is not that untoward…..
EriktheRed
@FlipYrWhig:
Actually, Melissa Bean (ptooie!!) was first elected in 2004; one of the few Dem turnovers in that election….
..not that it really mattered in her case.
goblue72
@Brandon: Most of polling is really national at this point on head to heads, or primary level. From what I’ve seen at RCP, most of the state level general election head to heads (Ohio – Clinton v Rubio or Florida – Clinton v. Cruz, etc) is pretty intermittent and fairly dated at this point.
St. A
@Brachiator: I see what you’re saying–I think Steinem apologized? I did facepalm at Bill Clinton on CNN this morning…
goblue72
@C.V. Danes: There won’t be a brokered convention – neither Dem or GOP. I see that kind of talk every damn Presidential election and its never true.
goblue72
@FlipYrWhig: I’m not talking about circles one way or another. Literally about the daily barrage of Salon posts that appear in my Facebook feed. Based on what they push out daily, I’d say their internal metrics tell them they have more Bernie readers than Hillary readers, so there are slightly more pro-Bernie articles than Hillary articles, but definitely some of both. Along with the occasional “both sides are wrong”, “both sides are right”, or “these fights are destroying us” kind of pot stirring articles. Gotta keep the froth going. Froth grabs mindshare. Boring doesn’t.
Like I said, rather than a grand conspiracy, it far more likely about what their internal metrics tell them gets page views and clickthroughs. Its always about selling ads with digital media. I have friends in senior management with some digital media companies in NYC, media capital of everywhere – after having them spend 10 minutes explaining to me how the sausage gets made, it was enough to make me want to burn my computer and get all my information through hand painted scrolls.
goblue72
@Matt McIrvin: Where on here have you seen that? And if not here, than where?
I put the number of people who would actually not vote for Hillary if Sanders loses as the same number that moved to Canada when Bush was elected President.
Betty Cracker
@rikyrah: What if palliative is the best we can do?
dww44
@C.V. Danes: This a thousand times:
A couple of days ago I shared a similar comment from this very blog over at Booman’s place, as there are a couple of commenters there who will go out of their way to bash Clinton even when the blog post isn’t about Clinton and/or Sanders. That comment here was quite detailed and rational and unemotional.
But he (that much I remember) said the same thing as you…that a nasty, drawn out primary battle does not bode well for Dems in the general. That there is historical precedent and analysis that documents that the party tends NOT to lose the general when there hasn’t been an all out primary war, 2008 notwithstanding..
I note that some of the bloggers I read now think it’s almost a given we will lose in November.
Matt McIrvin
@goblue72: Salon.
PST
Curry’s writing is full of throw-away lines with loaded language that gratifies the true believers at the expense of any attempt to persuade anyone else. He’s like a Fox commentator. So “Clinton apparatchik” Debbie Wasserman Schultz “robbed the voters of free and open debate” and so forth. All good fun if you think so already but anyone else’s eyes glaze over. And I love it when he says that “all evidence indicates Sanders won the popular vote” without suggesting what evidence that is. There is a good argument to be made that Iowa Democrats ought to run their caucuses like the Republicans do, but they don’t, so Curry’s statement is a bit like me saying “all evidence indicates that the Panthers won the Super Bowl” by yardage, time of possession, completions, or whatever metric you like except the one that matters. It wouldn’t be so bad if Curry didn’t always thump the same tub. He’s almost as bad a Patrick “Putin is a god” Smith. Salon should just turn the whole site over to Digby.
boatboy_srq
@goblue72: There’s a “drown out the opposition” component at work. We here are (mostly) able to discuss both candidates in complete sentences. Elsewhere, there are Berniebots out there reduced to emoticons (not even the “Ron! Paul! Ron! Paul!” they-won’t-get-a-word-in-edgewise chant of yesteryear). Even the Clintonistas still use complete sentences. I’m all for cutting through the background noise, but c’mon.
I don’t think I would be so bothered if the similarity between the two groups’ behaviors weren’t so close – as if Paul’s supporters from 2008 had abandoned Daddy Ron and found their new bromance without stopping to evaluate either the political positions they were moving to or the practicality of enacting them with a Congress so far removed from a compatible mindset. I suspect that a sizeable component of Sanders’ support base that thinks he’s the Leftist variant of Daddy Paul, and their disillusionment could be very painful come November.
I have no doubt there are some in the Clinton camp who can get similarly automated in the Intertubz. But there’s the taint of Entitled White Male that hangs around some of Sanders’ support.
goblue72
@Matt McIrvin: Between the clickbait nature of Salon’s articles and the randomness of what random people on the Internet say, I’m gonna call that pretty weak sauce.
I'll be Frank
@Bob In Portland: With all due respect, I think you are wrong. The evidence points to a fairly small part of the Ukraine occupied by separatist who had claimed on social media to have shot down a AN-26 and then took the claim down as soon as it was obvious that they had made a boo-boo. There is lots of open source data to support the Dutch findings. Why should the SoS out his intel resources to make a point that has been more than made. It was a mistake made by Ukraine separatists and has proven to be of little or no use as a “provocation.” At least that is my opinion based on all the information available to me at this point in time.
Bobby Thomson
@randy khan: I agree with all of that except maybe Thomas. Also, too, Scalia and Alito (if not Roberts and Kennedy) will decide the question differently based on the party of the candidate.
goblue72
@boatboy_srq: Taint? Sure. But I find most of the whingeing about it to be completely overblown. And to characterize Sanders supporters as mostly composed of ex-Paulites to be completed moronic at best. Y’all need to get a serious grip. And unplug from the Internet and maybe go phonebank somewhere to have some actual basis for what is actually going on out there on the campaign trail.
jl
@AnonPhenom: People made up and voted correctly in 2008. So far, things seem far more cordial and friendly than they did back then.
Of course it all depends on the Democratic candidates really being smarter and saner and generally better people than those on the GOP side.
Is Sanders really just as committed to waging his political revolution whatever transpires, as he is set on getting the nomination? He has explicitly said so many times in his stump speeches. But will he follow through? I think he would be a fool not too, since that will determine his chances on being in Senate majority with an HRC administration.
Will HRC ruin her campaign and bring in toxic people and ‘shake things up’ in order to solve a campaign crisis that I don’t see remotely existing? She has never been candidate for President before. If Sanders wants to play ball, will she control freak the guy into blowing her off? Or will she blow him off. despite her sweet words now.
Edit: will Big Dawg go berserk? That is a possibility. He is as good politician as Obama. But not remotely as disciplined.
We won’t know until it happens. And then it will be too late. So we all make best decisions who to contribute to and support in the meantime.
If only the GOP could even offer a damn Romney, or the same Romney, we could afford the luxury of only being extremely pissed and deeply concerned, rather than being terrified at the prospect of a GOP win.
Only guy who does not completely terrify me is Kasich, and he would be a disaster. But maybe one we could recover from in the several decades before my life table says I should shuffle off the scene. So, Kasich is not much comfort at all.
And I don’t think Kasich can get the nomination. I heard some of his campaigning on the news, and he seems as inept as Jeb. But less pathetic, since he seems to have a life.
Lord, what a scary hot mess the GOP is.
chopper
@Kropadope:
so did obama. the GOP is not going to give president sanders the time of day on any issue. not one. even the small things. he’ll get gornisht.
the only hope either candidate has is 1) to have some decent coat tails and 2) to have the dem caucuses in the house and senate go to bat for them. so far as i can tell, as to 1) bernie has done little to nothing about down ticket races except ‘hope for the best’, and as to 2) clinton has far, far more support from party members in congress.
either way it doesn’t look easy for either candidate, but looking at the way things stand right now president sanders would be a lame duck on his first day.
boatboy_srq
@C.V. Danes: It really doesn’t help much that what we have behaves like three parties: liberal Dems, conservaDems, and the Reichwing*. There’s so much talk about the fracturing of the GOTea that the loose coalitiion that is the other party – and the just-barely-glossed-over distinctions between the two groups – gets short shrift. “Blue Dog” and “DINO” get thrown about a lot, but the pols who garner those labels represent a significant portion of the electorate. It’s no mean trick to drag that crowd Leftward out of its comfort zone without scaring them enough to run to the Teahad.
*Never mind that the conservaDems are what the GOTea really ought to be, and the Teahad is less reminiscent of the old GOP that certain other unmentional socio-political movements.
Matt McIrvin
@randy khan: Back in 1995 Jordan Steiker, Jack Balkin and Sanford Levinson somehow managed to parody all this stuff before it was even written, in a joke-ish article arguing from comma placement in the eligibility clause that nobody is eligible to be President:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/jbalkin/articles/takingtextandstructurereallyseriously.pdf
Cacti
@boatboy_srq:
You mean like the unshakable belief that a 74-year old, white male, from a tiny, lily-white state, with a 25-year Washington career and little to show for it, and who wasn’t even a Democrat until just months ago…
Is the one true progressive, our national savior, and the candidate who will bring about a revolution that will fundamentally reorder our national politics and cure every national ill? And if you don’t believe all of it, it’s because you’re corrupt, compromised, and stupid?
That sense of Entitled White Male?
randy khan
@Bobby Thomson: Well, since we’re talking about Cruz, we know how Scalia and Alito will vote, even if it pains them to agree with RGB, Sotomayor and Kagan that the mother is just as important as the father. (Undoubtedly they would concur on some specious ground rather than joining with those three.)
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@Cacti:
Apparently all that will happen, too, by waving their Bernie signs and posting pics of Bernie on Facebook. When it comes to process questions like how to get the red states to pass the policies needed for healthcare and educational reform when they’re doing everything they can to prevent “those people” from voting and denying them expanded Medicaid, the breeze from all the hand waving away blows my hair back.
muddy
@Cacti: I know. How dare someone from a blue state run for president. Right out of nowhere, and a shitty little state to boot. They aren’t really even American. Fuck those commies.
jl
@muddy: Maybe Kennedy too, since he has shown deep and sincere concern over the problems the little ladies will encounter,and should not be expected to solve, in trying to think through issues relating to birthing them some babies.
Cacti
@muddy:
As opposed to the current POTUS, from the deep red state of Illinois? Or the former Secretary of State and Senator from the blood red state of New York. Or the former governor of bright red Maryland?
The above complaint makes no sense, champ.
boatboy_srq
@Cacti: More like the unshakeable belief that they, as Millenial Caucasians, aren’t the least privileged by either of those things; and that being those things gives them Unique Insight into their Extra Special Sparkly Candidate, and conveys an absolutely clear and impartial understanding of the plight of Those People (who, if they’d only STFU and listen, would also grok that all their woes are economic in nature, and would stop whining about the racism/sexism/genderism/nativism secondary issues). And anyone who questions any of that has to be duped by The GW2-Flip-Flopping, Wall-Street-Toadying, Military-Interventionist, Big Business shill they all assume is the sum total of Clinton the candidate. All this – and calling out Clinton’s voting record going back to her first Senate votes – while conveniently forgetting Sanders’ very similar record from the same days (save that one Iraq War vote) and insisting Their Guy is day to Clinton’s night.
I worry that these people, once they see Sanders’ entire agenda, and get a good look at his potential coattails, will desert the Dems altogether and either sit out the general or flip to the GOTea.
Although that’s not far removed from your illustration, it is distinct enough to represent a separate set. Bernie the Saviour is not quite the same as Bernie the Original Dudebro.
jl
@Cacti: I don’t think either of you are making much sense with your entitlement face off.
randy khan
@Matt McIrvin: That is a thing of beauty.
muddy
@Cacti: Good thing I was going for sarcasm and not a complaint.
Like Bernie, don’t like Bernie, I don’t care. I don’t even have a favorite. I just don’t see how the fact that he comes from “a tiny, lily-white state” is to be held against him. You come from where you come from.
Interesting to me as a liberal that coming from Vermont is now a bad thing.
ETA: “Champ”? wtf is that for?
Mr. Twister
@dww44: Saw your post. Man, the one commenter over there is just insufferable. I am getting to the point where I just won’t go over there any more because of the vitriol.
Van Buren
@Applejinx: adorable+ Danish=redundant
Cacti
@muddy:
The tiny, lily-white state is where he chose to live. Pointing out that it’s mostly unrepresentative of some of the backbone constituency groups of the national Democratic Party is hardly unfair.
Because you’re a champion. ;-)
muddy
@Cacti: He chose to live there 40 years ago. Positive he was not planning a run for the presidency back then.
Seems like that makes as much sense as blaming black people for not moving to Vermont to make it more diverse.
Matt McIrvin
Josh Marshall is freaking out again.
TallPete
@rikyrah:
Curious, is Sanders position any different that Clintons or O’Bamas for that matter? Reparations seem like an unworkable idea.
LanceThruster
@Applejinx:
Thanks to you all for your efforts. Here’s to some stratospheric numbers for Bernie out of New Hampshire.
muddy
@Cacti:
Thank you for saying so, I must have mistaken your tone.
I thought maybe you were referring to the Lake Monster. That’s a scary thing from Vermont too. It’s lily-green though.
DCF
@muddy:
Gradualism and the fight over Single Payer
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2016/02/gradualism-and-single-payer
I, for one, am deeply encouraged – even excited – by the passion and participation of the youth demographic (17 – 29) in conjunction with the 30 – 44 year-old cohort (see above link)….
My concern, at present, is what will happen with this group (Democratic/Liberal/Progressive – TheNextGeneration) should we once again elect a candidate who is both a military interventionist and corporate-friendly…how much longer can we afford to live with glacier-like incrementalism/gradualism in the face of escalating climate change and the ongoing Second Gilded Age? Do we truly wish to blunt the spirit and aspirations of yet another American political generation?
Simon Taverner
@Brachiator: I think for many people (if not most), those two things are one and the same.
Applejinx
@LanceThruster: We’ll try! Thank you. And then we move on and continue to do the same thing in other states. Looking good so far :)
Brachiator
@Cacti:
Bernie, entitled? I’m not getting that vibe from him. And his most vociferous supporters seem, like him, stubbornly fixated on their version of progressive ideology.
Sad fact is that both candidates are pretty weak in many respects. They are better than any of the Republicans, but that ain’t saying much.
Brachiator
@Simon Taverner:
Not at all. The first is more about whether a voter thinks that the candidate understands him. And in America, especially, there is the absurd notion that politicians and celebrities must be regular guys, and never never never ever think that they are better than us, have better taste than us, etc.
But the other thing, which really took off with Bush and Cheney and found its ultimate expression in Sarah Palin is the insistence that ignorance is the highest virtue. Americans used to be suspicious of eggheads, but still acknowledge intelligence and learning. But there are now people who demand that you must be as uncritical and unthinking and anti-intellectual as they are in order to belong to the tribe.
JenJen
@Marjowil: The very first line of Beyonce’s new (and AMAZING) song, “Formation”:
“Y’all haters corny with that Illuminati mess”
Beyonce is on to the crazy conspiracy talk that surrounds her, but the song and especially the accompanying video is timely and pretty mind-blowing. I’m not surprised to find that the wingers are disturbed by the imagery but I do think it’s awfully funny. Maybe they’ll pay attention and learn something? Naaaaaaw.
Brachiator
@boatboy_srq:
I think you worry too much. It’s kinda early in the campaign.
Are some here thinking that things would be better is we just settled on one candidate now, and not have any kind of challenge or debate? Or that if we close our eyes, click our heels together and say, “there’s no one like Hillary,” we will guarantee happiness and light?
dww44
@Mr. Twister: I saw the blog post titles over there today and I elected not to even open the comments. I can handle it when Booman pretty much indicates that he’s in Bernie’s camp, but a couple of those commenters who BELIEVE and KNOW that they are right and everyone else is not only wrong but also stupid for even contemplating supporting HRC.
If you read the comment I’m thinking about, then one of those Bernie commenters rated my response as trollish. I had to laugh.
.
BruceFromOhio
@Loneoak: this made me laugh and it scared the rabbit.
boatboy_srq
@Brachiator: Early? Sure. Non-issue? Well, that depends on what kind of support Sanders can get in places like AR and SC, where Clinton definitely has an edge through focusing on the minority/women’s rights angles. Sanders’ flubbing the early BLM response hasn’t helped, and especially in the South that could be a problem.
I’m also specifically pointing out a particular subset of Sanders supporters who aren’t showing much interest in Black/Brown/Queer/Female issues (for them, economics trumps all other issues), and may bail on the general election if Their Guy isn’t nominated. The general electorate is far more malleable. And I’m not pointing out a risk to either Sanders’ or Clinton’s electability, merely scratching my head as to why I keep running into people supporting Sanders with the same language and tactics some people used to support Paul back in ’08, and wondering whether they’re the same subset of voters. I don’t see Clintonistas being the same kind of sore loser as this variety of Berniebot; and while these particular Berniebots may not be enough to decide the election, the fact that they’re there at all is not comforting.
Mr. Twister
@dww44: I saw that. Interestingly, Martin posts those over at Washington Monthly and does get a lot of push back over there.
boatboy_srq
@Brachiator: Not BERNIE, but certain varieties of Berniebot, for whom “progressivism” is defined fairly narrowly – essentially any and all minority issues are economic in nature and will be resolved when wealth inequality is addressed (conveniently ignoring racism, sexism, anti-Otherism and other failings of the primary-caucasian primary-Xtian Teahad).
FlipYrWhig
@dww44: The Booman commenters skew nutbar. Some of the craziest regulars anywhere I stop in the blogosphere.
Jean
@dww44: I know exactly the thread you’re referring to at the Pond. I read that the comments on Booman’s posts in the Washington Monthly are far less provocative. I sympathize with you.
Jean
@dww44: Trollish?? LOL. You were certainly not. And while the person you were responding to seems to have a whole lot of electoral history knowledge in her short term memory, she can be, whether she intends to be or not, insulting.
Jean
@Mr. Twister: know the feeling. I’m beginning to avoid the commentary altogether. Hope the Pond doesn’t turn into FDL.
dww44
@FlipYrWhig: I used to think AG was the real nutbar, but of late not so much..At least he has a sense of humor.
@Jean: Best description ever of the most prolific commenter there, However, the insults she directed at me were intentional. Visits there will be scarce until this primary fight gets decided, then we shall see. Thanks for the kind words.
Brachiator
@boatboy_srq:
Again, it is too early to worry about these voters. Also, the hard core of this group is too small to worry about, compared to the rest of Democratic voters.
These people, like their Naderite antecendents, are self-negating. They really are not Sanders supporters. They are ideologues who keep waiting for their version of the Second Coming, an economic paradise. Sanders could never deliver this by himself, and there are no credible people who believe this stuff running for Congress. There is nothing you can do to make these people happy. And if they are not willing to compromise if their designated political Messiah is not anointed, there is no way or reason to court them.
moderateindy
One last word on the whole hysterical kerfuffle. Cole’s post perfectly proves my point that the word no longer conveys its etymological origins. He had no idea of it’s sexist connotations until he took a women’s studies course in college.
Some people have proffered the idea that people still use it in arguments to push buttons. While certainly possible, not a particularly effective device when the vast majority of people would’nt even get the reference, and thus their buttons would not get pushed. You’d really have to know a lot about who you are arguing with to use that as a device to belittle them. My guess is the vast majority of people never think of the word hysterical as applying specifically to women.
dww44
@moderateindy: i don’t know that I agree. As a woman with a few decades of liiving behind her and one who worked where men were largely in charge and women were clearly in support roles, if the men in charge deemed a support female as both emotional and hysterical that was addressed in a performance review. If a female was able to climb the ladder even a little bit, she had to be perceived as rational, ladylike, low key, and unemotional. There were lots of ahole men that we supported, but they never got the boot, in spite of the fact that they were often way more emotional than were the women who supported them.
moderateindy
@dww44: Of course women get painted all the time as being too emotional, that’s part of the sexism that is still a problem. But I don’t believe that most people actually know the origins, or the historical meaning of the word hysterical, so I doubt many performance reviews would use that word to try and denigrate a woman. I would wager that if you asked 100 people at random to define the word less than 5 would link the term to women, with the vast majority saying it meant crazy, or something really funny.
Like I said, if Cole only learned the original meaning by taking a women’s studies course, how common can the knowledge of the sexist undertones be?