• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Conservatism: there are people the law protects but does not bind and others who the law binds but does not protect.

They want us to be overwhelmed and exhausted. Focus. Resist. Oppose.

Impressively dumb. Congratulations.

When someone says they “love freedom”, rest assured they don’t mean yours.

We will not go back.

Tick tock motherfuckers!

One of our two political parties is a cult whose leader admires Vladimir Putin.

Books are my comfort food!

They are not red states to be hated; they are voter suppression states to be fixed.

Republicans choose power over democracy, every day.

SCOTUS: It’s not “bribery” unless it comes from the Bribery region of France. Otherwise, it’s merely “sparkling malfeasance”.

Nothing worth doing is easy.

Authoritarian republicans are opposed to freedom for the rest of us.

You come for women, you’re gonna get your ass kicked.

“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”

I swear, each month of 2025 will have its own history degree.

My right to basic bodily autonomy is not on the table. that’s the new deal.

Sometimes the world just tells you your cat is here.

They think we are photo bombing their nice little lives.

Cancel the cowardly Times and Post and set up an equivalent monthly donation to ProPublica.

Today’s gop: why go just far enough when too far is right there?

DeSantis transforming Florida into 1930s Germany with gators and theme parks.

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

If ‘weird’ was the finish line, they ran through the tape and kept running.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Open Threads / Because of wow. / The establishment is the kiddie table

The establishment is the kiddie table

by David Anderson|  February 12, 201610:46 am| 137 Comments

This post is in: Because of wow., Election 2016, All we want is life beyond the thunderdome, Ever Get The Feeling You've Been Cheated?, The Math Demands It, Their Motto: Apocalypse Now, WTF?

FacebookTweetEmail

Via Political Wire:

 

new Morning Consult poll finds Donald Trump with a huge national lead over his GOP rivals at 44%, followed by Ted Cruz at 17%, Ben Carson at 10%, Marco Rubio at 10%, Jeb Bush at 8% and John Kasich at 4%.

The consolidated establishment lane of “responsible” Republicans pull in 22%.  That is a faction less than the Cruz/Carson faction.  The Republican Establishment is the kiddie table in that party.

I am having a harder time seeing how Trump is not the nominee for the GOP as he controls the terms of debate, the media loves him, and plausible unified opponents can’t unify.  His non-Cruz/non-unadulterated grifter opponents are locked in a single shot, non-iterative game with a single winner takes all prize.  Coordinating so one of the opponents in this category is the proffered opponent leaves the withdrawing opponents only soft agreement enforcement mechanisms to get any promised goodies.  Throw in that there is personal loathing among some of the Establishment candidates , it makes a non-Cruz anti-Trump consolidation behind a single candidate improbable in the next week or two.

And even if there is a consolidation with universal support transfer, the anti-anti-Establishment non-obvious grifting wing of the GOP is a minority faction.

How does Trump not get the nomination?

 

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « When the Republican offer is not nothing
Next Post: Pretty men to tell you all those pretty lies »

Reader Interactions

137Comments

  1. 1.

    beltane

    February 12, 2016 at 10:51 am

    Trump is pulling support from a cohort of white people who have been living under a rock up to now. They are not teabaggers but the white underclass. Scary times.

  2. 2.

    dr. bloor

    February 12, 2016 at 10:51 am

    Watching the establishment media and princes hump the Establishment Candidate du Jour over the next several weeks is going to have a lot of folks thinking about Ernie Anastos.

  3. 3.

    MazeDancer

    February 12, 2016 at 10:54 am

    Possible there is some unknown event that could stop Trump, but otherwise, after Super Tuesday, don’t see where he is stopped. The alternatives for GOP are so lackluster, so who they gonna call?

    the media loves him

    They do. They absolutely do. And they hate Hillary.

    However, have noticed the NY Times is lightening up on Hillz. In the sense, that they don’t savage her in every headline. Maybe they’re thinking if the alternative is Donald Trump, they better get their hatred in check.

    Because if it’s Trump vs. Sanders all Donald has to do is spew “Socialist, Socialist, Socialist” over and over, with a few wild spouts of how much the tax raise will be to give away all the “free stuff”, while the media asks over and over “Will American elect a Socialist?”. That will be the entire campaign.

  4. 4.

    guachi

    February 12, 2016 at 10:57 am

    Would be interesting to see a campaign between two candidates who have no concrete way of accomplishing their goals and who know almost nothing about foreign policy.

    We’d get a Noun, a Verb, and Income Inequality vs. a Noun, a Verb, and Loser.

  5. 5.

    Miss Bianca

    February 12, 2016 at 10:57 am

    you mean, short of “termination with extreme prejudice”?

  6. 6.

    Peale

    February 12, 2016 at 10:57 am

    So he wins. The next question is whether or not running a campaign on issues and positions that the republicans have slaughtered democrats on in off-year elections is going to produce a win in a presidential election. It he can win with his signature issues, whole Bernie Revolution vs. Hillary Centrism debate is moot.

  7. 7.

    Tommy

    February 12, 2016 at 10:57 am

    Honestly, I am not sure at this point. If anybody had Cruz’s numbers, well other than Cruz I could envision a number of ways Trump could lose if they had the funding to limp into the SEC primary states.

    But Ted, fucking Cruz. Political geeks like us that read wonky blogs and insider pubs have known for a long, long time nobody, not even pretty hardcore Republicans (much less Republican leadership) like the man. But now I hear it on major TV stations, my local news, and dead tree print pubs my parents and I assume “Joe Six Pack” read from time-to-time.

    I don’t know if it was Salon or Daily Beast that had a deep dive (in the last few days) into how the last two Bush’s used, starting with the direction of Lee Atwater, SC as a “firewall” against any insurgent candidate. It worked each time. They went and looked at what Jeb? is planning for SC and it seems it is the exact opposite of what worked in the past.

    I recall reading that and thinking “The Donald” has it …..

  8. 8.

    Oatler.

    February 12, 2016 at 11:00 am

    @Miss Bianca: Yes, AMC’s ” Weekend Rambo Marathon” will be appointed by Trump to his cabinet for a HUGE salary.

  9. 9.

    beltane

    February 12, 2016 at 11:00 am

    @MazeDancer: The problem is that the people supporting Trump now, and the people who will support him in November, couldn’t care less what the NYT and the rest of the media think. This is Sarah Palin’s war against “east coast elites” on steroids. Just because Trump himself is a member of the east coast elite (sort of) doesn’t make a dime of difference. Both Hillary and Bernie are poorly equipped to run against this. The only real hope is that evangelicals are turned off by the proceedings and sit this one out.

  10. 10.

    The Golux

    February 12, 2016 at 11:00 am

    @dr. bloor:

    Oddly, none of the definitions there seem to capture the meaning understood here, i.e. a phrase encouraging your opponent to continue doing that stupid thing he’s doing.

  11. 11.

    Just Some Fuckhead

    February 12, 2016 at 11:00 am

    How does Trump not get the nomination?

    The only way is for the race to settle into a three-way contest between Trump, Cruz and NotTrumpCruz.

  12. 12.

    Linda Featheringill

    February 12, 2016 at 11:01 am

    I am surprised that Trump is doing this well at this point. But then, I have a terrible record when it comes to predicting elections.

    As a student of history, however, I think that a Trump vs Sanders election would be pivotal. It would cause the US to make some choices that would impact our lives for a long time.

    Perhaps we are living in interesting times.

  13. 13.

    Keith P

    February 12, 2016 at 11:01 am

    Can’t wait for the 2016 Autopsy Report.

  14. 14.

    Steve in the ATL

    February 12, 2016 at 11:03 am

    I’m still trying to unpack this sentence. Will be back in a couple of days.

    I am having a harder time seeing how Trump is not the nominee for the GOP as he controls the terms of debate, the media loves him, and the nature of a single shot, non-iterative game with winner takes all prizes and only soft agreement enforcement mechanisms combined with personal loathing among some of the Establishment candidates makes a non-Cruz anti-Trump consolidation behind a single candidate improbable in the next week or two.

  15. 15.

    beltane

    February 12, 2016 at 11:03 am

    A big problem with Trump is that he’s liable-proof, a man who openly and proudly speaks from the gutter.

  16. 16.

    A Ghost To Most

    February 12, 2016 at 11:03 am

    I think it’s not beyond possible that Combover Yam could get in a snit over whatever,and up and quit.

  17. 17.

    Betty Cracker

    February 12, 2016 at 11:04 am

    @beltane: I could be totally wrong, but while I can see the Republican Party settling on Donald Trump as the nominee, I can’t see the United States of America electing him as president. Maybe I have too much faith in my fellow citizens, but I think if Trump wins the nomination, the Democrats will win the election by an enormous margin, take back the Senate and make significant gains in the House.

  18. 18.

    forked tongue

    February 12, 2016 at 11:04 am

    How does Trump not get the nomination? I can think of only one way: Bill Kristol predicts that he does.

  19. 19.

    beltane

    February 12, 2016 at 11:05 am

    On NPR yesterday they we interviewing some College Republican bigwig who was already pivoting towards supporting Trump. I think they would prefer him to Cruz any day.

  20. 20.

    amk

    February 12, 2016 at 11:07 am

    let’s wait and see how he does in southern states.

  21. 21.

    Capri

    February 12, 2016 at 11:08 am

    @MazeDancer: Forget socialist, how many Americans can get past atheist? What I’m holding onto is the fact that when Obama first ran, the media and the Democratic establishment said the exact same thing about America never electing a person of color.

    To older people who lived through the cold war, socialism means terrible things, but to people born after the ’70s it’s a rather benign term.

  22. 22.

    Laertes

    February 12, 2016 at 11:08 am

    How does Trump not get the nomination?

    He doesn’t not get it. He’s going to be the nominee. And he’s got at least one chance in three of taking the white house if he does.

    A Democracy gets the leaders it deserves. God help us.

  23. 23.

    beltane

    February 12, 2016 at 11:08 am

    @Betty Cracker: It really depends on turnout. Trump was yuuge with first time voters in NH. Unenthused millenials and enthused crazy people could lead to trouble. Hillary really has to work to be less dismissive of the concerns of young people.

  24. 24.

    Amir Khalid

    February 12, 2016 at 11:10 am

    To help me keep track, I have divided the Republican candidates into four groups, of which three have only one surviving candidate. As you can see, there’s really no one left among the Damp Squibs but Kasich and Rubio. Only Kasich has not yet had a turn in the spotlight. And when they’re down to him, with his feeble performance so far, the party establishment will be down to the no-hopers.

    @MazeDancer:
    The NYT endorsed Hillary for the Democratic nomination and Kasich for the Republican one. I think those are the candidates NYT dislikes least from each party. I’m sure they disapprove of Bernie, in their genteel way, while the Republican candidates as a group horrify them.

  25. 25.

    Tommy

    February 12, 2016 at 11:11 am

    Trump has this white dude, billionaire thing going on that works for Republicans from time-to-time statewide in my pretty darn blue state of Illinois. Our new governor is worth like $600,000,000. Really good looking white dude that was able to win over the rich Chicago Republicans and business people throughout the state, but also a lot of people that work so hard for a living, get paid so little, they should really be voting for somebody else.

    Almost happened in Obama’s Senate run against Jack Ryan. Obama was down and I think would have lost. But then the court papers of Ryan’s divorce came out, that he tried to force his wife, Jeri Ryan (The Borg Seven of Nine on Star Trek TV show), to go to group sex clubs and he dropped out and Armstrong Williams “carpetbagged” it to Chicago to take his place. Obama well …….. history could have been very different.

    I will NEVER for the life of me understand why middle-class to lower middle-class white dudes that works in a coal mine (a lot around me) would vote for somebody like Trump, but my gosh they do.

  26. 26.

    Richard Mayhew

    February 12, 2016 at 11:11 am

    @Steve in the ATL: updated — basically in an ideal word without personality conflicts, getting Kasich and Rubio and Bush to unify behind one of them and have the other two drop off and throw all their support behind the Chosen One is a nasty coordination problem as promises are minimally credible. Throw in the fact that Bush evidently detests Rubio on a visceral level, and that problem goes from tough to fugly.

  27. 27.

    Matt McIrvin

    February 12, 2016 at 11:11 am

    I can’t see the United States of America electing him as president.

    I can. The more time goes by, the more I feel like mclaren.

  28. 28.

    C.V. Danes

    February 12, 2016 at 11:12 am

    @MazeDancer:

    Because if it’s Trump vs. Sanders all Donald has to do is spew “Socialist, Socialist, Socialist” over and over, with a few wild spouts of how much the tax raise will be to give away all the “free stuff”, while the media asks over and over “Will American elect a Socialist?”. That will be the entire campaign.

    If Bernie topples Hillary, then he will win the general election. If Hillary wins, she will win the general election. No Democrat or center-left independent is going to vote for Trump or take the chance on Trump winning by sitting out. To suggest otherwise really borders on concern trolling. I truely believe that.

  29. 29.

    Linda Featheringill

    February 12, 2016 at 11:13 am

    BTW, there is newspaper proof of Bernie’s involvement in the Civil Rights Movement:

    http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2016/02/bernie-sanders-core-university-chicago

  30. 30.

    NR

    February 12, 2016 at 11:13 am

    @MazeDancer: If the election is Trump vs. Hillary, I expect that Trump will pivot and start attacking Hillary from the left on a number of issues (except immigration, there’s absolutely no way he could pivot on that at this point). But he’ll go after her for being too close to Wall Street and being too hawkish in the Middle East. And she will be completely unable to deal with those kinds of attacks.

    Trump will be out there with a simple message: “Vote for me because I can’t be bought.” And apparently Hillary will be defending her millions of Wall Street $$$ by saying “That’s what they offered!”

    It’s going to be really ugly for Hillary.

  31. 31.

    beltane

    February 12, 2016 at 11:14 am

    @Tommy: Many of these lower-middle-class white dudes react to changing economic circumstances by supporting a candidate who talks big and promises them a boot in the face of their enemies forever.

  32. 32.

    the Conster, la Citoyenne

    February 12, 2016 at 11:14 am

    Trump bellowed in his acceptance speech about Sanders: “He wants to give our country away folks! Let’s not let that happen!”

    Implied (but not for long) is it will be given away “to those people”

    There’s a weird cross appeal between Sanders and Trump in support, and it’s white anxiety. I don’t think Sanders is a good match up against Trump, at all, if both are going all in for the white vote.

  33. 33.

    Punchy

    February 12, 2016 at 11:15 am

    I cant wait to see how the National Review magically changes its tune in August (Sept?) and promotes Trump as the bestest thing to vote for evah. And to witness all those “Evangelicals” who insist on Core Family Values (TM-GOP), Christian Values(TM-Baptists), and Conservative Principles (TM-Hypocrites) for their role models forced to punch the ticket for a thrice married, gambling-ensconced short-fingered vulgarian.

  34. 34.

    Laertes

    February 12, 2016 at 11:15 am

    @Matt McIrvin:

    I’m old enough to remember my countrymen going mad and electing (and re-electing) idiots that I never thought they’d choose.

    It’s a really big country, and I no longer have any confidence at all that I’ve got a good handle on what they’re thinking out there.

    I’ll be terribly disappointed if we elect Trump, but I won’t be one tiny bit surprised. My countrymen are entitled, murderous, racist, and monstrously thin-skinned.

  35. 35.

    Peale

    February 12, 2016 at 11:16 am

    @Capri: They will put up pictures of grocery stores in Venezuela and ask the Latinos if thats what they want here. Yeah I know Bernie isn’t going to nationalize all the industries and equate private property with subversion, but it will be very easy to equate socialism with toilet paper shortages.

  36. 36.

    MattF

    February 12, 2016 at 11:17 am

    If you’re not a hard-core Trump fan, then the argument for voting for Trump is that everything he says is a lie. It’s just entertainment, and there’s absolutely no telling what President Trump* might actually do.

    *Oy.

  37. 37.

    Punchy

    February 12, 2016 at 11:17 am

    Moderator….help me! Apparently GAMBOLING spelled the correct way is too much for this website to handle.

  38. 38.

    Tommy

    February 12, 2016 at 11:17 am

    @beltane: Yes and who is rich. They assume if he is rich then he knows what he is talking about. Not that if he would have taken the money he was left by his dad and put it in a mutual fund he’s be worth several times more than he is worth now (they did the math I think at Vox and Mother Jones).

  39. 39.

    dr. bloor

    February 12, 2016 at 11:18 am

    @Betty Cracker: Like anyone with an R after his name, he’ll take the deep red states in a heartbeat. As always, it boils down to what he can do in a handful of swing states (Ohio, Florida, etc.), all of whom have healthy contingents of angry, disenfranchised white people and cranky oldsters.

    I don’t think he would win a general election, but it’s certainly not impossible.

  40. 40.

    C.V. Danes

    February 12, 2016 at 11:18 am

    @Betty Cracker: This. Needs to be repeated over and over.

    America is not going to elect Trump. If Trump were to get elected, the resulting country would no longer be America. I have to believe that the majority of people who call themselves Americans get this.

  41. 41.

    Matt McIrvin

    February 12, 2016 at 11:19 am

    @C.V. Danes: Even if there’s a third-party run from Bloomberg?

    I don’t think Bloomberg is a danger if Hillary Clinton is the nominee, because very serious pundit-y people all believe Clinton is a viable candidate, regardless of whether she’s actually more electable.

    But if Sanders is the nominee, there may be enough people who regard Bloomberg as a more viable presidential candidate than Sanders that it’s not a priori obvious which one is the spoiler who should drop out. Kind of like Eliot Cutler the first time around. Or the current notrump situation in the Republican Party.

  42. 42.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    February 12, 2016 at 11:19 am

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne: and outside of the hard-core war-mongers, FP doesn’t get much discussion in this go-round. It wouldn’t take much next October to get people to flock to strong-and-wrong.

  43. 43.

    Matt McIrvin

    February 12, 2016 at 11:19 am

    @C.V. Danes: America never has been America. We’d just be jettisoning the myth.

  44. 44.

    Calouste

    February 12, 2016 at 11:20 am

    The consolidated establishment lane of “responsible” Republicans pull in 22%.

    And have been doing so for a number of months, basically since the time Scott Walker’s supporters all moved to Trump.

  45. 45.

    the Conster, la Citoyenne

    February 12, 2016 at 11:23 am

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    If it comes down to choosing between two shouty old white men in the midst of a foreign policy crisis, Trump is going to sound classier, stronger, muy macho. Bernie doesn’t have any chops at all in that department, and can’t bluster his way around it. Who are his foreign policy advisors? Not voting for AUMF isn’t a policy.

  46. 46.

    Technocrat

    February 12, 2016 at 11:24 am

    I wouldn’t say the media loves him. There are no shortage of “Bad Trump, Bad!” articles in the media. If any normal politician got the same type of coverage Trump does, they’d be sunk.

    The problem is that Trump plays the media, and that he is immune to the media. The media is his tool, not his watchman.

    Most worrying to me is that it seems his mastery extends to social media as well. Personally, I think he’ll severely damage any single one of our candidates from Twitter-orbit. Let’s be honest, much of Jeb!’s feckless image has been built by consistent Trump messaging – via Twitter.

    I think our “out” is that he can’t take everyone on at once. If we lived in a perfect world where Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders could campaign for the Democratic nominee, I think we win in a walk.

    But we probably don’t live in that world.

  47. 47.

    C.V. Danes

    February 12, 2016 at 11:24 am

    @Matt McIrvin: It’s too late for Bloomberg to get into the game. He’d be too easily dismissed as Ross Perot or Naderish. People still remember what happened with Bush.

  48. 48.

    CONGRATULATIONS!

    February 12, 2016 at 11:24 am

    He gets it, of that I’m reasonably sure. He’s pulling in a lot of support from people who are not political. I’d like to know how he polls among likely (have voted before) voters.

    I don’t think he can win, but if he does, well, we’ve elected worse. He’s a loudmouth boor and a blowhard, but he does not strike me as intrinsically evil in the way that, let’s say, Cheney or Nixon were. And his party at that point will be too busy self-destructing for them to get anything done.

    Watching the TeaTards and the God Squad going hammer and tongs at each other will be fun, at least.

  49. 49.

    Face

    February 12, 2016 at 11:24 am

    But he’ll go after her for being too close to Wall Street and being too hawkish in the Middle East. And she will be completely unable to deal with those kinds of attacks.

    Unable to deal? Did you see her in front of a hostile GOP House? For 12 hours, she in no uncertain terms told them to fuck off. And Trump, failed businessman and lifelong NYCer, is going to use an attack about being close to Wall Street as something unique to Clinton?

    This aint her first, second, or third rodeo. Methinks you cant be serious.

  50. 50.

    beltane

    February 12, 2016 at 11:24 am

    @C.V. Danes:

    No Democrat or center-left independent is going to vote for Trump or take the chance on Trump winning by sitting out.

    I wish this were so, and it may be so for actual registered Democrats, but there are going to be a fair number of left leaning independents, especially ones who feel their future is bleak, who will support Trump because he is the candidate of disruption. Some of these people who I’ve spoken to don’t really think Trump is serious about the racist stuff. They think he’s going to kick butt and take names. It is a completely unpredictable electorate this year. Let us not be as clueless as the Republican establishment in assuming the unthinkable can’t happen.

  51. 51.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    February 12, 2016 at 11:25 am

    @beltane: Hillary really has to work to be less dismissive of the concerns of young people.

    I get that she doesn’t have mass, romantic appeal, but how is she dismissive? I don’t see it.

  52. 52.

    Tommy

    February 12, 2016 at 11:26 am

    @Peale: See I so disagree. This nation has so much. My Wal-mart Superstore has a single aisle for toilet paper and paper towels that must stretch 35 feet into the air. The stuff is moved in on pallets and not even put on a shelf really :).

    Now I think you are spot on that is what Trump will say ….

    I am still in my own head trying to figure out what Hillary or Bernie would say to that. It is so over-the-top, like the other day when he said something like, “I heard actual unemployment is 42%.”

    Not sure how you debate or counter that. Clearly facts have left the room. That is only a few steps away from saying the world is flat. So not based in reality I am not sure if Trump wins and keeps on this path, doesn’t attempt to come somewhat to the center for the general, what the fuck is going to happen.

  53. 53.

    Calouste

    February 12, 2016 at 11:27 am

    @Just Some Fuckhead:

    The only way is for the race to settle into a three-way contest between Trump, Cruz and NotTrumpCruz.

    The problem with that is, as mentioned in the post, that NotTrumpCruz polls at 22%. Not a percentage that wins a three-way race. Carson’s voters are most likely to go to Cruz, then Trump.

  54. 54.

    beltane

    February 12, 2016 at 11:28 am

    @C.V. Danes: If Bernie somehow won the nomination, Bloomberg would win the votes of middle-to-upper-middle class fiscally conservative Democrats. The NYT would certainly endorse his candidacy. He would bomb epically with Republican base voters, who would rightly (for once) think he was coming after their guns.

  55. 55.

    C.V. Danes

    February 12, 2016 at 11:29 am

    @Matt McIrvin: Except the world, and us, need the myth. I personally cannot think of anything scarier than Trump or Cruz in charge of a military stronger than most of the rest of the world combined.

    Maybe this is concern trolling on my part, but I don’t see how we get out of a Trump win without a constitutional crisis of some sort.

  56. 56.

    cmorenc

    February 12, 2016 at 11:30 am

    I am torn between glee at the schadenfreude of the GOP establishment caught in the nightmare of having lost control of the monster they fostered over the past couple of decades, stuck with strong front-runners in Cruz and Trump who are disastrously mis-fits for a general election campaign – and fear that there proves a realistic chance after all that Trump could win the general election. Too many low-information voters who want a strong daddy person to fix everything that’s wrong plus loyal vote GOP no-matter-what voters out there (the 27%) are out there that we cannot take it for granted that Hillary or Bernie won’t lose – even if by a small margin.

  57. 57.

    CONGRATULATIONS!

    February 12, 2016 at 11:30 am

    Maybe I have too much faith in my fellow citizens, but I think if Trump wins the nomination, the Democrats will win the election by an enormous margin, take back the Senate and make significant gains in the House.

    @Betty Cracker: You have too much faith in your fellow citizens, and have forgotten than the specialty of Democrats is losing winnable elections. The Dems have let their infrastructure, at least below the national level, go to absolute shit. We’re not making gains in the House. We are not getting the Senate back. The best we’re going to get is a veto for four years, and hopefully some Supreme Court appointments.

  58. 58.

    Randy P

    February 12, 2016 at 11:31 am

    @C.V. Danes: What do you make of all the under-30s in the Sanders crowd who say when interviewed that if Sanders doesn’t get the nomination, they guess they’ll go with Trump?

  59. 59.

    Punchy

    February 12, 2016 at 11:31 am

    @C.V. Danes: No offense, but perhaps you haven’t been through flyover country in a while? They’d vote for a Venus Flytrap if it had a “R” next to it on the ballot. These people in Midwestern red states will literally vote for anyone other than a Democrat. Anyone; it’s black and white (and they always choose white, natch).

    I have no problem envisioning Trump being elected. This country is faaaaaaaaaar more polarized than the media leads on, and the reflexive voting decisions that ensue. They dont give a shit if Trump is our leader, as long as it’s not a fucking Democrat.

  60. 60.

    Steve from Antioch

    February 12, 2016 at 11:32 am

    @Linda Featheringill:
    Unfortunately, the beauty of the Hillary-engineered John Lewis swift boat attack is that facts don’t matter.

    X number of people know and respect Lewis.
    Some of them will see the headlines and be pushed towards Clinton
    Of those a much smaller portion will take the time to learn the facts.

    It’s a despicable, knowing, dishonest slur. And it will work.

  61. 61.

    Matt McIrvin

    February 12, 2016 at 11:32 am

    @CONGRATULATIONS!:

    I don’t think he can win, but if he does, well, we’ve elected worse. He’s a loudmouth boor and a blowhard, but he does not strike me as intrinsically evil in the way that, let’s say, Cheney or Nixon were. And his party at that point will be too busy self-destructing for them to get anything done.

    The evil isn’t concentrated in Trump. It’s the evil in the rest of us, the hate and fear and murder just waiting to be awakened in millions of Americans. The force that drove massacres and lynching parties.

    Up to now, since World War II at least, every major presidential candidate who’s walked up to the edge of pulling that lever and un-caging that beast has shied away in the end.

    But Trump, he doesn’t care. He’ll pull the lever.

  62. 62.

    Peale

    February 12, 2016 at 11:33 am

    @Tommy: I don’t know how you counter that. I mean you had a whole bunch of people acting like we were experiencing Weimar levels of inflation in the early days of Obama or we would soon when no such thing was happening. Trump could run on brininging run away inflation under control and a huge chunk of the population would believe that we had run away inflation now.

  63. 63.

    Iowa Old Lady

    February 12, 2016 at 11:33 am

    They’re paying for the combination of egos that won’t let them drop out and Citizen’s United money that means they don’t have to.

  64. 64.

    C.V. Danes

    February 12, 2016 at 11:34 am

    @beltane: The last thing we need is the presidency to come down to billionaire vs. billionaire.

  65. 65.

    Keith G

    February 12, 2016 at 11:34 am

    @beltane:

    Trump is pulling support from a cohort of white people who have been living under a rock up to now. They are not teabaggers but the white underclass. Scary times.

    To different degrees, both political parties are getting a taste of what can happen if the underclass or underserved feel their needs are chronically not being addressed.

    For 30 years, the Republican Party has nurtured a sense of grievance and fear on the part of the white underclass. And during those 30 years, that economic cohort has had little help and it’s finally beginning to become an issue now that bible thumping rhetoric no longer seems to have the traction it once did.

    Notice that Trump only seems to occasionally include a drive by reference to religious issues, though I’m sure he’s not above turning to a full embrace if he feels that would be helpful in the long run. Donald Trump is simply harvesting the crops planted by others for these past several decades.

    As I said above, the Democrats are experiencing their own version of this but that is for a later discussion.

  66. 66.

    Mike in DC

    February 12, 2016 at 11:34 am

    The only scenario I can think of is if Trump loses SC to Cruz, then Cruz sweeps the SEC primary on the first Super Tuesday. He could consolidate 35 to 40 percent against Trump’s 25 to 30, leaving the establishment struggling to top 30 percent.

  67. 67.

    bluehill

    February 12, 2016 at 11:35 am

    @Tommy: I ask myself the same question all the time. One theory I came up with is the Matrix theory as in the movies.

    “You take the blue pill – the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill – you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.”

    Some people don’t want to see reality because it’s too grim and would rather imagine that they are relatively well off or that things will get better.

    Maybe a better explanation is that repubs have effectively cast the dems as trying to take what little benefits the lower middle class and middle class get from the system and give it to the poor, illegals, minorities etc. They don’t realize that the real threat to their benefits isn’t redistribution to the classes below them but to the ones above.

  68. 68.

    beltane

    February 12, 2016 at 11:35 am

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: She’s telling them that nothing can realistically be done to address their concerns.Telling people to dream small and expect less may be honest, but it’s not a great motivator.People who are going to be crushed by debt no matter who they vote for are going to be much less likely to vote at all.

  69. 69.

    nodakfarmboy

    February 12, 2016 at 11:35 am

    Let’s get REALLY into the weeds.

    Trump wins a close election. Let’s say something really tight, like W’s 271-266 electoral college victory in 2000.

    So, the electors are largely chosen by the state parties (there’s a few different models).

    The reality that Trump is going to be President makes a few of these electors a bit, shall we say, skittish. Maybe a few of them start thinking “is this really a great idea?” Recall, again, that these will most likely be party establishment folks- individuals who have been in the Republican party for decades, and would rather not see it go down the tubes. Even if Trump had just squeaked out a tight win, do they really want him at the helm of the good ship America?

    Time for the old “faithless elector” problem to come into play.

    So, a handful or more of electors get in the booth for the moment of truth, and vote for someone else- Zombie Reagan, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Dole, etc.

    Suddenly, Trump no longer has a majority in the Electoral College. Which means the election gets thrown to the… drumroll please…

    House of Representatives. Time for a compromise candidate, to get rid of that meddlesome Trump.

    Hello, President Ryan!

    And the circle is complete.

    Yeah, crazy. But given everything else we’ve seen lately, who would really be shocked?

  70. 70.

    Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class

    February 12, 2016 at 11:36 am

    @MattF:

    That’s the vaunted “I’m shaking the box and voting for him because he’s not a typical politician” demographic. Basically, mostly white small insurance agency owners, used car salesmen, skilled tradesmen, insurance processing clerks, insurance salesmen and bar owners.

  71. 71.

    C.V. Danes

    February 12, 2016 at 11:36 am

    @Randy P: I haven’t heard that.

  72. 72.

    Villago Delenda Est

    February 12, 2016 at 11:36 am

    Should Trump get the nomination, the downticket fallout will be devastating. It might even surge over the gerrymandered sea walls the GOP has established around its majority in the House.

    The GOP, as it is currently constituted, needs to be annihilated. The way National Socialism was annihilated in Germany in 1945.

  73. 73.

    C.V. Danes

    February 12, 2016 at 11:37 am

    @Punchy: This is true. But how many electoral votes does this translate to?

  74. 74.

    Matt McIrvin

    February 12, 2016 at 11:38 am

    @Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: Scott Brown’s core voters! I think Brown endorsed Trump, by the way.

  75. 75.

    beltane

    February 12, 2016 at 11:38 am

    @Keith G: Trump also goes full populist when it suits him. In NH he said he was going to go after those big drug companies. He was going to put them in their place and they were going to hate him. This is not the usual GOP boilerplate.

  76. 76.

    elmo

    February 12, 2016 at 11:38 am

    So I just spent the last few days at an industry conference, where it was taken absolutely for granted that the industry leaders in attendance rejected the Democrats to a man (I wasn’t the only woman; I was one of three out of maybe 50 attendees). A big piece of the conference was about the terrible industry-killing results of the last seven years, the awful villains in charge of the various agencies and their nefarious plans to destroy capitalism, and the anticipated results of the upcoming election.

    These people are so deep in denial it’s scary. These are CEOs, senior Exec VPs, and similar high-level industry folks, and they were asking serious questions about Biden jumping in when Hillary is indicted, and whether Bloomberg will pull more votes from the Dems, and exactly how it will happen that Rubio or Jeb will consolidate the establishment vote and save the party from Trump. There was virtually no discussion at all about Cruz. They live in a different reality from you and me.

  77. 77.

    Tommy

    February 12, 2016 at 11:38 am

    @CONGRATULATIONS!:

    The Dems have let their infrastructure, at least below the national level, go to absolute shit.

    Agreed. I might have been too laid back in the past and even up until a few years ago. I don’t know. No more. I am so pissed at my party I can’t put it to words.

    I just have to keep saying this here.

    The DNC didn’t come help my district last election.

    In a District where we’d held the House seat for 70 years we lost it to a “Tea Party” dude. And we didn’t lose my .76%. We lost by almost 4 points. The RNC pumped in money we did nothing. Let they forgot my District that isn’t in Chicago or a Chicago burb is the LARGEST in the state of what is supposed to be “Blue” Illinos.

  78. 78.

    Villago Delenda Est

    February 12, 2016 at 11:39 am

    @bluehill:

    They don’t realize that the real threat to their benefits isn’t redistribution to the classes below them but to the ones above.

    They know something is wrong, but they’re misidentifying it exactly as you’ve stated.

    Which is why Louisville Sluggers upside their block heads seems so pleasing a way to get their attention.

  79. 79.

    feebog

    February 12, 2016 at 11:39 am

    @Betty Cracker:

    I can’t see the United States of America electing him as president.

    I’m right there with you Betty. Let’s review:

    1. The national electorate will be 2 percent less white compared to 2012.
    2. Obama won 70% of the Latino vote in 2012. Given the Mexican bashing Trump has indulged in, HRC will win at least 75%. Every study I have seen says Republicans have to win at least 40% of the Latino vote.
    3. HRC will retain Obama’s share of AA and Asian voters.
    4. HRC will receive a greater share of women voters than Obama did in 2012, Women made up 53% of voters in 2012.

    The only question is turnout. As we get closer to the election people are going to realize “this buffoon could be our next President”. This will be readily apparent as Trump and Clinton debate, and voters realize Trump has absolutely no policy chops.

  80. 80.

    Germy

    February 12, 2016 at 11:40 am

    “He ain’t much at the dance, but when you get him home… you’d be surprised.”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGdwYofDQts

  81. 81.

    Peale

    February 12, 2016 at 11:40 am

    @Keith G:

    Notice that Trump only seems to occasionally include a drive by reference to religious issues, though I’m sure he’s not above turning to a full embrace if he feels that would be helpful in the long run.

    Yeah. I don’t think he has to as long as he comes out in favor of getting rid of gay marriage (he said that it will unite the country to get rid of it) and bar the false cult of the Mohammedans from our shores, he’ll be addressing the more pressing concerns of the Christian right.

  82. 82.

    Bobby Thomson

    February 12, 2016 at 11:41 am

    This is what I’ve been saying for months. Nate Silver is a statistician, not a political scientist, and it shows. I don’t think any Republican can pull a Kerry and go from single digits to a majority in a few weeks in the era of Citizens United. But it goes beyond that. Trump positioned himself to pick up the Wallace vote perfectly, and it’s the dominant strain in today’s Republican Party. In part, the party has changed in four years. In part, Trump is sui generis when it comes to media manipation.

  83. 83.

    Steve from Antioch

    February 12, 2016 at 11:41 am

    Look if Trump were running against Jack Kennedy with Obama as Kennedy’s vp, Trump would get 35% of the vote at least. He doesn’t have to win over 51% of Americans, he has to win over 16%

    If you think that it’s impossible for Trump to win, you are as deluded as Karl Rove on election night 2012.

  84. 84.

    Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class

    February 12, 2016 at 11:42 am

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne:

    Who are his foreign policy advisors? Not voting for AUMF isn’t a policy.

    Did you hear that Hillary voted for the AUMF? The most evil, awful thing anybody ever did, giving the Executive the customary Congressional deference on believability when they come to Congress and say “no shit, we have a crisis that needs dealt with immediately”.

    It wasn’t that “Bush lied, people died”, it was that “Bush blundered in with blinkers, and people died”.

    Use correct terminology, dammit.

  85. 85.

    Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class

    February 12, 2016 at 11:45 am

    @Steve from Antioch:

    The floor looks more like 45% to me – there’s a substantial number of GOP voters who say to themselves “he doesn’t believe all the stupid shit he says and won’t do it. And he’s a white businessman in a nice suit, so I’m voting for him.”

  86. 86.

    Bobby Thomson

    February 12, 2016 at 11:45 am

    @Steve in the ATL: this may help.

  87. 87.

    p.a.

    February 12, 2016 at 11:45 am

    Does someone who didn’t know what ‘ground game’ is until last week have the infrastructure to accumulate delegates?

    I don’t know (too lazy to investigate) the Rethug nomination structure. Superdelegate heavy? As a party, they’re anti-democratic, so maybe we can advance-call electoral ‘shenanigans’. The question then is, who benefits? (whom? I never get that one. IIRC who= subject, whom= object. But to me S/O is usually ambiguous ’cause I ain’t to durn good at Mercan grammar).

  88. 88.

    peach flavored shampoo

    February 12, 2016 at 11:46 am

    Hello, President Ryan Huelskamp!

    You really think, if given the chance to choose anyone, they’d go with anyone other than a complete, utterly unabashed Tea Party Wingtard? Actually, they’d probably f#ck up the vote and mistakenly put Pelosi in the WH.

  89. 89.

    dr. bloor

    February 12, 2016 at 11:46 am

    @C.V. Danes: Well, he starts at 191.

  90. 90.

    Bobby Thomson

    February 12, 2016 at 11:46 am

    @Betty Cracker: you do have too much faith. They reelected Bush.

  91. 91.

    Matt McIrvin

    February 12, 2016 at 11:47 am

    @Technocrat:

    I think our “out” is that he can’t take everyone on at once. If we lived in a perfect world where Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders could campaign for the Democratic nominee, I think we win in a walk.

    I do think that the nomination fight isn’t going to go down to the convention, and when there’s a nominee, they’re all going to line up on the same side. We can’t count on Bill Clinton being useful: he’s sounding tired and frail these days, maybe has health issues we don’t know about.

    But Obama’s going to go all in, and so is whichever of Clinton and Sanders doesn’t get the nom. Neither one jumps ship to a stupid third-party candidate (I’ve heard people speculating about Bloomberg giving Hillary the VP slot, but I can’t believe anything comes of that). Sanders likes to talk about fomenting a revolution but he’s not stupid, he also repeatedly insists that beating the R candidate is paramount.

  92. 92.

    beltane

    February 12, 2016 at 11:49 am

    @Bobby Thomson: Imagine if we get a Zika-caused microcephaly breakout here? Even one confirmed instance in a white infant and Americans will lose their shit.

  93. 93.

    Steve from Antioch

    February 12, 2016 at 11:49 am

    @Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: I wouldn’t argue with any of that.

  94. 94.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    February 12, 2016 at 11:50 am

    @beltane: I don’t think she’s offering “nothing” unless the point of comparison is “Revolution”. TBH, it’s not an issue my childless, middle-aged, state-schooled self has any experience with, so I don’t know how these proposals would impact people with real, current debt

    Debt won’t hold you back.
    Under Hillary’s plan, if you have student debt, you will be able to refinance your loans at current rates. An estimated 25 million borrowers will receive debt relief, and the typical borrower could save $2,000 over the life of his or her loans.
    For future undergraduates, the plan will significantly cut interest rates so they reflect the government’s low cost of debt. This could save students hundreds or thousands of dollars over the life of their loans.
    Everyone will be able to enroll in a simplified, income-based repayment program so that borrowers never have to pay more than 10 percent of what they make.

  95. 95.

    redshirt

    February 12, 2016 at 11:51 am

    @beltane: Gosh, you’ve gone full panic, all the time.

  96. 96.

    p.a.

    February 12, 2016 at 11:51 am

    @Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: Say it. SAY IT! You know you want to: petite bourgeoisie.

  97. 97.

    amk

    February 12, 2016 at 11:52 am

    christie/walker/bush/cruz/trump – bj’s tradition of preemptive pissing in the pants continues.

  98. 98.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    February 12, 2016 at 11:53 am

    @Bobby Thomson: whose approval ratings nationally went above 50% a couple of years back.
    When Willard’s campaign was touting the Game Changing Mystery Speaker who turned out to be Clint Eastwood and an empty chair, there was some speculation that it might be Condi Rice. I laughed and then googled her numbers, she was 65% approval in the summer of 2012.

  99. 99.

    Peale

    February 12, 2016 at 11:54 am

    @redshirt: T

    BH, it’s not an issue my childless, middle-aged, state-schooled self has any experience with

    What? The concept of “Revoluation?”. Yeah, I don’t have much experience with that either. Hopefully its just the metaphorical kind.

  100. 100.

    redshirt

    February 12, 2016 at 11:55 am

    @Matt McIrvin: Agreed. Obama has a vested interest in seeing a Democrat follow him. He’ll be out there campaigning hard for whoever the nominee is, and this is a huge factor I don’t see discussed often. We’ll have the President campaigning for us. He’ll be able to mock Trump in ways the actual nominee cannot.

  101. 101.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    February 12, 2016 at 11:56 am

    @Peale: I think you’re talking to me. I was talking about student loan/education debt

  102. 102.

    Bobby Thomson

    February 12, 2016 at 11:56 am

    @srv: Target Point? Who are they? That does sound about right,though. NV seems like neutral territory.

  103. 103.

    Peale

    February 12, 2016 at 11:56 am

    @p.a.: Maybe the name he was looking for was “francis”

  104. 104.

    beltane

    February 12, 2016 at 12:00 pm

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: I actually do have college-age and close to college age children and what she is offering is not substantially different than what Obama has already done for people. Refinancing and extending payments out for decades is better than starving (and is very profitable to lenders), but touting hundreds of dollars in savings over the life of a 20 year loan is the type of thing that deserves a hearty “F-ck you” from anyone struggling with the issue.

    If nothing is going to done to reduce the cost of attending a state school, fine, but then don’t expect young people or their parents to get fired up over what is essentially a debt restructuring plan.

    My husband is still repaying his own student loans BTW. Between education costs and health care costs we have pretty much been bled dry.

  105. 105.

    Bobby Thomson

    February 12, 2016 at 12:01 pm

    @feebog: if his crazies vote, and they will, and our butthurt snowflakes don’t, and that’s a serious question, yes he can.

  106. 106.

    Peale

    February 12, 2016 at 12:01 pm

    @Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: Hillary tricked Bush into wanting that war.

  107. 107.

    Betty Cracker

    February 12, 2016 at 12:01 pm

    @CONGRATULATIONS!: Good point about the national infrastructure. Maybe I’m in denial.

  108. 108.

    p.a.

    February 12, 2016 at 12:06 pm

    @Peale: Jedi mind trick or Confundus spell?

  109. 109.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    February 12, 2016 at 12:08 pm

    @beltane: @Jim, Foolish Literalist: I actually do have college-age and close to college age children

    I thought so, that’s why I asked. Here’s her plan for current, future students. Pretty gauzy, I admit.

    Students should never have to borrow to pay for tuition, books, and fees to attend a four-year public college in their state under the New College Compact. Pell Grants are not included in the calculation of no-debt-tuition, so Pell recipients will be able to use their grants fully for living expenses. Students at community college will receive free tuition.
    Students will do their part by contributing their earnings from working 10 hours a week.
    Families will do their part by making an affordable and realistic family contribution.
    The federal government will make a major investment in the New College Compact by providing grants to states that commit to these goals, and by cutting interest rates on loans.
    States will have to step up and meet their obligation to invest in higher education by maintaining current levels of higher education funding and reinvesting over time.
    Colleges and universities will be accountable for improving outcomes and controlling costs to ensure that tuition is affordable and that students who invest in college leave with a degree.
    We will encourage innovators who design imaginative new ways of providing a valuable college education to students—while cracking down on abusive practices that burden students with debt without value.

  110. 110.

    beltane

    February 12, 2016 at 12:10 pm

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: I’m on my way out the door but I will look at this later. Don’t want you to think I’m blowing you off :-)

  111. 111.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    February 12, 2016 at 12:13 pm

    @beltane: No worries. Like I said, I’m under no illusion that her proposals are gonna get anybody standing and cheering. I think it’s an important issue that needs to be addressed.

  112. 112.

    Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class

    February 12, 2016 at 12:14 pm

    @CONGRATULATIONS!:

    The Dems have let their infrastructure, at least below the national level, go to absolute shit. We’re not making gains in the House.

    We had some really nice Blue Dogs who held a bunch of Townhalls on healthcare in 2009-2010. There were a bunch of paid progressive activists who chose not to go to those meetings to state reasons for a broader form of relief, and instead chose to snipe at impure Blue Dogs from the comfort of the Internet all while wailing about how corporatist Obama sold them out. As a result, those information exchange Townhalls became loud, angry freakshows, full of angry white people cosplaying in tricorner hats and talking about death panels (which the media dutifully reported as the mood of America, no counterweight given). The Blue Dogs got crushed in 2010 – some chose not to run again, others went down in electoral defeat.

    The paid progressive activists reveled in the purity that had been wrought by the defeat of Dean’s Blue Dogs.

    They were impure, those Blue Dogs were.

  113. 113.

    Matt McIrvin

    February 12, 2016 at 12:16 pm

    @redshirt: Well, a US Zika outbreak is actually pretty probable. But it’ll also be a serious problem for the anti-reproductive-rights contingent.

  114. 114.

    Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class

    February 12, 2016 at 12:19 pm

    @peach flavored shampoo:

    President Gohmert….

  115. 115.

    the Conster, la Citoyenne

    February 12, 2016 at 12:21 pm

    @Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class:

    Someone was paying attention – well explicated. That’s exactly what happened. So fucking sick of hearing about how Obama “let us down”, when not one single one of those self-cutting progressives had his back for anything – even when just about every speech included an appeal for help, since he can’t do this alone. So they stayed home in 2010 and bitched on FDL and Kos. Now I keep hearing from Bernfeelers about how after the election, how he told his coalition to all go home, he’s got this, and Bernie! won’t do that. I have no idea where this started, but it’s such a bunch of bullshit. I got so many OFA emails after the election, I unsubscribed. But I always vote up and down ticket for Dems. Always have, always will.

  116. 116.

    Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class

    February 12, 2016 at 12:22 pm

    @Peale:

    Don’t say that too many times or too loud. We’ll see it on an angry Bernie shaking his fist meme very soon if you do.

  117. 117.

    CONGRATULATIONS!

    February 12, 2016 at 12:26 pm

    Good point about the national infrastructure. Maybe I’m in denial.

    @Betty Cracker: Thank you. Watching the national GOP pump money into my last school board election changed my life and not in a good way, because I finally realized what they’d been doing all these years.

    They were building a huge, deep backbench while we were chasing the presidency and ranting on blogs.

    @Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: This, every damn word. We need anyone we can lure into the coalition. And that will involve compromises. But we need everyone. Including Blue Dogs, because they’re the only ones who can win seriously contested territory.

  118. 118.

    Just Some Fuckhead

    February 12, 2016 at 12:28 pm

    @Calouste: I’m not saying it’s likely, simply that it’s the only way.

  119. 119.

    NR

    February 12, 2016 at 12:35 pm

    @Face:

    Did you see her in front of a hostile GOP House? 

    They weren’t coming at her from the left the way Trump will be.

  120. 120.

    FredFrog2

    February 12, 2016 at 12:36 pm

    @p.a.: Nawww. Lumpenproletariat.

  121. 121.

    gene108

    February 12, 2016 at 12:49 pm

    @beltane:

    Hillary really has to work to be less dismissive of the concerns of young people.

    I don’t think she’s dismissive.

    I just think she is not confident her policies – though a step in the right direction – will lead young people into the land of milk and honey, the way they feel Sanders will be able to do, if he gets a shot; or it’s worth a shot to try Sanders plans, even if it doesn’t work because the current system sucks and needs to be ground into dust and a new one put into place.

    I think some of the problems are bigger than what a President can manage to put in place, even with a Congress completely behind him/her.

  122. 122.

    Betty Cracker

    February 12, 2016 at 12:54 pm

    @Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: Who is paying these progressive activists? What organizations are they working for?

  123. 123.

    TerryC

    February 12, 2016 at 1:07 pm

    @Steve from Antioch: @Steve from Antioch: @Steve from Antioch: IMO, as a vet who was in Vietnam, without a lie, we are
    not in Swifboating territory. Where did he lie?

  124. 124.

    pamelabrown53

    February 12, 2016 at 1:16 pm

    @Tommy:
    How much $$$ did the RNC actually pump into your teabagger’s race? Was it Koch $$$? They have been very adept at understanding that “change starts from the bottom up”, to quote President Obama.

    Too many of us, including myself, have been pissed at the DNC for being too establishment and their funding has reflected that. You can’t simultaneously believe that the DNC (do you mean the Democratic Congressional Committee ) for not doing what you the voters in your district could not?

  125. 125.

    normal liberal

    February 12, 2016 at 1:17 pm

    @Tommy:
    I’m not sure why I’m bothering in a dead thread, but it was Alan Keyes who parachuted in from Maryland to replace Ryan. I actually know people who voted for Keyes, proving that some people will vote for anyone.

  126. 126.

    Betty Cracker

    February 12, 2016 at 1:18 pm

    @CONGRATULATIONS!: Just to stick up for stupid ol’ blogs for a moment because someone has to — I bet the folks who comment here and just about any other politics-focused blog have sky-high civic participation rates, presidential and non-presidential election cycles both. We aren’t the problem. It’s the special snowflakes who can’t be arsed to get off the sofa without the drama of a presidential contest or an inspiring candidate who speaks to their personal, extra-special concerns.

  127. 127.

    chopper

    February 12, 2016 at 1:23 pm

    so it’s basically trump running against a bucket of crabs.

  128. 128.

    Sasha

    February 12, 2016 at 1:25 pm

    How does Trump not get the nomination?

    Bribery? Cause outside a convenient murder-suicide, I got nothin’.

  129. 129.

    Gravenstone

    February 12, 2016 at 1:31 pm

    @Technocrat:

    I wouldn’t say the media loves him.

    The media “love” him for the sole reason that he moves product (copy, clicks, eyeballs …). That’s all theyc are about because that’s all their bosses tell them to care about, bottom line and quarterly values.

  130. 130.

    Grumpy Code Monkey

    February 12, 2016 at 2:12 pm

    How does Trump not get the nomination?

    Shenanigans by the RNC or some surrogate. Likely illegal, definitely unethical shenanigans. Vote-machine rigging/ballot-box stuffing shenanigans.

    I will joyfully eat crow on this – I was convinced Trump wouldn’t make it past September. I was convinced his schtick would wear thin and he’d flame out early on.

    But he has tapped into the lizard brain of the angry white male on both sides of the political divide, he’s appealing to millenials who know they have no future, he’s speaking to people’s anger in a way nobody else is or has for generations. Before December, I was convinced there was no way in Hell he’d get the nomination.

    Now I’m convinced there’s no way in hell he won’t, barring shenanigans.

  131. 131.

    Brachiator

    February 12, 2016 at 2:49 pm

    I am having a harder time seeing how Trump is not the nominee for the GOP as he controls the terms of debate, the media loves him

    I don’t see that the media loves him. They fear him and are baffled by his continuing success. And it is still early.

    I don’t think that Trump becomes “inevitable” unless he racks up big wins through Super Tuesday. Then it may be time to worry.

  132. 132.

    Gerald

    February 12, 2016 at 2:51 pm

    These folks have not been hidden … they’ve been in the open … just ignored by their Party!

    They are the ones the polls showed support for SS, Medicare, Medical, back round check on gun purchases, higher taxes for the wealthy, government spending on education, infrastructure, jobs, etc

    These are the folks the grifter and half-baked Alaskan spoke to when she shouted “don’t tell us to shut up and sit down” …

    NOT the GOP/Republican Party that set the conversation and agenda. Then feed them LIES about the Bush/Cheney (2000-2008) debacile, Democrats, so-called Liberal agenda, MSM, AND what they would do to scuttle the US government BECAUSE of the BLACK …POTUS!

    Of course …we could add more to this rant from the soapbox.

  133. 133.

    KithKanan

    February 12, 2016 at 6:08 pm

    @normal liberal: 27% of people. It was the original example of the Crazification Factor.

  134. 134.

    mclaren

    February 12, 2016 at 8:06 pm

    @MazeDancer:

    Because if it’s Trump vs. Sanders all Donald has to do is spew “Socialist, Socialist, Socialist” over and over, with a few wild spouts of how much the tax raise will be to give away all the “free stuff”, while the media asks over and over “Will American elect a Socialist?”. That will be the entire campaign.

    Yes, yes it will be the entire campaign. Sanders will point at Trump and shout “There’s the billionaire trying to buy our government and this is why I’m running! If you want a lower minimum wage, vote for Trump. If you want fewer jobs, vote for Trump. If want the rich to get richer and everybody else to get poorer, vote for Trump.”

    Sanders will win by such a historic landslide that political scientists will need to invent a whole new mathematics to describe Sanders winning margin.

  135. 135.

    mclaren

    February 12, 2016 at 8:10 pm

    @Grumpy Code Monkey:

    [Trump is] appealing to millenials who know they have no future…

    Oh, try again, fantasist. Bernie Sanders has 84% of the millenial vote.

    Bernie Sanders’ coalition may be quite different – and much bigger – than has been assumed. That is one of the takeaways from his New Hampshire primary rout, in which Sanders scored impressively with voters who had been crucial to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 victory in the state.
    Sanders bested Clinton across virtually all regional and demographic boundaries in the Granite State, crushing her overall by 22 points. But he fared best with economically downscale voters and won over a number of blue-collar cities and towns that had been Clinton redoubts in her 2008 campaign. In so doing, Sanders essentially flipped the ’08 script, in which Clinton’s main challenger, Barack Obama, relied disproportionately on higher-income voters and those with college degrees.
    For instance, among voters making less than $50,000, Sanders defeated Clinton by 33 points. By contrast, Clinton won those same voters by 15 points over Obama in ’08. Sanders’ margin was only half as big – 17 points – with voters making more than $50,000, a group that Obama actually won by 5 points. Similarly, Sanders rolled up a 36-point spread among voters without college degrees, while winning college-educated voters by only 13 points. In ’08, though, it was Clinton who won voters without college degrees by 8 points, with Obama taking college graduates by 5 points.
    There’s also the geography of Sanders’ win. While he claimed almost every city and town in the New Hampshire, he didn’t fare much better than Obama in many of the state’s more upscale liberal areas. In Hanover, home of Dartmouth College, Sanders ran just 281 votes ahead of Clinton, a margin of 6.5 points. Eight years ago, Obama won that same town by 32 points, a plurality of more than 1,500 votes. In the coastal city of Portsmouth, another liberal enclave, Sanders performed only modestly better (a 12-point win) than Obama (6 points).
    But it was a very different story in the state’s older, post-industrial cities and towns, where Sanders improved by leaps and bounds over Obama’s ’08 performance. Take Berlin, a struggling mill city in the North Country, where Obama actually ran third, behind John Edwards. Clinton was so strong in Berlin in ’08 that her vote total actually exceeded that of Obama’s and Edwards’ combined. But this time, she lost the city by 13 points to Sanders. Rochester, another blue-collar mill town, was another Clinton stronghold in ’08, where she ran up a 976-vote plurality over Obama – a 16-point margin. Sanders, though, won Rochester Tuesday by 21 points.
    Sanders’ success with blue collar voters in New Hampshire carries potentially significant implications. Conventional wisdom has held that his campaign is fueled by the same liberal white voters who sided with Obama in ’08 – but doomed by his inability to make inroads with black voters, who were essential to Obama’s triumph.
    But the New Hampshire result suggests that Sanders is winning over white voters who shunned Obama in 2008. Eight years ago, it was blue collar whites who sustained Clinton’s campaign through the end of the Democratic primary season, providing her edge in must-win contests in Pennsylvania and Ohio and powering her to landslide victories in “Greater Appalachia” states from Oklahoma to West Virginia. If Sanders can continue to win these voters over, he may be in position to win far more states than most have assumed.

    Source: “The Sanders coalition: Not what we thought it was,” MSNBC website, 10 February 2015.

  136. 136.

    mclaren

    February 12, 2016 at 8:28 pm

    Richard Mayhew is as usual utterly totally 100% completely wrong.

    5 obvious ways Donald Trump loses the nomination:

    [1] Trump does well in the early primaries, then hits a ceiling. More sensible Republicans sail past him, racking up plenty of delegates. At the convention, Trump doesn’t have enough votes to win on the first ballot, and delegates get released after that first ballot, opening everything up for negotiation. A compromise Republican candidate wins on the second ballot. Obvious, simple, and straightforward…no wonder Richard Mayhew “can’t see” how something like that could happen.

    [2] Trump wins a plurality but not minimum necessary number of delegates to win on the first ballot. The Republican national committee can change the rules to allow a candidate to win with any number of delegates. The RNC changes that number, shutting Trump out, and backroom deals result in another candidate getting enough combined delegates to snatch the nomination away from Trump.

    [3] Trump fizzles out when he gets forced to debate on substance. At anything other than giving kindergarteners wedgies, Trump is a fiasco. The public realizes he has nothing to offer and his support plummets. Another Repub gets the nomination.

    [4] When the race narrows and Trumps starts losing more and more states, the Republican establishment’s feral hatred of him prompts the Republican national committee to shift elegibility rules for various primaries, using dirty tricks to knock Trump out of the running. He rages and rails, but to no avail: locked out, he can’t win enough delegates and quits in a pique.

    [5] As Trump looks more and more likely to win the nomination, the national press’ loathing of him overcomes their hatred of Hillary or Sanders and a flood of negative hit pieces hits the airwaves and the headlines, crushing Trump. The public turns against him and the 27% of fanatical bigots that form his base aren’t enough to get him the nomination.

    Any questions?

  137. 137.

    mclaren

    February 12, 2016 at 8:34 pm

    @Villago Delenda Est:

    Should Trump get the nomination, the downticket fallout will be devastating.

    Quite a few Republicans have said that Trump’s nomination would fracture and destroy the Republican party. Good times! If someone other than Trump gets nominated, they get nuked by Bernie or Hillary. If Trump gets nominated, it destroys the Republican party. I’m liking this situation more and more…

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Image by MomSense (5/10.25)

Recent Comments

  • Betty Cracker on Tuesday Morning Open Thread: Circuses Everywhere (May 13, 2025 @ 8:27am)
  • drdavechemist on Tuesday Morning Open Thread: Circuses Everywhere (May 13, 2025 @ 8:27am)
  • JML on Tuesday Morning Open Thread: Circuses Everywhere (May 13, 2025 @ 8:27am)
  • Dorothy A. Winsor on Tuesday Morning Open Thread: Circuses Everywhere (May 13, 2025 @ 8:26am)
  • Sure Lurkalot on Tuesday Morning Open Thread: Circuses Everywhere (May 13, 2025 @ 8:22am)

PA Supreme Court At Risk

Donate

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
War in Ukraine
Donate to Razom for Ukraine

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Meetups

Upcoming Ohio Meetup May 17
5/11 Post about the May 17 Ohio Meetup

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Hands Off! – Denver, San Diego & Austin

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

PA Supreme Court At Risk

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!