• 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.

Damn right I heard that as a threat.

There are consequences to being an arrogant, sullen prick.

This is dead girl, live boy, a goat, two wetsuits and a dildo territory.  oh, and pink furry handcuffs.

Their boy Ron is an empty plastic cup that will never know pudding.

JFC, are there no editors left at that goddamn rag?

Motto for the House: Flip 5 and lose none.

Washington Post Catch and Kill, not noticeably better than the Enquirer’s.

Innocent people do not delay justice.

Republicans are the party of chaos and catastrophe.

Not all heroes wear capes.

Accountability, motherfuckers.

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

Balloon Juice, where there is always someone who will say you’re doing it wrong.

Imperialist aggressors must be defeated, or the whole world loses.

Relentless negativity is not a sign that you are more realistic.

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

🎶 Those boots were made for mockin’ 🎵

Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.

“The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits.”

The arc of the moral universe does not bend itself. it is up to us to bend it.

Compromise? There is no middle ground between a firefighter and an arsonist.

Fuck these fucking interesting times.

I have other things to bitch about but those will have to wait.

Black Jesus loves a paper trail.

Mobile Menu

  • 4 Directions VA 2025 Raffle
  • 2025 Activism
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Politicans / Cruz-ifiction / Presumptive nominees and procreating rats

Presumptive nominees and procreating rats

by David Anderson|  March 16, 20169:20 am| 158 Comments

This post is in: Cruz-ifiction, Election 2016, Hail to the Hairpiece, Hillary Clinton 2016, Bring On The Meteor

FacebookTweetEmail

With last night’s results, I think it is fair to say that the Democratic race is, absent strategic meteor strikes, effectively over.  The Democratic Party has a presumptive nominee in Hillary Clinton.

The Republican Party does not have one yet.  Fivethirtyeight.com has a good chart based on delegate targets that shows the Republican Party’s most obvious problem.  No one is on pace for a clear majority in Cleveland and the two closest to pace are detestable.

Fivethirtyeight presumptive

My state’s primary is coming up soon and it is quasi-open with enough lead time.

What should people in my situation do? Should we just point and laugh while voting for the Democrats. There is an active House primary that I have a bit of an opinion on who would be a better Congresscritter, and my town’s Mayor and my daughter’s crossing guard may want my vote. OR should I cross over to contribute to the chaos in the GOP primary? If I elect to go that route, should I minimax and vote for a cadidate who would be a horrendous but competent President (Kasich) OR vote for the greater probability of a large Democratic win in November (Trump)?

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Wednesday Morning Open Thread: Excelsior!
Next Post: Merrick Garland SCOTUS Nomination »

Reader Interactions

158Comments

  1. 1.

    Bg

    March 16, 2016 at 9:24 am

    Efforts at strategic voting often backfire. Don’t do it. Too many variables.
    Kasich is terrible. Anti-choice, anti-union, anti-worker, pro-big business and big banks. And probably the hardest for Hillary to beat.
    Vote for the good folks who are local. That’s how a party builds

  2. 2.

    msdc

    March 16, 2016 at 9:25 am

    Vote your local races. They need you, and the Republicans are doing a fine job of fucking up on their own.

  3. 3.

    Tom Levenson

    March 16, 2016 at 9:25 am

    I’m of the view that you should vote in the races where you have a direct interest — so, IOW — what Bg says.

  4. 4.

    Cermet

    March 16, 2016 at 9:26 am

    Better stick with your local – besides, you are wrong that tRump would be easier to defeat; that honor belongs to Cruz the Canadian Citizen.

  5. 5.

    Rob in CT

    March 16, 2016 at 9:27 am

    Vote in the Dem primary.

  6. 6.

    Princess

    March 16, 2016 at 9:27 am

    Point and laugh. Research local candidates. Vote Democratic.

  7. 7.

    BottyGuy

    March 16, 2016 at 9:29 am

    You should vote for the candidates whose policies you favor, and could possibly be elected. Voting is such a low marginal impact activity, strategic voting or protest voting is a fools errand.

  8. 8.

    Betty Cracker

    March 16, 2016 at 9:29 am

    What BG said at #1.

  9. 9.

    The Ancient Randonneur

    March 16, 2016 at 9:30 am

    Strategic voting may have unintended consequences. Ask President Gore he can tell you all about it.

  10. 10.

    J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford

    March 16, 2016 at 9:30 am

    Vote for who you support. I think strategic voting played a part in the Michigan upset and all it did was give Sanders and his supporters false hope.

  11. 11.

    Forked Tongue

    March 16, 2016 at 9:30 am

    Don’t ratfuck the Repubs. They’d never do that to you.

  12. 12.

    The Ancient Randonneur

    March 16, 2016 at 9:32 am

    @Betty Cracker: I put a link to some Marco Memorabilia in your thread last night. Think it was about #70 or so.

  13. 13.

    geg6

    March 16, 2016 at 9:33 am

    I could never, ever vote for a candidate I didn’t want to win.

    I look at people who want to play these games and then I think of all the people who died, were tortured and who sacrificed everything to vote. I can’t disrespect that kind of bravery by treating my vote like a plaything.

  14. 14.

    JMG

    March 16, 2016 at 9:33 am

    Don’t overthink it. Vote for the candidate you think would be best in the office.

  15. 15.

    raven

    March 16, 2016 at 9:33 am

    I think it’s hilarious that the people who crossed over and voted for Kasich worried because they’d be “identified” as Republicans for the next 4 years. So what?

  16. 16.

    rikyrah

    March 16, 2016 at 9:33 am

    My thoughts about last night’s Illinois results from this Chicagoan:

    Well, I am happy on the local front for the results from last night.

    Anita Alvarez had to go. I had never been fond of her, but I was done with the result of the Rekia Boyd murder. From the result of that, I just felt nothing but disgust when I saw her. So, seeing her go down made me very happy. And, those who put up that fraud More shot themselves in the foot – More didn’t take votes from Foxx – she took them from Alvarez.

    And, as for Ken Dunkin…don’t let the door hit you on your way out. I absolutely despise Michael Madigan..but, even when you have the Devil in your midst, somehow, there always happens to be an even worse Devil in the form of our Governor- Bruce Rauner. We have been without a State Budget since July. The thought…the mere thought.,..that ANY Democrat would side with Rauner – FOR ANY REASON – I didn’t give two shyts about what Madigan decided to do to Dunkin. So, good riddance to him, and I hope the 30 pieces he got from Rauner was worth it, considering the thousands of the ‘least of these’ in my state that have been hurt because of Dunkin’s paid -for ‘ independence’. Negro, please.

    And, Tammy Duckworth won. Wasn’t feeling her, but Andrea Zopp didn’t even reach out to the Black community like she should have..so, oh well. I’ll support Duckworth to get rid of Kirk.

  17. 17.

    pseudonymous in nc

    March 16, 2016 at 9:34 am

    Vote local for the people you want to support in November. Simple as that.

  18. 18.

    japa21

    March 16, 2016 at 9:35 am

    I think the consensus is pretty obvious. Besides, as pointed out several times, the elections in which your vote would mean the most are the local ones.

  19. 19.

    Roger Moore

    March 16, 2016 at 9:35 am

    I agree with the people who say to vote your conscience, especially for local races. In addition to the reasons given, we don’t want to give the Republicans any outs or excuses about how their wonderful nomination process was spoiled by the Democrats crossing party lines. Let them ruin things on their own and take their own blame for it.

  20. 20.

    Betty Cracker

    March 16, 2016 at 9:38 am

    @The Ancient Randonneur: Ha! I remember that. It went straight to his head, clearly. What a rude awakening that vacuous nonentity got yesterday.

  21. 21.

    MomSense

    March 16, 2016 at 9:42 am

    I’m going with the others who have said to vote for your preferred Democratic candidate and for the local candidates you like. Strong, local candidates are so important. This is how we build our bench. More importantly there are so many important issues that are determined at the municipal and state levels. These issues and local candidates are too important to waste your vote on one of the Republican monsters.

  22. 22.

    peach flavored shampoo

    March 16, 2016 at 9:44 am

    Can anyone enlighten me as to what happens after 10AM today? So Obama nominates a dude to be judgey for all things important. Then what? Does this person await a call from Senate Republicans (that will not be coming) to set up a meeting? Does he have to call the Senators and beg for a interview? Does Obama set up these meetings?

    I realize the media takes over and drives the narrative, but is the nominee essentially sitting at home, staring at his phone hoping it may ring?

  23. 23.

    raven

    March 16, 2016 at 9:46 am

    @peach flavored shampoo: 11

  24. 24.

    I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet

    March 16, 2016 at 9:46 am

    @Bg: This.

    Well said.

    Running up the Teabagger Party vote total makes them stronger (at least as far as the press is concerned). Don’t feed the beast. Vote Team D.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  25. 25.

    HelloRochester

    March 16, 2016 at 9:47 am

    If Hillary wraps up the nomination too soon, she will be compelled by her entourage to get all triangutarded way too soon. Bernie is making her a better candidate. She is forced to offer policies, apologize for past mistakes, and highlight her successes. A long campaign trail of speeches against TPP and NAFTA and FTAA will serve her well with Rust Belt moderates and nationwide liberals. I would like a better Democrat, honestly, but I’m willing to advocate for her election as long as she doesn’t throw loyal liberals under the bus before we even get to the convention. Like it or not, she needs to keep Berners in the fold.

  26. 26.

    OzarkHillbilly

    March 16, 2016 at 9:48 am

    @Roger Moore: They are going to blame Dems no matter what happens.

  27. 27.

    Jeffro

    March 16, 2016 at 9:50 am

    Do whatever you want in your state’s primary, Richard. I’m so excited for November I can’t even think straight.

    The schaden, it is so freunde today!!

  28. 28.

    Peale

    March 16, 2016 at 9:51 am

    @peach flavored shampoo: we wait for the barrage of online advertising and outraged articles about the president’s divisiveness and character shots at the candidate that make him or her appear unsuitable. Hillary promises, that if the seat is still open, she’ll nominate someone to the left of Jill Stein to the bench. The republicans cave.

  29. 29.

    Betty Cracker

    March 16, 2016 at 9:51 am

    @peach flavored shampoo: Yeah, I think it’s all about the media since the GOP has abandoned its constitutional role to play partisan games. Give reporters a face, name and record to work with, and perhaps they’ll portray this as the hostage crisis it is.

  30. 30.

    NotMax

    March 16, 2016 at 9:51 am

    @Betty Cracker

    Bright future for him at the used car lot.

    “Let’s step into my office, break open a bottle of water and put you in the driver’s seat of this creampuff TODAY.”

  31. 31.

    Revrick

    March 16, 2016 at 9:52 am

    @peach flavored shampoo: The nominee will be someone who already has a judge job and will be doing judgey things in the meantime. He/she will essential serve as a warning shot across Republican Senators bows. If the Democrats retake the Senate in November, the first thing they’ll do in January is blow up the filibuster for Supreme Court justices and then confirm the President’s nominee.
    So, voters in NH, PA, NC, FL, OH, IL, WI, and IA — elect a Democratic Senator.

  32. 32.

    OzarkHillbilly

    March 16, 2016 at 9:52 am

    MO actually has split primaries- yesterday’s was only the Presidential one, all the others are done in August. I could have crossed over to inject a little electoral mayhem, even thought about it, but the Dem race was too close here so I took the Dem ballot.

  33. 33.

    Ruckus

    March 16, 2016 at 9:53 am

    Let’s get this out right up front.
    Kasich is not horrendous but competent. There is no but there. There is no competent. He is one of them.
    He would be just plain horrendous. Why do people think different? That he wouldn’t be as bad as the rest, therefore he’s what, acceptable? He’s still horrible, his policies are horrible, we would all suffer very badly. This is the end result of the experiment in bad governance that conservatives started decades ago, they are all horrible, unacceptable. Look at their last guy, how bad was he? These guys are all, every one of them, far worse, including Kasich.

  34. 34.

    JMG

    March 16, 2016 at 9:53 am

    @peach flavored shampoo: The nominee will go to Capitol Hill and meet with Democratic Senators in highly publicized get-togethers. That’ll be step one. Step two would probably be trying to meet with Republican Senators with cameras rolling so those Senators will look like DUI perps as they seek to avoid being in the same frame as the nominee.

  35. 35.

    Tenar Darell

    March 16, 2016 at 9:53 am

    @peach flavored shampoo: Well, he still has his day job, but he’ll meet with Democratic Senators & any Republicans who aren’t cowards I’d guess. Said meetings probably set up by WH… Maybe one or two tv interviews too?

  36. 36.

    japa21

    March 16, 2016 at 9:53 am

    @HelloRochester: Are you Applejinx going under another name? Where is this crap about throwing people under the bus coming from? Is it something in the water? And maybe you would prefer a better Democrat, but she is the best Democrat running right now.

  37. 37.

    NotMax

    March 16, 2016 at 9:53 am

    Vote with your head (conscience) not with your liver (bile).

  38. 38.

    Roger Moore

    March 16, 2016 at 9:55 am

    @peach flavored shampoo:
    I think the main thing that happens is that Obama uses the Republican intransigence on the nomination to beat them about the head and shoulders for being a bunch of obstructionists who need to be thrown out in November. He may work over individual members of the Senate Judiciary committee in detail in an attempt to bully and/or shame them into giving his nominee an actual hearing. The exact details are less important than the big picture.

  39. 39.

    Redshift

    March 16, 2016 at 9:56 am

    @peach flavored shampoo: In a normal process, the nominee would start having meetings with senators, and the only question would be arranging schedules (and I have no idea of the details of that process.)

    In the current radicalized GOP, who knows? Presumably the nominee will go through the usual prices with Democratic senators and any GOP ones who do do it while pretending they’re just having s polite chat and not considering a nominee. Mostly I suspect it will be media profiles and maybe interviews, to highlight how bizarrely abnormal the GOP is being and undermine their ludicrous “no, really, this is how things have always been done in election years” excuse.

  40. 40.

    Revrick

    March 16, 2016 at 9:57 am

    @HelloRochester: Will my fellow Progressives please knock off with the triangulation argument. Because nowadays it is unpossible. All the Blue Dog/Yellow Dog Dems and moderate (Ha!) Republicans are gone. The middle ground between Dems and Republicans is now No-Man’s Land, a place of bomb craters and barbed wire.
    I’ll leave aside the whiff of sexism in this, that Hillary is just a reflection of Bill and that as a competent woman she somehow lacks agency, or more to the point, a brain that can grasp today’s political reality.

  41. 41.

    NonyNony

    March 16, 2016 at 9:58 am

    Local races are incredibly important and there often really is a qualitative difference between nominees in these races that can be hugely important in how they impact your life. You should really vote in your own primary even once the president is decided because those House/state/city council/school board elections are really importabt.

    (We vote way too much in this country. Researching all those races can be exhausting. I understand why people don’t do it, but if we want better Democrats we’ve got to make our voices known in the “farm team” process, and that means primaries.)

  42. 42.

    peach flavored shampoo

    March 16, 2016 at 9:59 am

    @raven: Uh…..huh?

  43. 43.

    PsiFighter37

    March 16, 2016 at 10:00 am

    OT but multiple reports saying that Obama will nominate Garland. Disappointed that it is not Srinivasan, but perhaps he thinks the optics of the GOP sticking it to their demographic base (old white guys) will shame them into a vote?

  44. 44.

    Redshift

    March 16, 2016 at 10:01 am

    @Roger Moore:

    In addition to the reasons given, we don’t want to give the Republicans any outs or excuses about how their wonderful nomination process was spoiled by the Democrats crossing party lines.

    Meh. I don’t think their tendency to make such excuses (or the media’s tendency to swallow them) will be in any way affected by reality.

  45. 45.

    Ohio Mom

    March 16, 2016 at 10:01 am

    @Bg: Ditto. None of us should ever say nice things abut that wolf in sheep’s clothing, let alone consider voting for him.

    To say that Kasich is the only sane one is to admit that on the continuum of crazy to evil, where for example, Trump would be towards the crazy end, well, Kasich would be far down toward the evil end.

  46. 46.

    Elizabelle

    March 16, 2016 at 10:01 am

    CNN saying it’s Merrick Garland.

    Does that support Baud’s theory that Obama goes with the older judge since he does not think the GOP will approve?

  47. 47.

    Aaron Morrow

    March 16, 2016 at 10:02 am

    Fivethirtyeight’s chart is good, but please note that it’s excludes Missouri and may not have the final delegate count for Illinois.

    Don’t ratfuck yourself!

  48. 48.

    Anya

    March 16, 2016 at 10:03 am

    @Tom Levenson: My local elections are boring. Nothing is happening. That’s why I know more about what’s happening in the in Cuyahoga County and Cook County than I know about my own district. I don’t even know if Rep Nadler is retiring, or anything about his primary challengers, except who loves Israel more.

  49. 49.

    Elizabelle

    March 16, 2016 at 10:03 am

    @PsiFighter37: Maybe Garland will end up being Srinivasan’s wingman?

    Either way, Scalia is OFF the bench. He has left the planet.

    Not happy about a 63 year old being nominated, ageist that I is ….

  50. 50.

    larrybob

    March 16, 2016 at 10:04 am

    down ballot elections are way more important that whatever the GOP decides.

  51. 51.

    philpm

    March 16, 2016 at 10:07 am

    What all the others above said. Vote what you normally would. The GOP is doing a fine job of wrecking themselves without our help. Let them figure out how to keep Hair Dump from getting the nomination.

  52. 52.

    rikyrah

    March 16, 2016 at 10:11 am

    @Ruckus:

    Let’s get this out right up front.
    Kasich is not horrendous but competent. There is no but there. There is no competent. He is one of them

    I wish Kay would do a front page post explaining in detail how many ways Kasich is horrible. She does it, in replies consistently, but I wish she’d lay it all out in a front page post.

  53. 53.

    Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class

    March 16, 2016 at 10:12 am

    He just shoved that one right up Hatch’s and McConnell’s asses. Good.

    Makes it more likely that Hillary gets to name a black lesbian anti-poverty justice crusader.

  54. 54.

    SiubhanDuinne

    March 16, 2016 at 10:13 am

    @Elizabelle:

    Nina Totenberg is reporting that she heard that the GOP Senate sent a “back-door” message to the WH that if Obama nominated Garland, the Senate would confirm him in the lame duck session IF a Dem wins the Presidency. Sounds like a lot of conditions and “ifs,” but she says her sources are good, and she’s probably right about that.

  55. 55.

    Redshift

    March 16, 2016 at 10:13 am

    @raven:

    I think it’s hilarious that the people who crossed over and voted for Kasich worried because they’d be “identified” as Republicans for the next 4 years. So what?

    Well, it means getting twice as many phone calls and twice as much junk mail every campaign season, which is moderately annoying.

    Speaking of which, Ms. Redshift got a fundraising call from the Republicans yesterday, even though she’s never voted Republican in her life! Virginia Republicans have always had terrible targeting. Or best guess is that someone bought Romney’s mailing list; her mother is Mormon, so we got quite a few calls from the Romney campaign.

  56. 56.

    Disgruntled former Baud supporter

    March 16, 2016 at 10:14 am

    I’ve always been of the opinion that John Kasich is detestable.

  57. 57.

    OzarkHillbilly

    March 16, 2016 at 10:17 am

    @peach flavored shampoo: You said the announcement was at 10, it’s at 11 EST, so if you were talking CST, you’re both right.

  58. 58.

    WarMunchkin

    March 16, 2016 at 10:18 am

    Just vote for who you want. Democracy should be simple, and polling has the effect of dirtying everything up.

  59. 59.

    dr. bloor

    March 16, 2016 at 10:18 am

    @Revrick:

    I’ll leave aside the whiff of sexism in this, that Hillary is just a reflection of Bill and that as a competent woman she somehow lacks agency, or more to the point, a brain that can grasp today’s political reality.

    That’s not a “whiff,” it’s a roiling stench that’s been permeating the entire primary.

  60. 60.

    oldgold

    March 16, 2016 at 10:18 am

    Has anyone heard a good explanation as to why the Democratic primary results in Michigan and Ohio were so different?

  61. 61.

    Anya

    March 16, 2016 at 10:18 am

    Does this mean, the Protestants are shut out of the Supreme Court?

  62. 62.

    Elizabelle

    March 16, 2016 at 10:19 am

    @SiubhanDuinne: Interesting.

    Cowards. They should confirm him in a regular session.

  63. 63.

    Jeffro

    March 16, 2016 at 10:20 am

    @SiubhanDuinne:

    if Obama nominated Garland, the Senate would confirm him in the lame duck session IF a Dem wins the Presidency.

    Ok, but that doesn’t sound like something the President would go along with (or would need to) – if a Dem wins, the GOP Senate could once again go bat-poop insane and refuse to approve anyone until the 2018 midterms. Obama’s going to want them to deal with this in a normal and timely manner, and not leave open the possibility of a Trump SCOTUS nomination.

    I was hoping for Srinivasan but it looks like for several reasons the Garland nom is a stroke of genius.

  64. 64.

    rikyrah

    March 16, 2016 at 10:22 am

    Does the nominee have to step down from where they’re already a Judge because they’re nominated?

  65. 65.

    Anya

    March 16, 2016 at 10:22 am

    @SiubhanDuinne: Why would the president agree with that tho?

  66. 66.

    SiubhanDuinne

    March 16, 2016 at 10:23 am

    @Elizabelle:

    It would be fun if POTUS confirmed Totenberg’s rumor and called them out on not only their cowardice but their hypocrisy – willingness to make a deal, etc.

  67. 67.

    Elizabelle

    March 16, 2016 at 10:24 am

    Carol Costello of CNN is such a frigging tool.

    She just assured an interviewee that the Senate will stay Republican, maybe in the last half hour.

    This after getting after a union official earlier; why haven’t the Democrats done more for workers? Eliding right past any neglect by Republicans.

    Was it Violet that said our problem not that we are a center right nation, but that we have a center right press?

  68. 68.

    Betty Cracker

    March 16, 2016 at 10:24 am

    @SiubhanDuinne: I hope that’s not true because if so, it seems like caving in to the Repubs blatantly anti-constitutional obstructionism. Why the fuck should they get to find out who wins the presidency before doing their goddamned jobs?

  69. 69.

    MattF

    March 16, 2016 at 10:24 am

    I agree that you should vote for the candidates you like, and I agree that rules out any Republican. In particular, I could never vote for Trump, even strategically.

    In my district in Maryland, which is voting in about a month, there are two pretty important local races– US Senate and US House. The main Senate candidates are Chris Van Hollen and Donna Edwards. Both good, I’m leaning towards Edwards. In the House (replacing Van Hollen), there are eight candidates, the main ones (I think) are Raskin, Matthews, and Trone. Trone is the rich guy, not so sure about the others. They all seem to be pretty librul.

  70. 70.

    Elizabelle

    March 16, 2016 at 10:28 am

    Yeah, on thinking on it, I don’t see Obama letting the GOP obstructionists setting a precedent by not holding hearings, or sneaking the nominee through during recess.

    This is the slippery slope.

    And I pray that Carol Costello has to deal with a Democratic Senate in 2017. Fool.

  71. 71.

    Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class

    March 16, 2016 at 10:30 am

    @Elizabelle:

    Carol Costello used to willingly date and presumably fuck Rush Limbaugh, IIRC.

    That should tell you lots.

    ETA – I was wrong. It was Daryn Kagan, but to me, the resemblances were there.

  72. 72.

    gene108

    March 16, 2016 at 10:31 am

    @HelloRochester:

    The difference in the policy goals between Bernie and Hillary are razor thin. The both talk about affordable to free college, affordable and better access to healthcare for more people, etc.

    The methods of reaching those goals are different.

    That is all.

  73. 73.

    Anya

    March 16, 2016 at 10:31 am

    @oldgold: My theory is that Ohio Democrats got scared of the possibility of a Trump presidency. Trump’s mini Nuremberg rallies scared the crap out of them. My brother in law is in university in NC and he’s a big Bernie supporter but eventually voted for Hillary because he said, what happened at Trump’s rallies over the weekend & Friday was a huge wake up call for him & some of his friends. I assumed the same thing happened to a lot of folks.

  74. 74.

    Grumpy Code Monkey

    March 16, 2016 at 10:31 am

    As much fun as queering the Republican primary could be, they really don’t need our help. If you identify as a Democrat, then vote in the Democratic primary.

  75. 75.

    Joe Falco

    March 16, 2016 at 10:32 am

    Because of SEC primary, I have to go back to vote in the local races at a later time. It sucks but I will be there bright and early to vote.

  76. 76.

    maryQ

    March 16, 2016 at 10:32 am

    Speaking of “strategic meteor strikes”, that reminds me. I watched “Deep Impact” the other night, which is one of my favorite disaster flicks. But, like all disaster flicks, it takes many liberties with reality. I saw a big one this time, which had escaped my notice in previous viewings: So, there is a huge meteor heading toward earth, and no one blames the black President? Come on.

  77. 77.

    SiubhanDuinne

    March 16, 2016 at 10:33 am

    @Jeffro:
    @Anya:

    I don’t think for a minute that Obama is “going along with” the GOP on this, and Jeffro’s right, they are more than capable of pulling a Lucy with the football move anyhow. But I didn’t get the impression from what Totenberg said that the WH is nominating Garland because of the back-door approach; she also mentioned that he had been, essentially, Obama’s runner-up choice during previous SCOTUS nominating cycle, so I’m sure there are good and compelling reasons for POTUS to name him and for the Senate to confirm him. Promptly.

  78. 78.

    maryQ

    March 16, 2016 at 10:34 am

    @gene108: Thank you. Perfect.

  79. 79.

    Feudalism Now!

    March 16, 2016 at 10:34 am

    I believe PBO will nominate Garland and the Senate, tools that they are, will ignore it. THis sets up PBO nominating Sri or other more liberal judges closer to the election for highlighting purposes.

  80. 80.

    Mai.naem.mobile

    March 16, 2016 at 10:34 am

    I saw on the Tweeter machine its going to be Merrick Garland. Fine. I wanted Sri Srinivasan and I know theres a good chance Garland will get shot down because hes the first candidate. Still, an Asian would be good.

  81. 81.

    OzarkHillbilly

    March 16, 2016 at 10:35 am

    @rikyrah: No.

  82. 82.

    Jado

    March 16, 2016 at 10:37 am

    “…two closest to pace are detestable.”

    Hey, now. these two are the preferred choices of the Republican voters. I keep hearing that Trump and Cruz are awful choices for the Republicans, but if that’s true how come so many voters choose them?

    THESE are the guys the base wants. I say let them have these guys. If the GOP goes Trump/Cruz ’16, the Democrats might just take back the House and Senate in the landslide electoral victory to come.

    And maybe the GOP base will get the idea that NO ONE ELSE wants what they are pushing

  83. 83.

    geg6

    March 16, 2016 at 10:37 am

    @Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class:

    Carol Costello used to willingly date and presumably fuck Rush Limbaugh, IIRC.

    You forgot to throw down the mic after this.

    ETA: Damn it. You ruined it for me.

  84. 84.

    Steve in the ATL

    March 16, 2016 at 10:38 am

    @Anya:

    Does this mean, the Protestants are shut out of the Supreme Court?

    Have been for a while now. To be fair, though, we had a pretty good run of nothing but Protestants for most of SCOTUS’s history.

    Still, it would nice to have a token Episcopalian on the court, but no one has vetted me yet. And I even went to an ethics and professionalism CLE yesterday.

  85. 85.

    Bobby Thomson

    March 16, 2016 at 10:38 am

    Damn it! It’s Garland. Bad Obama.

  86. 86.

    cokane

    March 16, 2016 at 10:39 am

    Vote Trump, the current incarnation of the R party needs to be burned to the ground. And Trump is the perfect arsonist

  87. 87.

    Betty Cracker

    March 16, 2016 at 10:39 am

    @Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: Ewwwww!

  88. 88.

    Elizabelle

    March 16, 2016 at 10:39 am

    Just turned off CNN.

    Costello is discussing how most voters don’t like either presumptive nominee. Enough, former Limbaugh squeeze. (Gag.)

    Will check in again for Rose Garden announcement.

  89. 89.

    Anya

    March 16, 2016 at 10:39 am

    @Elizabelle: Also, Judge Garland has been on POTUS’ short list twice. It’s not a stretch of the imagination he likes him and wanted to nominate him.

  90. 90.

    Humboldtblue

    March 16, 2016 at 10:44 am

    The Democrats consensus is clear and Nate Silver provides the data

    Nate Silver 11:48 PM

    So far, Trump has won 37.1 percent of the votes throughout Republican primaries and caucuses. That percentage is up tonight after Trump had strong results in Florida and other states. And it could climb further in subsequent states, especially with only three candidates remaining in the race. But the percentage is still on the low end by the standards of previous nominees. Since primaries became widespread in 1972, only George McGovern won his party’s nomination with a smaller share of the vote — just 25.3 percent, with McGovern winning by taking advantage of delegate rules that he had helped to write.

    Clinton 2016 Democrats 57.8

  91. 91.

    Rommie

    March 16, 2016 at 10:47 am

    I thought about doing this (rat-dancing and voting Trump) with my Michigan vote, but in the end I stayed on my side of the battlefield. I remember doing this a few years ago (can’t remember for which candidate) and the result was getting all the R mailings for the next two years. Amusing, but not worth it in the end.

    And LOL for the continuation of the President Obama “Bucket” list farewell tour…squirm, little rats, squirm!

  92. 92.

    Anya

    March 16, 2016 at 10:47 am

    @SiubhanDuinne: As always you make a great point. I am little concerned about Garland’s ruling that detaines couldn’t assert habeas corpus. I am not a lawyer but that troubles me.

  93. 93.

    Elizabelle

    March 16, 2016 at 10:47 am

    @Anya: Yes indeed.

    Meanwhile, rather than discussing mainstream media morons, who may or may not have humped Rush Limbaugh in the past, here is a horse in a suit. Harris tweed.

    He wears it well.

    Not sure what a horse does with a pocket, though, or how he gets into it.

    He looks jaunty and proud to be wearing his suit. I’d rather hear from him than almost all of the jackholes TV news has inflicted on us this morning.

    (NBC Today show panel: Nicole Wallace, Mark Halperin and Chuck Todd. Could you keep YOUR breakfast down?)

  94. 94.

    Cacti

    March 16, 2016 at 10:50 am

    @Humboldtblue:

    Since primaries became widespread in 1972, only George McGovern won his party’s nomination with a smaller share of the vote — just 25.3 percent, with McGovern winning by taking advantage of delegate rules that he had helped to write.

    In contrast to the McGovern situation, Tad Devine will be arguing against the superdelegate rules he helped to write.

  95. 95.

    Anya

    March 16, 2016 at 10:50 am

    @Steve in the ATL: My half Episcopalian side is disappointed. Maybe President HRC will nominate an Episcopalian and a Muslim then my both sides will be satisfied.

  96. 96.

    Humboldtblue

    March 16, 2016 at 10:50 am

    And it will be Garland decorating the Rose garden in a few minutes when Obama nominates him for SC

  97. 97.

    I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet

    March 16, 2016 at 10:51 am

    @Jeffro: Srinivasan has a reputation for being a little bit business-friendly, if I’m correctly remembering the various bits of scuttle-butt I’ve read. I don’t know much about any of them, but given that huge binder that Obama was dragging around, and his 3rd condition (roughly “someone who understands that the law affects real people”) Garland might be a better choice even if it’s one that the GOP says they’ll eventually go along with.

    IOW, Obama might have genuinely liked him better than Sri – the GOP saying they’d go along might just be a little bonus.

    We’ll see.

    Cheers,
    Scott.
    (Who was expecting another woman, himself.)

  98. 98.

    Humboldtblue

    March 16, 2016 at 10:52 am

    @Cacti: Pretty sure he’s going to argue until he’s blue in the face but it comes as no surprise that a Democrat — Clinton — is handily defeating an independent running as a Democrat. It’s all over but the screaming from Sanders supporters.

  99. 99.

    I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet

    March 16, 2016 at 10:54 am

    @MattF: I’m in NoVA. What do you think of Matthews (Tweety’s wife)? She was a local newscaster. That’s about all I know about her (though I have gotten fundraising e-mails from her).

    I’m generally not happy with the idea of a celebrity candidate, but who knows she might be the best of the bunch. Being so close to Tweety is, er, disconcerting though….

    Thanks.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  100. 100.

    Thoroughly Pizzled

    March 16, 2016 at 10:54 am

    @oldgold: The independent vote was really huge in Michigan – 28% of the electorate, which went for Bernie something like 70-30. Hillary won with registered Democrats.

    As for why that didn’t happen again, my guess is that independents might have voted more on the Republican side, and Hillary supporters were shocked out of complacency.

  101. 101.

    Timurid

    March 16, 2016 at 10:55 am

    @PsiFighter37:

    Maybe he didn’t want to waste the younger guy as a sacrificial lamb?
    Srinivasan may get his shot under Hillary…

  102. 102.

    C.V. Danes

    March 16, 2016 at 10:55 am

    What should people in my situation do? Should we just point and laugh while voting for the Democrats.

    Yes! The down ballot progressives need your help too! This is not just about Hillary, you know :-)

  103. 103.

    Mnemosyne

    March 16, 2016 at 10:55 am

    @gene108:

    The difference in the policy goals between Bernie and Hillary are razor thin. The both talk about affordable to free college, affordable and better access to healthcare for more people, etc.

    The methods of reaching those goals are different.

    This. Some people seem to be mixing up policy and strategy. I think the vast majority of Democrats agree on what we should do, but we’re having some knock-down, drag-out fights over how to do it.

  104. 104.

    Chris

    March 16, 2016 at 10:55 am

    The Democratic Party has a presumptive nominee in Hillary Clinton.
    …
    The Republican Party does not have one yet.

    “The suspense is killing me. I hope it’ll last!”

  105. 105.

    Daulnay

    March 16, 2016 at 10:57 am

    @Revrick:

    Will my fellow Progressives please knock off with the triangulation argument.

    If Trump is the nominee, as looks likely, the ‘moderate’ Republicans who profess to be horrified might be seen as people Clinton could win. I could see her triangulating like mad to capture them and guarantee a big win, couldn’t you? Why wouldn’t she?

  106. 106.

    Betty Cracker

    March 16, 2016 at 10:57 am

    @Anya: I don’t know much about Garland, but he seems promising on the gun issue, from what I read.

  107. 107.

    Mnemosyne

    March 16, 2016 at 10:58 am

    @I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet:

    I was still hoping for Goodwin Liu, but he may not have wanted to leave California’s Supreme Court just yet. Oh, well.

  108. 108.

    Steve in the ATL

    March 16, 2016 at 10:58 am

    @Anya: Half Episcopalian and half Muslim–so, half single malt swilling drunk and half teetotaler? That must get confusing!

  109. 109.

    Chris

    March 16, 2016 at 10:58 am

    @Bg:

    Efforts at strategic voting often backfire. Don’t do it. Too many variables.

    Yeah, and in the modern GOP, any attempts to determine which politician would be “less bad” than the other seems like a complete fool’s errand.

    I mean, when George W. Bush was president, there were probably quite a few people wishing John McCain had been the Republican nominee, but I think his 2008 campaign and subsequent shenanigans have made it pretty clear he’d have been just as bad.

  110. 110.

    Rommie

    March 16, 2016 at 10:59 am

    The reporter on the Yahoo announcement feed has the sniffles – that’s gotta suck for that job. Leaving the sound on wasn’t very kind.

  111. 111.

    raven

    March 16, 2016 at 10:59 am

    Jesus Herman Cain is a fucking moron.

  112. 112.

    Calouste

    March 16, 2016 at 11:00 am

    With the current state of the race, Trump can’t get a majority of the delegates until May 10, and more likely the race will last until the last contests on June 7. There certainly is no reason for Cruz to drop out.

  113. 113.

    C.V. Danes

    March 16, 2016 at 11:01 am

    @Revrick:

    The middle ground between Dems and Republicans is now No-Man’s Land, a place of bomb craters and barbed wire.

    You know that and I know that, but I don’t think that Clinton’s team grasps that yet, especially the ones who thought that rolling out Kissinger or burnishing Nancy Reagan’s AIDS credentials were a good idea.

  114. 114.

    OzarkHillbilly

    March 16, 2016 at 11:03 am

    @oldgold: A take from Clare Malone:

    Why Clinton Won Ohio After Losing Michigan

    Exit poll results are coming back and telling us a bit more about why Clinton won in Ohio and not in Michigan — her victory can be boiled down to her performance with white voters, older voters, and voters who are concerned about trade issues.

    In Michigan, Sanders won white voters, but in Ohio, Clinton won them, 51 percent to 48 percent, and that seems to have made a difference. Her support with black voters in the state also remained strong — she won them 68 percent to 30 percent — but that was less an overwhelming win of the demographic than her record in other states.

    It’s well-known that Sanders performs well with young people — there were fewer youths (ah, the youths) in Ohio. Sixty-two percent of Ohio’s electorate was 45 and older.

    The last leg of the Clinton victory triangle is that she won on the all-important-in-the-Rust Belt trade question: Voters who said trade with other countries takes away U.S. jobs supported her, 53 percent to 46 percent. Sanders won that bloc in Michigan, 56 percent to 41 percent. It’s not quite clear what happened in the intervening week — our Andrew Flowers noted during the last Democratic debate that the Vermont senator seemed to be hammering the anti-NAFTA message less than usual, but it might also just be that Michigan was an aberration.

  115. 115.

    MattF

    March 16, 2016 at 11:03 am

    @I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: Yeah, I’m also doubtful about celebrity/media types. On the other hand, I live in Bethesda, so ‘celebrity/media type’ is a synonym for ‘neighbor’. The alternatives seem to be ‘rich guy’ or ‘party apparatchik’.

  116. 116.

    SiubhanDuinne

    March 16, 2016 at 11:04 am

    @raven: what made you think of him?

  117. 117.

    dedc79

    March 16, 2016 at 11:04 am

    Judging by the freakout underway in the comments over at NRO, this pick was a wise one

  118. 118.

    dignan

    March 16, 2016 at 11:05 am

    You should not strategically vote for Trump. He would be so horrible for the nation that we can’t put him any closer to the White House. What if by some chance he won. I’d rather not help along that possibility in any way.

  119. 119.

    dr. bloor

    March 16, 2016 at 11:05 am

    @Mnemosyne: He also wouldn’t have had a snowball’s chance in hell of getting any meetings or hearings at this particular point in Obama’s presidency.

  120. 120.

    Shana

    March 16, 2016 at 11:06 am

    @raven: I haven’t read through all the comments yet, so forgive me if someone else has already said this, but:

    I went to my county’s precinct ops meeting last night and one of the things the head of our part of the county said was, don’t vote in the GOP primary to screw with them. If you think you might ever run for office that vote will show up in your voting record. Not who you voted for, but which party’s primary you voted in. It doesn’t matter a whit that you explain, years later, that it was strategic to vote for the guy you wanted the Dem to go up against. It WILL be used against you.

    Also, in your case, the local races are important, so vote in the Dem primary.

  121. 121.

    Cacti

    March 16, 2016 at 11:06 am

    @Humboldtblue:

    Pretty sure he’s going to argue until he’s blue in the face but it comes as no surprise that a Democrat — Clinton — is handily defeating an independent running as a Democrat. It’s all over but the screaming from Sanders supporters.

    Even though Clinton can’t drive turnout and Bernie has all the enthusiasm on his side, she leads him by about 2.4 million votes. Go figure.

  122. 122.

    C.V. Danes

    March 16, 2016 at 11:10 am

    @Daulnay:

    If Trump is the nominee, as looks likely, the ‘moderate’ Republicans who profess to be horrified might be seen as people Clinton could win. I could see her triangulating like mad to capture them and guarantee a big win, couldn’t you? Why wouldn’t she?

    Depends on if you want a Democratic Senate or not. Those Republicans who could be convinced to vote for Hillary will still vote for their Republican senator and state reps, while this strategy will bring out fewer lefties needed to swing those elections. Better to keep the center-to-left fired up and give a reason for disenchanted Republicans to stay home.

    Contrary to the conservative echo chamber, America is a center-left nation. If Clinton stays where she’s at, she already has most of the vote. No need to dive right for more.

  123. 123.

    FlipYrWhig

    March 16, 2016 at 11:12 am

    @Daulnay: Honest question: which would you rather have, a 51-49 victory by Hillary running as an uninhibited progressive, or a 58-42 victory by Hillary running as a unifier of the full spectrum of Democrats and a chunk of the few remaining reasonable Republicans?

  124. 124.

    Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class

    March 16, 2016 at 11:12 am

    My fantasy is awesome.

    Remember that moment on Fox in 2008 when Ohio got called and Hume looked like he’d just swallowed a bad oyster? I want to be watching Fox when it gets called early for Hillary. I’ll stay through as we watch the totals rack up to the point where we can see that the Senate will flip. I’ll peruse the comments at RedState and Breitbart and FR, laughing.

    The next day, I’ll listen to the talkers, and will sit down to drinks as Rush Limbaugh goes to air, chuckling the entire time.

  125. 125.

    sherparick

    March 16, 2016 at 11:13 am

    @rikyrah: As a Chicagoan still in my heart, though 30 years gone now, Zopp was fatally compromised by her association with the now radioactive (Chernoybl is safer and more popular by comparison) Rahm Emmanuel.

    My personal recommendation to Hilary for Vice-President would be Sherrod Brown. I think he would 1) be a fine Vice-President and 2) a very good President if the worse happens and 3) would be a huge reach out to the Bernie wing of the party 4) might help draw some persuadable white working class voters to Hilary while 5) taking the bark off of Trump for his anti-worker and con-man ways and finally 6) might help Hilary directly in Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania in the general. Negative is that if they win, the asshole Kasich will pick his replacement and right-wing tool will have the seat.

  126. 126.

    Shell

    March 16, 2016 at 11:14 am

    Wow, the birdies are really chirping away there in the Rose Garden. Can spring finally be here? (well, in DC)

  127. 127.

    Ridnik Chrome

    March 16, 2016 at 11:15 am

    @Betty Cracker: I don’t understand why some people here are disappointed that it’s Garland and not Srinivasan. Srinivasan would be to the left of Scalia, it’s true, but he’d be to the right of all the other Democratic appointees on the SCOTUS, and he’s got a terrible record on labor issues. I’m all for putting an Asian-American on the court, but I’d much rather have Goodman Liu…

  128. 128.

    Humboldtblue

    March 16, 2016 at 11:17 am

    @Cacti: That Nate Silver number is just going to go up as the primaries continue. Clinton won’t get to Obama 2012 numbers but I betcha she cracks 70-75% and that’s a pretty clear consensus.

  129. 129.

    Felonius Monk

    March 16, 2016 at 11:17 am

    @raven:

    Jesus Herman Cain is a fucking moron.

    Who the fuck woke him up?

  130. 130.

    Mike in NC

    March 16, 2016 at 11:17 am

    Stayed up way too late last night, but still plan on spending today savoring the decline and fall of Ru-Ru-Rubio, former Savior of the Republican Party.

  131. 131.

    Daulnay

    March 16, 2016 at 11:18 am

    @FlipYrWhig:
    Honestly? 51/49 running as a progressive. Then she’s more likely to have coattails for actual progressives. I fear a lot of young voters will get disillusioned if she dances too far to the right during the general, especially if she governs pragmatically — which I’m near certain she will.

  132. 132.

    balconesfault

    March 16, 2016 at 11:19 am

    Kasich would be the wet dream that Norquist talked about back in 2012 – a pen who would reliably sign anything that passed the GOP House and Senate.

    Meanwhile, I don’t think that Trump would. I have little idea wtf he’d end up doing – but I know that at some points he’d just tell McConnell and Ryan to go f*** themselves. His answer back in New Hampshire regarding Medicaid expansion told me he was the least bad crayon in the box http://www.statnews.com/2016/02/05/trump-cruz-universal-health-care/.

    On the how to vote thing … a few weeks ago here in Texas I crossed over and voted for Trump. But that’s simply because I have a personal policy of taking every opportunity to vote against Ted Cruz.

  133. 133.

    Anya

    March 16, 2016 at 11:20 am

    @Elizabelle: he really does wear it well.

  134. 134.

    chopper

    March 16, 2016 at 11:22 am

    @Mai.naem.mobile:

    Garland is chief judge of the dc circuit. he’s about the most qualified person around which has its benefits when goopers refuse to consider him.

  135. 135.

    John D.

    March 16, 2016 at 11:23 am

    @sherparick:

    My personal recommendation to Hilary for Vice-President would be Sherrod Brown.

    1) Losing a Dem US Senator when a GOP governor gets to appoint his replacement is not a wise move at this time.

    2) Putting an effective Democrat into a mostly-useless position strikes me as sub-optimal.

    3) Sherrod has said directly that he does not want the VP slot.

  136. 136.

    Thoroughly Pizzled

    March 16, 2016 at 11:23 am

    @Daulnay: I’m not sure if that would work. Fewer votes for the Democrat translating into MORE votes for liberal Congressional candidates?

  137. 137.

    El Caganer

    March 16, 2016 at 11:25 am

    @FlipYrWhig: Some reasonable Republicans still exist, although I think they’re pretty rare. I actually know two of them, and they’ve both told me they’ll vote for Hillary (Bernie was beyond the pale – they seemed to confuse him with Leon Trotsky). Unfortunately, I know a whole lot more unreasonable Republicans who seem inclined to vote for Trump.

  138. 138.

    MattF

    March 16, 2016 at 11:25 am

    @John D.: I’ve seen some chatter about Tom Perez for VP. Who is a cabinet member and a good guy.

  139. 139.

    FlipYrWhig

    March 16, 2016 at 11:28 am

    @Daulnay: I think I’d rather see as lopsided a win as possible, to make the Republicans reassess their overall approach to politics. It will help save the idea that the point of being in the government is to govern, to formulate policy that addresses pressing social problems. I worry that a narrow victory won’t do that: it will let the media say that Democrats and Republicans are basically 50-50 and we’ll be stuck at another impasse for at least 2 more years.

  140. 140.

    Anya

    March 16, 2016 at 11:32 am

    @Steve in the ATL: Luckily neither side is religious. What’s most confusing is the cultural difference (the loud, opinionated Somali side that delights in telling you what to do and why you’re doing it wrong vs WASPtopian values). The only similarity is a shared superiority complex.

  141. 141.

    sherparick

    March 16, 2016 at 11:40 am

    Steve Benen http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/the-republican-partys-chosen-one-exits-stage-right and Steve M at No More Mister Nice Blog both write up about the end of Marco Rubio’s campaign. For the theatrical theater school of journalism, who whom Hilary was a tired, old female character with zero sex appeal, Rubio was the dreamboat candidate out of Central Casting. (See today’s write up by their theater – I mean political reporters – Peters and Barbaro, in the Times – http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/16/us/politics/marco-rubio.html?ref=politics&_r=0, as well as Mark Liebovich the day before.. They and their editors can’t even hide their disappointment that Rubio’s campaign disappeared in a puff of smoke. http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2016/03/marco-rubio-will-be-just-fine.html#links

  142. 142.

    RaflW

    March 16, 2016 at 11:42 am

    @rikyrah: Ahhh, good, Alvarez lost. Occasionally, bad actors do pay a price in politics.

  143. 143.

    HelloRochester

    March 16, 2016 at 11:44 am

    @gene108: Triangulation is still happening (education “reform”, for example, is now a both-sides-grift-it) and likely to continue. It’s impossible to ignore the potential of Clinton Foundation big donors to influence policy decisions. I don’t ignore that bullshit with regards to the Clarence/Ginny Thomas axis or anywhere else on the right, so I’m not giving Hillary a pass. Saddling Hillary with the political sins of Bill is entirely valid since it’s only 8 years since she ran a disgraceful campaign against BHO using dog whistle tactics and hired all his people. And her tenure in the Senate was unimpressive and completely focused on taking care of the NY metro area (most people are unaware that NYS is a very large state that exists primarily outside of range of the MTA) I am prepared for her to prove me wrong, but I also think being approached aggressively from the left will avoid her hawkishness WRT foreign policy and avoid granting 90s-style complete deference to the Masters Of The Universe on Wall St who are, as a matter of public record, some of her major campaign contributers. Close personal friend of the family Rahm Emmanuel has run Chicago into the ground to appease those same jagoffs and for the same reason. I’m not dumb enough to sit out the election just because I’m not thrilled with her candidacy or to protest vote for Jill Stein or some other Nader, but I don’t have to like it either. Imagining that she will continue to advocate for liberal policies absent Bernie is completely naive. But back off on the Bernie-bro characterizations; I’m not opposed to her for any reasons in the same galaxy as sexism and giving her a pass for her own words and actions is as sexist as blaming her for Bill’s.

  144. 144.

    Yellowdog

    March 16, 2016 at 11:49 am

    @MattF: Matthews is Chris Matthews wife, no political experience. Raskin is a bona fide progressive and is currently a state senator. Go with Raskin. And Vanhollen is okay but Donna Edwards is better, and member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Go with Donna.

  145. 145.

    Yellowdog

    March 16, 2016 at 11:53 am

    @Yellowdog: task in should be Raskin .

  146. 146.

    GoBlue72

    March 16, 2016 at 11:59 am

    @Mnemosyne: That is a lie. The past 20 years have shown there is a decided split amongst Democrats. Corporate friendly, DLC style Democratic centrism is not an illusion. Bill Clinton screwing workers and the poor with NAFTA, welfare “reform”, and financial deregulation actually happened. Corporate Dems making a hash of healthcare reform and refusing to consider more progressive approaches happened. Corporate Dems like Feibstein and McCaskill killing card check legislation happened.

    I know you people just root for the laundry, but this “all Dems are basically the same” is completely naive.

  147. 147.

    Jeffro

    March 16, 2016 at 12:02 pm

    @dedc79:

    Judging by the freakout underway in the comments over at NRO, this pick was a wise one

    Oh my, that was SO worth ‘getting out of the boat’ for…they really are freaking. Nice back and forth between “we better take this deal” and “Senate Rs better stand firm or else”, LOL. Oddly enough, many of them seem to understand that Obama has them boxed in by nominating a well-respected moderate white guy (and one a little older than the last few justices, at that)

    No. Way. Out, Republicans. Just #doyourjob

  148. 148.

    Jeffro

    March 16, 2016 at 12:06 pm

    @John D.:

    1) Losing a Dem US Senator when a GOP governor gets to appoint his replacement is not a wise move at this time.

    2) Putting an effective Democrat into a mostly-useless position strikes me as sub-optimal.

    3) Sherrod has said directly that he does not want the VP slot.

    Yes, yes, and yes. Clinton would be smart to pick a much younger running mate with a proven record who is either minority or female (or both). HUD Secretary Julian Castro would be a great pick, as would Kirsten Gillibrand (whose Dem governor would get to appoint her replacement)

  149. 149.

    Peale

    March 16, 2016 at 12:41 pm

    @Jeffro:

    whose Dem governor would get to appoint her replacement

    Please don’t let Cuomo have that power!

  150. 150.

    Germy Shoemangler

    March 16, 2016 at 1:27 pm

    Meghan McCain: ‘People hate President Obama because he sacrificed’ Judge Garland’s career

    Fox News contributor Meghan McCain asserted Wednesday that President Barack Obama had effectively destroyed the career of appeals court judge Merrick Garland by nominating him to the Supreme Court.

    http://www.rawstory.com/2016/03/meghan-mccain-people-hate-president-obama-because-he-sacrificed-judge-garlands-career/

  151. 151.

    Brachiator

    March 16, 2016 at 1:35 pm

    @FlipYrWhig:

    I think I’d rather see as lopsided a win as possible, to make the Republicans reassess their overall approach to politics.

    Right now, I am not seeing a lopsided win by the Democrats. Actually, I am not seeing a win at all. I think that Trump has more than a fair chance if he is the nominee.

    But, as I always say, it’s early.

    That said, a win against Trump will NOT force the GOP to reassess their positions. They will say it was Trump, not the party, or a bad message and not the party, or something. Since the GOP will likely maintain majorities in the Congress, they can still falsely assert that Congressional elections represent the real will of the people, and presidential elections don’t mean squat.

    I worry that a narrow victory won’t do that: it will let the media say that Democrats and Republicans are basically 50-50 and we’ll be stuck at another impasse for at least 2 more years.

    Increasingly, the media, or what there is left of it, is just plain irrelevant. But a lot of people, including Balloon Juicers, continue to miss the significance of the social shift which devalues whatever you want to consider to be the mainstream media.

  152. 152.

    Brachiator

    March 16, 2016 at 1:44 pm

    @Germy Shoemangler:

    Meghan McCain: ‘People hate President Obama because he sacrificed’ Judge Garland’s career

    Wow. Talk about throwing down the gauntlet.

    Conservatives and Faux News will push this BS to the end. Fortunately, Obama is up to the challenge.

  153. 153.

    TriassicSands

    March 16, 2016 at 1:44 pm

    If I elect to go that route, should I minimax and vote for a cadidate who would be a horrendous but competent President (Kasich) OR vote for the greater probability of a large Democratic win in November (Trump)?

    If you’re a Democrat, vote for the Democrat you want to win. Leave the gamesmanship to the lunatics.

    Imagine how you’ll feel if you help Trump win the nomination and then he wins the presidency.

  154. 154.

    Mnemosyne

    March 16, 2016 at 1:49 pm

    @GoBlue72:

    Corporate Dems making a hash of healthcare reform and refusing to consider more progressive approaches happened.

    In other words, all Democrats wanted to reform health care (policy), but disagreed on the way to do it (tactics). Where is the “lie,” exactly? Your own lack of reading comprehension and inability to understand policy debates does not equal a “lie” on my part, jackass.

  155. 155.

    Prescott Cactus

    March 16, 2016 at 2:44 pm

    @Princess:

    Point and laugh. Research local candidates. Vote Democratic.

    Dem primary ballot only has Presidential race. . . Deep in the heart of redness

  156. 156.

    Mothra

    March 16, 2016 at 6:32 pm

    Vote for the person you want to have the job. These crossover schemes aren’t going to be effective, and none of those guys have any business being POTUS.

  157. 157.

    Mothra

    March 16, 2016 at 6:42 pm

    @John D.: @Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class:

    True confession.

    Sometimes I still like to reread “Romney Shellshocked”. Even now.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/adviser-romney-shellshocked-by-loss/

  158. 158.

    akryan

    March 16, 2016 at 6:59 pm

    I gotta agree with the people on here that advise against switching sides just to screw with the election. I saw that happen in AK when we elected Lisa Murkowski on a write-in ballot because Dems were so terrified of a Joe Miller victory that they didn’t have the nerve to vote for their own party. That was shameful. Granted, Murkowski is far from the worst Rep senator (basically an oil and gas lackey [which any AK senator would be anyway], but not totally against governing), but If we’d just kept the same percentage of the vote we had for governor that year then we’d have a Dem senator right now. Vote for the person you believe in. Let the other side pick their own poison.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - BarcaChicago  - Off the Gunflint Trail/Boundary Waters 7
Image by BarcaChicago (7/17/25)
Donate

Recent Comments

  • JoyceH on Donald Trump Boosts Higher Ed Enrollments (Jul 17, 2025 @ 6:06pm)
  • JBWoodford on Donald Trump Boosts Higher Ed Enrollments (Jul 17, 2025 @ 5:59pm)
  • Harrison Wesley on Donald Trump Boosts Higher Ed Enrollments (Jul 17, 2025 @ 5:58pm)
  • Suzanne on Donald Trump Boosts Higher Ed Enrollments (Jul 17, 2025 @ 5:58pm)
  • Chetan Murthy on Donald Trump Boosts Higher Ed Enrollments (Jul 17, 2025 @ 5:56pm)

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
No Kings Protests June 14 2025

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

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

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

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

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!