Just a couple of points to remember as the internet is not always correlated with reality.
At this pt in ’08, 59% of HRC voters would vote for Obama in Nov. (via Gallup) New @maristpoll 69% of Sanders voters will vote 4 HRC in Nov
— amy walter (@amyewalter) April 6, 2016
Additionally the Washington Post reports on an interesting poll in Virginia:
Nearly a third of Virginia Republicans will vote for Hillary Clinton, pick a third-party candidate or sit out the election if Donald Trump is the GOP’s nominee for president, a new poll finds.
Democrats in the key swing state are far less likely to defect if Clinton is the nominee, with just 9 percent saying they would vote for someone else or stay home on Election Day…
the survey finds the former secretary of state leads Trump 44 percent to 35 percent.
Most of the Democratic party is pretty happy with either candidate even if there are strong and passionate supported for both who have strong and loud preferences for one or the other. Putting this in terms that my three year old can understand — dessert can be either a cookie or a yogurt. He’ll be very happy with either one even if he really wanted a cookie last night. The pro-cookie folks won’t throw a tantrum if the cookies aren’t chosen by their other family members.
Now on the other side, the pro-anthrax folks will riot if the tire rimmers win. So relax as historically the Democratic Party is not particularly divided this year.
Finally the musical accompaniment needed for this post is below the fold:
Immanentize
Rust never sleeps.
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
This song was so scandalous when I was in junior high.
Immanentize
It is still a dirty little ditty — that I adore. Relax!
Immanentize
@J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford: It is still a dirty little ditty — that I adore.
Poopyman
WHY ARE YOU DISTURBING OUR BEAUTIFUL MINDS WITH DATA !?!?
Elizabelle
Thank you, Richard. Tis balm.
Am sick of the infighting. And it’s boring.
boatboy_srq
HEY! The sanitized “safe-for-the-kiddies” video.
boatboy_srq
@J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford: @Immanentize: I do love how the Reichwing is all about chastity – until some gay band plays a song about it.
NotMax
Guessed (incorrectly) the song below the fold would be this one.
boatboy_srq
Virginia was big Rmoney territory in ’12. Establishment (and the appearance of success and/or Election) is king. Neither Trump nor Cruz is tolerable to that crowd, and Kasich has a slightly better chance than a snowball’s in Hell. This result is predictable. The GOTea fascination with Ryan as an airdrop candidate probably stems from this perception: Virginians would probably turn out for Ryan where they won’t for anyone else still in the contest.
Immanentize
@boatboy_srq: So true!! I never thought of it that way — thank you for that insight, which makes me like it even more. “It’s got a great beat, you can dance to it, and it pisses off right-wingers for all the wrong reasons.”
Elizabelle
@boatboy_srq:
Lot of Virginians work for the government or contractors. Ted Cruz shutting down the govt helped get Terry McAuliffe elected. The people at doors I canvassed were livid about all that drama.
Sure, some of the GOP polled will pull the GOP lever this fall, but a substantial number of them may realize that Hillary is better and safer for their self-interest than is Trump or Cruz.
Richard Mayhew
@NotMax: Before my time
Richard Mayhew
@Elizabelle: It’s not even that, let’s assume that Trump or Cruz get 90% of the GOP vote.. they are going to have work their asses off to get the potential defectors and soft supporters. Doing that means the moderates run away in disgust (note I said moderates not independents as right now the typical indy is a Teabagger who thinks the GOP is too liberal — NB: Romney won independents, Obama crushed moderates )
Punchy
Bull. Fucking. Shit. Tribal instincts trump everything. These peeps will close their eyes, swallow hard, and vote the GOP ticket, regardless of whether Donny Trump or Donny Wahlberg is on the ballot.
p.a.
ASSUME NOTHING!
Brachiator
I want hysteria and panic, dammit!
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Brachiator: one thread below
bin Lurkin'
As a probably fifth percentile or a bit better smart but eclectically autodidactic old geezer I concluded quite a number of years ago that smarter people than I are much better at fooling themselves than I could ever be at fooling them.
Joe
@Punchy: Lifelong Virginian says you’re generalizing from national-level information in a way that’s missing some important differences this year. Those Republicans are women. I’ve been hearing things from my Republican relatives and friends that make me think there are a lot of women in the south who will pull the lever for Hillary, and then deny for the rest of their lives that they did it.
Poopyman
@bin Lurkin’: Well put. An “elite bubble”, if you will.
kindness
Sadly my facebk feed is filled with apoplectic Berniebros who say Hillary is Hitler. Can’t really have a conversation about it as they go right off the deep end if you show any signs you haven’t been infected by Bernieatitis yet. Unfollowing has helped but….
Brachiator
@boatboy_srq: Virginia may have been big Romney territory in 2012, but Obama won the state, 51 to 48 percent.
Joe Falco
I’m fine with my bland uninspiring yogurt as it is better than the sludge that will be the GOP nominee. I’ll even tell folks that the yogurt is good for them.
But I really really wanted the cookie…
Just Some Fuckhead
Did they poll how many HRC voters would vote for Sanders right now? I’m guessing that’s a lower number than the reverse scenario because my fellow Clinton supporters are the same buttheads this time around that they were in 2008.
Elizabelle
@Richard Mayhew: Agree re moderate flight and the slippery “independent” voter definition. These “independents” are not necessarily the ones Democrats need to pursue. Despite what earnest “both sides do it” types tell us.
NotMax
@Richard Mayhew
Symphony concert version from 2015 (with lyrics!).
japa21
My personal preference is that they just sit out the election and stay home. If they go vote for Clinton or Sanders or go with a third party candidate, they will still probably vote for the GOP candidate in down ticket races, even though many if not most of those are just as looney.
Better case scenario is that the GOP somehow gives the nomination to someone not named Trump or Cruz. Those supporters won’t vote for Clinton but a non-miniscule percent of them will probably either not vote at all or vote Dem just to spite the GOP.
What Have the Romans Ever Done for Us?
@boatboy_srq: I live in the DC area and the majority of the Republican establishmentariat all live in Northern VA, ’cause they don’t want to live in navy blue MD or DC. We’re talking political operatives but also a lot of defense/national security contractors and other beltway bandits. They’re probably a pretty large GOP voting block in northern VA. Downstate there are plenty of Cruz-ites and Trumpenproles but the Dems don’t need to much stay home or hold their nose and vote for Hillary switching to make the State blue.
Poopyman
@Just Some Fuckhead: I don’t think that’s the case. Based purely on anecdata, I’d say today’s Hillary voters are yesterday’s Obama voters plus Hillary voters. The ones I know have no Perfect Unicorn for a candidate and are well aware of the rewards of not voting.
HRA
Thank you Richard Mayhew for your most reasonable post.
Snarkworth, short-fingered Bulgarian
You will pry my cookie from my cold, dead short fingers.
Eric U.
@Punchy: there has to be a limit to tribal identity. Someone was saying that most democrats don’t know why they vote for the democrat, just that they prefer them, i.e. the tribal argument. At some point, the candidate is so vile that people will say “that’s not my tribe, I’m not like that.” And vote for Hillary. I think that a lot of middle age Republicans lived through the Clinton years and realize they were pretty good, and this election may peel them off. I’m sure there are still republicans that aren’t fundamentalists and anti-gay and have some black friends and finally can’t ignore the racism that underlies the Republican party platform. The mainstream Democratic party is pretty moderate, even Bernie, and people that are moderate but voting republican out of tribal loyalty may actually get peeled off by this election. One can hope
Joel
@Punchy: Wahlberg is 2020.
boatboy_srq
@Elizabelle: @Richard Mayhew: I think Elizabelle is closer with this one. The VA public sector (FTE and contracting) sphere is both very very Establishment and highly sensitive about their own employment: they like their jobs, value their work and despise people who get in the way of that, even as they think Gummint is still too big (which I’ve never wholly understood since without Big Gummint they wouldn’t have jobs). Cruz shot himself in the foot here with the shutdown. Trump scares the p!ss out of them with his wild statements. At least HRC will carry on enough of the status quo to keep them in beer and pretzels – and if they can’t vote for her then “none of the above” is a perfectly valid choice. Moderate-chasing, OTOH, isn’t something Cruz is genetically capable of doing; and while Trump has a shot at the disaffected pseudo-center, he’s killing himself with every bloc outside the WWCs so he can pander to the center all he wants and it won’t matter.
Ronnie Pudding
So one-third of Sanders voters won’t vote for Clinton, and one-third of GOP Virginians won’t vote for Trump. We’re not supposed to believe the former (I don’t), so why would we believe the latter?
Betty Cracker
@Eric U.: One can certainly hope for a “Clinton Republican” phenomenon, but I sure don’t think it’s likely. Anyone who’s stuck with the Repubs through the Bush II and Obama years is probably a lost cause.
Davebo
@kindness: Yet another good reason to Stay Away from Facebook.
I could get rich if I just developed my invention. It’s a Facebook inhibitor that requires one to blow into a breathalyzer before posting or commenting.
feebog
The numbers cited in the article do not compute. If almost one third of Republicans will stay home, vote third party or vote for HRC, shouldn’t the spread be more than 9 points? Especially when you consider PBO carried VA by several points?
jake the antisoshul soshulist
The media are friggin’ themselves over the idea of a contested Republican convention.
And are hoping for something similar for the the Democrats. ABC was feeling the Bern this morning.
Richard Mayhew
@Davebo: do you get to post only if you blow .o8?
Richard Mayhew
@feebog: lots of undecided voters
japa21
Damn, next thing you’re going to tell me there is no Santa Claus.
Shell
Pffft- The whole Dems in Disarray theme is beloved by the media who always want the horse race.
Shell
But you didn’t say what flavor it is, or is it the one with the fruit on the bottom?
rikyrah
good luck with that – nominate someone who could only win his home state
Yet another poll suggests Kasich is Republicans’ best hope in November
A poll released Wednesday shows Bernie Sanders trailing Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania by six points, while both Democratic candidates lag behind Ohio Gov. John Kasich in a hypothetical fall match-up in the Keystone State.
The poll, released by Quinnipiac University, also shows Republican frontrunner Donald Trump leading Ted Cruz, 39%-30%. Kasich trails in third at 24%, but is the only Republican candidate who beat Clinton or Sanders in a head-to-head matchup in the key swing state, pollsters noted.
In a statement on the poll, Assistant Director Tim Malloy noted that no candidate has won the presidency since 1960 without winning two out of the three swing states of Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio.
“Kasich is ahead of Clinton and Sanders in his home state (of Ohio), and now we see how strong he is next door, if he can jump over Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz,” Malloy said.
A March poll by Monmouth University showed Kasich as the only Republican beating Clinton in a hypothetical November matchup. Another Quinnipiac poll the day prior found Kasich edging out Sanders in a head-to-head, too.
Doug R
May I point out that Republican self identification has gone down since its peak in the George W days. In Canada, people got sick of Mulroney’s crap and voted out the Conservatives from 156 seats to 2. The Conservatives ended up combining with the even more right wing Reform and after 13 years of Liberals, we got Harper for 10 LONG years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_federal_general_elections
PsiFighter37
@rikyrah: Kasich is only strong because he has had very little attention paid to him. He’s almost as much of an asshole as Cruz is, and is just as bad on women’s issues as well.
He also worked at Lehman Brothers before it tanked, and that – well, the ads write themselves.
Mary
Yogurt vs cookies is a terrible example. I would cut a bitch that deprived me of a cookie, but I would enthusiastically vote for Bernie in November.
gene108
@Shell:
It was true in 1968, why wouldn’t it be true today?
Doug R
@Davebo: Hope it requires a minimum BAC-does it cut out when it’s too high?
Tim C.
On topic and hopefully more constructive question than the usual back and forth.
Assume the following facts are true (I think both are true with a 0.98 probability)
A) Bernie is likely to do well, but arrive at the convention with fewer pledged delegates than Hillary.
B) Bernie, as I believe is the case, has a sincere interest in making the Democratic party as useful as possible in advancing his agenda and doesn’t just want to light it all on fire.
What should Bernie ask for to give his full support? There’s nothing underhanded about this in my opinion, coalition politics is all about give and take. Obama clearly made a deal in the spring of 08 where she got the Sec. of State job as her jumping board for the next time around. He got her to completely shut down the PUMA nonsense. They both delivered. What should Bernie ask for? Policy planks? A seat on the cabinet? Executive orders on certain areas and topics? Regulatory moves that can be made by agencies under the President’s directions? Anyone have good notions or ideas?
Just Some Fuckhead
@Poopyman:
The Hillarians are modeling the same behavior today as then. HRC’s new Obama supporters are adding the racial charges and purity tests.
sherparick
Although the ratio of 3 bad articles to every good one remains (and they keep publishing Conservative Troll H. A. Goodman who portrays himself as a “Bernie” supporter), I reluctantly link to Gary Legum’s article which I would love to see Sanderistas address. It makes a very interesting point that whether it is voter suppression or not having Obama on the race Democratic turnout is down in 2016 from 2008, and it is hard to have a “political revolution” when Conservative monsters like Rebecca Bradley win elections to state Supreme Court vacancies.
http://www.salon.com/2016/04/07/this_is_the_problem_with_bernies_revolution_how_one_down_ticket_election_in_wisconsin_shows_the_flaw_in_his_political_movement/
All progressives, whether Sanderistas, Clintonistas, or “I wish they would both go away at this point” type need to stop obsessing with Presidential elections and Green Lantern candidates and start building local political movements from school boards on up.
Shana
@What Have the Romans Ever Done for Us?: And most of those NoVA Republicans voted for Rubio in the primary. They may be Rs but they’re not stupid, blow-it-all up Rs. One of the last holdouts of “moderate Republicans” left in the country as far as I can tell. My precinct leans R but crushed for Obama in both ’08 and ’12. Our last Congressman before the wonderful Gerry Connolly (D) was Tom Davis (R) who saw the writing on the wall and retired in ’08.
Davebo
@Doug R:
The possibilities are unlimited!
Marc
Yea, I remember April and May 2008 too. Until now, at least, the sniping between the candidates was more restrained than in 2008, which helped damp things down.
I’m gonna lay low for a few weeks, ignore Democratic primary political stuff on social media and blogs, and focus on enjoying the Republican meltdown and looking ahead to what we need to do to win in the autumn…
Just Some Fuckhead
@Doug R:
One of the big differences between US and Canada is Canada has free and fair elections, including restrictions on gerrymandering and unlimited corporate cash, right?
Calouste
@rikyrah:
Fixified.
And of course Generic Republican only stays Generic Republican as long as you don’t open the box and look what’s inside.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
I just keep reminding myself that as late as the morning of the election in 2008, I was told in no uncertain terms that this country would NEVER elect a black man, especially one with the middle name of Hussein. No way, no how. So, how’d that work out?
Just One More Canuck
@Calouste: Schrodinger’s Republican?
RaflW
I agree with your general thrust, Richard. But the headline, oy.
We need to relax re: the top of the Dem ticket. But we need to work our butts off for the rest of the ballot!
FYI, Larry Sabato tweeted out the new Senate race ratings and there’s some interesting movement.
When I get back to MN in a couple days, I think I’ll go volunteer for Angie Craig. She’s working to take the long-Republican MN 2nd CD. Rep. Klein has announced his retirement, and let’s hope the Republicans in Disarray effect reaches down the ballot.
Calouste
@Tim C.:
If Sanders believed in coalition politics, why has he avoided joining the Democratic Party for 25 years? And why does he keep saying that everyone but him is corrupt?
I sincerely hope he will throw his support behind Clinton when he loses, because otherwise we’re in big trouble. I’m just not confident that he will.
qwerty42
Yeah, everyone is *for* their candidate, and (although I’m for Hillary), a *campaign* was needed, not an f-ing coronation. Bernie has highlighted some important things. This is *good* … but heck, I’m pretty much preaching to the choir. So we can go back to attacking.
RaflW
Damn FYWP. Two of the last three comments I’ve written have been eated. Clearly the side updates haven’t fixed that, dammit.
boatboy_srq
@Brachiator: Virginia GOTea was Rmoney territory. VIRGINIA, though, is bigger than the GOTea likes or will admit.
Eric U.
there are apps that keep you off of facebook, I might have to just change my hosts file to redirect facebook to a lolcats site
Elizabelle
C-Span live at present: Richard Cordray of the CFPB testifying. Lovely to have someone calm and competent on display. (ETA: Tom Cotton up now. Lizard personified. He’s asking pointed questions about race in a settlement action. Not sure where he’s going, but … ah, it’s people misidentifying as black and receiving a check. Cordray asserts that an individual has to confirm he/she is AfrAm and that “is fraud and I am sure you would not do that.” …. Cotton wants to make point the settlement was rife with fraud, and Cordray slapped him down good. Fireworks. Cotton is toxic.)
Look forward to President Obama’s speech at UChicago Law later today re his Supreme Court nomination. 3:30 today, Eastern.
C-Span schedule:
10:06AMRichard Cordray Testimony on CFPB Semiannual Report
12:33PMHillary Clinton Campaign Event in Pittsburgh
1:12PMDonald Trump Campaign Rally in Bethpage, New York
1:59PMOhio Governor John Kasich State of the State Address
3:30PMPresident Obama Town Hall Meeting on the Supreme Court
Brachiator
@Just Some Fuckhead:
Not quite. From a recent Globe and Mail story:
California pol Jesse Unruh’s dictum is a universal truth: “Money is the mother’s milk of politics.”
Calouste
Sanders blames media for Sanders not reading more than the headlines, taking everything his aides feed him at face value:
Just Some Fuckhead
@Elizabelle:
There ain’t nothing meaner than an Arkansan who thinks he’s an Israeli.
Tim C.
@Calouste: Granted and if that’s the case, I’m wrong. I’ve gotten used to that over the years. But what should he ask for?
boatboy_srq
@RaflW: Ditto. The Site, it is not fixed yet.
And FYWP with a rusty HTML tag.
JMG
@Calouste: Generic wins any poll against a real person. Those polled always fill a blank slate with positive qualities. Quinnipiac (which has shown more Republican strength in its polling than most others, they could be right but it’s noticeable) was asking a useless question. The only question which would be real information is Generic R vs. Generic D.
Calouste
@Just Some Fuckhead: Canada has a district system, so no fair elections by definition. In 2011 Harper won 54% of the seats in Parliament despite more than 60% of the vote going to other parties.
Peale
@Elizabelle: Black people are getting government money! Black people are getting government money! How are they cheating you today?
Brachiator
@boatboy_srq:
If you don’t actually win, it don’t matter that you consider it your territory.
Obviously, though, the Democrats can’t take a past victory for granted.
Corner Stone
@Calouste:
Which he and he alone is completely in charge of deciding. It’s hard to see such a cranky person of his age acting so juvenile.
raven
@Elizabelle: I guess I’ll skip watching the Masters to tune in to this compelling drama!
Emma
@qwerty42: I wish someone would explain what they mean by a “coronation.” She has debated, done interviews, town halls, rallies — everything a candidate is supposed to have done. She did come in with a better resume and name recognition. Should she have ignored her advantages?
Calouste
@Tim C.: The question is if he wants to ask for anything, or whether he just wants to wallow in purity pony victimhood. I’m not sure he would want, or would be temperamentally suited for anything with responsibilities like a cabinet position. Maybe Clinton should just make him VP and let him travel the world going to funerals.
lollipopguild
@japa21: What do you mean that there is no sanity clause?
feebog
@Richard Mayhew:
Not really, 14% say they would vote for neither, but only 7% undecided. Given that she should be starting with a slight edge anyway, and given the gender gap cited in the poll, I don’t see how the numbers work.
Elizabelle
C-Span: Elizabeth Warren up! “Welcome to your 61st hearing.”
Toomey was last questioner. He tried but failed to slime CFPB’s methods; Cordray schooled him, pretty much in words of one syllable.
Subject now: payday loans.
lollipopguild
@the Conster, la Citoyenne: He lost. Right?
Elizabelle
Honestly, we should do a thread with the transcript from this hearing. It deserves wide distribution, and Cordray is exceptionally skilled at testifying in understandable language and not getting off topic.
Those 61 previous visits to Congressional hearings were not wasted.
ETA: Now they’re discussing federal vs. state regulations. It’s a great discussion; you can see the underlying theory of govt that Cordray and Warren (and the sane) share.
Chyron HR
@Calouste:
DEAR FRIENDS
TODAY ONE OF CLINTON’S SURROGATES SAID THAT SHE WAS GOING TO SEND BERNIE TO A “FUNERAL”.
PLEASE SEND ALL YOUR MONEY NOW TO STOP THIS MONSTER.
VERY TRULY YOURS,
TED DIVINE
boatboy_srq
@Brachiator: True, but that’s not the same as saying that, if the last pResidential primary went for a guy whose type has been well and truly quashed this cycle, that a major portion of that party suggesting they won’t support their gang’s candidate in the general election this time around is not credible.
Doug R
@Just Some Fuckhead: One of Harper’s innovations was hiring campaign people with no scruples who called Liberal supporters with false information about the election, like where to vote. They also went a ways towards voter restrictions, making it harder to register day of.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Canadian_federal_election_voter_suppression_scandal
Brachiator
@Tim C.:
HRC should take a page from Godfather II:
In 2008, Obama had to make peace with both Clintons. He needed Bill to campaign for him, otherwise it would have been very ugly. Obama had to deal with any lingering bad feeling that Clinton supporters may have felt. And you are right on the money when you note that Obama kept Clinton’s political ambitions alive by appointing her Secretary of State (and ignoring all suggestions that she be made VP).
But Bernie is not part of the Democratic Party establishment, nor is it clear that he could transfer the enthusiasm and support of his voters to HRC. On the other hand, it would be suicidal for him to actively oppose her since it would look as though he was giving aid and support to the Republicans.
Gin & Tonic
@boatboy_srq: I read that sentence twice and still can’t parse it.
Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism
Breathe. Let it out.
boatboy_srq
@Immanentize: Ah, the bad old days. HIV was killing people and the Reichwing was aflame with denunciations of Teh Immoral Ghey. “If they didn’t have Teh Buttsecks, then they wouldn’t get sick” was a common theme. Along came FGTH with “Relax (Don’t Do It!)”, which is a gay-positive spin on not having sex (albeit with very naughty phrasing and a full-blown leatherfest for a video) and the Reichwing was instantly concernstipated over Those Awful Hoamseckshuls And Their Evil Abstinence.
Calouste
@Corner Stone: He’s almost implying “that woman made me
hitattack her”.Elizabelle
@raven: So excited you’re at the Masters.
There will always be a transcript, or C-Span video.
Immanentize
@Calouste:
Two words: Elizabeth Warren. I don’t know and have not read of anyone (although I am sure they exist) who would rather vote for Bernie Sanders than Elizabeth Warren. She is (my Senator and) the key to this year’s unity efforts. I actually believe that Bernie can pick up his ball and go home mad never to be heard from again if Senator Warren cuts a deal with Secretary Clinton and then actively works to bring home the Sandernistas and soothe the Clintonians who have had their fee fees hurt. I think this is the reason she never endorsed anyone in the primary. (Although I was intrigued by whoever said she may not support Sanders because of her experience in the Senate a la Barney Frank’s)
So that is my prediction — Warren is the giant in the post-nomination democratic GOT(Bernie supporters)V efforts this fall. And she will do a magnificent job.
So the question ought to be — What should Elizabeth Warren ask for?
boatboy_srq
@Gin & Tonic: It’s hard to put cleanly, but here goes. 2012: VA GOTea goes Rmoney (the Establishment candidate). 2016: Establishment candidates are out, and a significant plurality of the VA GOTea says they won’t vote for their nominee. Brachiator says none of that matters if the state goes Dem, and implies that tribalism trumps personal/professional survival for Big Gummint workers and Big Gummint contractors. I disagree.
boatboy_srq
Humph. Two comments eaten, but other comments appearing immediately. Is FYWP really broken, or are “in moderation” comments hidden from posters as well as the thread at large?
Calouste
@Chyron HR: As they say on the Wonkette: upfist.
Someone posted a Sanders fundraising email here yesterday btw, and it sounded like a right money making scam.
Linnaeus
@Emma:
It stems, IMHO, from the perception that Clinton and her supporters resent that she has opponents in the Democratic primary. According to this view, the Clinton campaign saw this election as “her time” and Sanders is messing that up by challenging her.
StellaB
@Emma: PBO would not have botched the first debate in 2012, if he had been debating in a primary fight. Debating in this primary cycle improves HRC’s performance in the debates for the general. Also, having a primary fight raises her visibility for the disengaged. Otherwise only Trumpolini would be getting the free publicity.
What Have the Romans Ever Done for Us?
@sherparick: Steve Bennen over at Rachel Maddow’s blog had a post on this earlier today. He quotes an Dave Weigel quoting an exit poll which estimates that roughly 14 percent of Bernie voters voted for Bernie and left the rest of their Wisconsin primary ballots blank. For Hillary 4 percent did. Failure of Bernie voters to not fill out down ballot was part of the reason the RWNJ won the WI Supreme Court appointee won a full term. So…way to go guys.
Linnaeus
@Brachiator:
Perhaps I’m naive, but I still want to believe the Sanders will openly support Clinton once she’s got the nomination wrapped up. I could be quite wrong about that.
Felanius Kootea
@Tim C.: He should ask for a public option in the Affordable Care Act, a quadrupling of Pell Grants, federal student loan interests of no more than 1%, debt forgiveness for students who work in rural or urban underserved areas, taxing all income, and not just the first $1xx,000 for social security, and new designations of certain Wall Street actions as felonies rather than misdemeanors. Oh and a new rule that a CEO can make at most 30 times what a janitor makes at any organization.
I can’t stop laughing…
Tim C.
@Brachiator: Interesting. The problem is, it’s not just about Bernie’s resources, which agreed, probably won’t be of much use to Clinton. The Warren angle mentioned by Immanentize above is a brilliant move, because while I think it’s possible Bernie will try to go the full Nader, (not likely, but possible) Warren absolutely lives in the real world. Likely she’ll move to a cabinet position…… hell…if I’m in my little dream land, why not just provoke the crazies and make it a Clinton/Warren ticket. Goodness, watching the conservative/bigot/a-hole heads asplode at that would be epic beyond imagining.
japa21
@Linnaeus: Perception being the key word. There is no indication that Clinton or the vast majority of her supporters resent there being a candidate opposing her. In fact most probably view it as a blessing.
boatboy_srq
@Linnaeus: I would be a lot more confident of his support for Clinton later if he were supporting downballot Dems now.
Amaranthine RBG
Does anyone remember whether Hillary Clinton’s supporters were this obnoxious and sanctimonious towards Obama during the primary fight?
My recollection is that they were not.
Corner Stone
@What Have the Romans Ever Done for Us?: My goodness. If that reporting is accurate…As a dear friend of mine on this blog might say if he were informed that up to 15 percent of Bernie voters left all down ticket spots empty, “I am stunned by this.”
Hoodie
Virginia numbers aren’t that surprising. I used to work for a defense contractor in Maryland, where the typical white collar worker was tribally aligned with the GOP because they view them as “strong on defense” i.e, a more dependable source of defense contracts. Socially, they don’t have a lot in common with the xenophobes and open racists supporting Trump or the bible thumpers supporting Cruz. What they want is a Bush, or someone like him (e.g., Kasich, maybe Ryan). Unlike whites in the midwest and south, they’re probably not all that pissed off about trade or immigration, because their jobs typically require US citizenship and aren’t affected by foreign competition. A lot of retired military in the DC area pretty much the same. The only other hot button issue they tend to have is crime, e.g., they tend to hate DC and Baltimore (no doubt a racial dimension to that). Trump may appeal to that segment, but I could see a significant number holding their noses and voting for Hillary. The Clinton years were not the flushest of times for the defense business (especially compared to the Reagan years), but she may be acceptable because of her hawkish rep, and they can feel pretty comfortable that she’ll keep the contracts flowing. I think Bernie would be a nonstarter for that crowd. I would not place too much faith in these crossover numbers, however, because it may be highly dependent on who the GOP ends up nominating.
aimai
@Just Some Fuckhead: I’m an HRC supporter who has really come to despise Sanders and I wouldn’t hesitate to not only vote for him but send him money and knock on doors for him. I don’t think there is any sign that there are any HRC supporters who wouldn’t also support Sanders, pace Bloomberg’s stupid stunt which was just a form of exhibitionism.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@Linnaeus:
Nothing in his past leads me to believe that he’s ever been a gracious team player, so I don’t think he will support Clinton, fwiw. He’s a bitter old crank who was quick to throw Jane under the bus vis a vis his failure to release his tax returns, and he’s going to throw Clinton under his bus too. I hope I’m really wrong about that too, but I don’t think I am.
Brachiator
@Richard Mayhew:
The independent vote may be more volatile than you allow. In swing states, Obama won the independent vote big time in 2008, but lost it in 2012.
If HRC can’t woo them, she has to make sure she gets a strong turnout of traditional Democrats.
Chyron HR
@Amaranthine RBG:
I agree, Bernie’s really set a new low.
aimai
@What Have the Romans Ever Done for Us?: They still wouldn’t have won because the Republican primary voters were all stoked to vote for their “non partisan” judge candidate. The numbers were overwhelmingly against the Dems. But its very common for highly enthusiastic new voters who get excited by Presidential elections simply to not know anything about down ballot races, or not know why they are important.
Felanius Kootea
@Amaranthine RBG: Uh let’s see – Geraldine Ferraro and the “inadequate black man” comments, Lynn Forrester de Rothschild, etc. Every primary has obnoxious supporters and surrogates. The tension from that seems to disappear when the general election rolls around. Thank God.
TriassicSands
The fickleness and stupidity of Democratic voters was apparent in Wisconsin last Tuesday. A terrible right winger was reelected to her seat on the State Supreme Court. Fifteen percent of Sanders voters skipped the Supreme Court race, while four percent of Clinton voters passed. That’s what we’ve come to expect of Democratic voters. There was a time when it was really difficult to find out much about judicial candidates, but today, with the Internet, that has changed and it’s no longer an excuse for not voting for judges. But many Democratic voters just can’t be bothered. Yes, four percent is a lot better than fifteen percent, but why isn’t the number less than 1%. We’re our own worst enemies.
Note: Wisconsin voters have screwed themselves. Time and again they fail to do what needs to be done. They’ve enable Scott Walker to wreck the state in innumerable ways and now they’ve returned another right wing disaster to the state’s supreme court.
aimai
@Brachiator: But I wonder whether Obama “lost” the independent vote in 2012 not because they were disgusted with him but because they treated it like a midterm/foregone conclusion and irregular voters, swing voters, and other non partisan voters simply don’t get out and vote unless its a huge wave election.
bmoak
@Davebo:
If you could make one of those for Twitter, you’d really be on to something.
Calouste
@Amaranthine RBG: Does anyone remember if Obama did an interview during the primary where he answered questions about the core of his platform with “I suspect there are, yes” and “Yeah well, I believe you do”.
My recollection is that he did not.
Linnaeus
@japa21:
Oh, I’m not saying it’s an accurate perception.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@aimai:
You’d think someone trying to lead a children’s crusade and who’s taking all that money from them would be all leadery and shit and connect the dots for them, because you know, political revolution. Unless I missed imploring his supporters to vote against her in Bernie’s stump speeches in WI in which case good for him. I know HRC mentioned it.
aimai
@Felanius Kootea: Here’s some interesting information on LFDR (first of all, she started off as a middle class New Jersey girl. She made all her own money and also married very well three times, social climbing all the way)
When you look at who she actually is you see someone who needed and wanted to be close to the President, really no matter who it was. Whatever she said about Obama was not said as a Democrat. She wasn’t a democrat. She was a well connected financial/broadband millionaire who wanted to be a signficant force in politics because of her financial dealings. If she’d thought Obama was going to win she never would have said a peep against him.
aimai
@srv: Well, an insult comic approach to politics ha so far served Trump very well.
Loviatar
One of the most frustrating things in life is when those who got lucky refuse to admit their luck. My preferred candidate, Hillary Clinton, is lucky this election cycle. Her opponents, both in the primary and seemingly in the general election are fatally flawed.
—–
I wrote the other day that the Bernistas felt they had been cheated. They’re following the game plan laid out by Obama in 2008; they vaguely mention some sort of grand Hope and Change revolution, repeatedly mention Clinton’s scandals, centrist leanings, etc and boom they’re the nominee. But, its not working, in fact the things that made Obama so attractive in 2008 is now being used against them in 2016. The same group who in 2008 overwhelmingly preferred the Hope and Change revolution now see it as too risky. Pragmatic Moderation is now their preferred choice.
—–
The Obots got lucky twice in 2008. The first time, it was a change election, the Democrats could have nominated anyone and they would have been guaranteed the presidency. How do I know this; they nominated a black man with a muslim sounding name and he got elected president. The second time they got lucky was Obama himself. He had only been a State Senator for 7 years and US Senator for 2 years, the country didn’t know what type of president he was going to be, we didn’t know!! He turned out to be every thing they hoped for. Lucky for them and the country.
I guess they’re not feeling so lucky this time.
rikyrah
@Emma:
Stop being cute. You know damn well what folks mean by coronation.
Hillary expected one in 2008, but Barack Obama stopped that.
She expected one in 2016, and gamed the entire process.
Outside of Biden, all of the rest of them who chickened out can go phuck themselves.
Because, it’s quite obvious that if there had been a serious candidate, embracing the Obama Coalition and standing up saying – I am for continuing the President’s policies – they would have laid waste to Hillary by now.
Bernie was only allowed in because they had to give some cover that they weren’t in on the sham of Hillary’s coronation – he was never supposed to REALLY catch on..which is another example of DWS trying to be too cute by half and shooting herself in the foot – she truly is incompetent.
Please stop pretending that you don’t know what folks mean by coronation.
Brachiator
@Linnaeus: RE: But Bernie is not part of the Democratic Party establishment, nor is it clear that he could transfer the enthusiasm and support of his voters to HRC.
No, I meant to say that even if Sanders strongly supports Clinton, this does not mean that Sanders voters will come along with him.
I just don’t know. Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton had developed their relationship with supporters over a longer period of time. And Bill Clinton had to be wooed so that he would not be nasty and vindictive toward Obama. And of course, the Clintons had friends and supporters within the Democratic Party. The dynamic with Sanders is very different.
If Sanders could reliably bring his supporters with him, the Democrats would be unbeatable against any Republican candidate.
And, let me also say, the same is true if somehow Sanders became the nominee and HRC urged her supporters to back him.
@Amaranthine RBG:
In some ways they were worse.
Hoodie
@Brachiator: She needs to do some combination of both. Obama may have benefited from a blowback in the AA community in 2012 because of the GOPs’ blatant disrespect of Obama and their voter suppression efforts. You can assume that will not be as intense for Hillary in 2016, so she’ll need to do pretty well with independents, too. Theoretically, she’s the right candidate to do that. In comparison, I don’t see where Bernie is going to get his revolution because the only people as “enthused” as his supporters are their counterparts in the Trump campaign. Yes, he currently polls well in theoretical matchups, but the fundamentals don’t make a lot of sense and I suspect those polls will dramatically change after the nomination. If Bernie were to somehow get the nomination, it would be with such acrimony that he’d be mortally wounded within the Democratic Party and handicap his ability to mobilize large parts of the base. He’s already starting to piss off party stalwarts. Obama never did that.
Chyron HR
@rikyrah:
Oooh, oooh, I know! Expecting the the party leadership to just hand you the nomination regardless of who wins the primary?
No, wait, that’s what Bernie’s doing. I guess I’m stumped. What IS a political coronation?
Linnaeus
@Brachiator:
No, we don’t know for sure what Sanders supporters will do in the general re Clinton, but the polling data is all we have to go on, and it so far indicates that by and large, they will vote for Clinton.
Emma
@Linnaeus: That makes a bit of sense, though it’s not the feeling I get from those of us who are Clinton supporters. I supported her from the beginning because she’s a known quantity for me, and I am never ready for revolutionaries unless I understand not only their policies but their procedures, and with Sanders I get a vibe of the old cartoon of two scientists looking at a blackboard where there is written an equation that includes the words “and here a miracle happens” and one is saying to the other “this needs a little more work”. Still, I committed to vote for whoever got the nod because the alternative sucks.
Calouste
@rikyrah:
Clinton is pretty much running on continuing the President’s policies. I don’t see how anyone else could have done the same and “laid waste” to Clinton. Sanders is more-or-less explicitly running on not continuing a number of the President’s policies, which seems to be what attracts some of his voters to him.
And you can’t rant about people who should have run without naming names. I don’t think there were ever many people named as serious potential contenders for 2016.
Emma
@rikyrah: You know, I know you hate her and that’s fine. But don’t assume that the rest of us are (1) as invested in understanding the hate and (2) as invested in the stupid internet fights.
Tell me, are you going to sit out the election if she’s the nominee?
Hoodie
@Calouste: Other than Biden, I don’t know who else could have run on Obama’s legacy. It’s hard to follow an incumbent Pres if the VP is not a viable candidate. Whether or not Biden would have been viable, he made himself unavailable. That might have been because he wanted to avoid a fight with Clinton, but it doesn’t matter now. A lot of other Dem pols have been on the defensive over the past several years, hiding behind Obama as he takes incoming fire from the loonies in the GOP. Clinton’s about the only one battle-tested enough to pull off continuing Obama’s legacy.
rikyrah
@Calouste:
We have selective memories. Clinton only came to ‘ I’m going to run and support the President’s Policies’, when she saw that the Obama Coalition wasn’t feeling her trying to distance herself from the President. Don’t pretend that’s how she began…cause, it’s not true.
rikyrah
@Emma:
I have voted in every election – local, state, federal -since I became 18 years old.
Corner Stone
@rikyrah:
This seems not so obvious. If the battle between HRC and Generic Serious Democrat was to see who could out-Obama one another doesn’t HRC win against anyone but Biden? And that’s a close call, certainly not a “laid waste” blowout by Uncle Joe. No other GSD could talk about serious policy course change without alienating Obama’s coalition to some degree or other. I don’t see what’s so obvious about this conclusion, nor do I see any real life GSD that made noises about it. And if there is a GSD that decided not to run because Clinton Machine, then I propose that they really are not a GSD to begin with.
Corner Stone
@rikyrah:
Even if we grant your version of the selective memory syndrome, why is it an issue? Why is evolving a bad thing in this instance?
And I, for one, do not grant your version of how her campaign has progressed. At least not to the degree you seem to be implying. HRC has to define herself as a candidate while also bringing in the largest chunk of the Obama Coalition possible. She is of his cabinet but she is not his third term, as a VP may be said to be. Calling for preserving, and where possible expanding, any gains made by PBO is the smartest politics possible in this environment. Whether it’s heartfelt or politically necessary.
FlipYrWhig
@rikyrah:
Are you thinking about Syria here? I’m not coming up with very many acts of distancing, but, like you said, memory can selective.
Brachiator
@Loviatar:
There is nothing to be gained by admitting luck. There is much to be gained by maximizing whatever advantage that luck has brought you.
Context is everything. Hope and Change was blunted by Republican obstructionism. And there is promise of much more of this in the future.
aimai
@Brachiator: Right. I don’t understand why people (Loviator) seem to think that the electorate never learns from past elections, or that people in general shouldn’t cut their coat to suit their cloth. Its the most sensible thing in the world. When circumstances change, I change too. Obama made certain gains that I value–in the economy (which he brought back from the literal brink of death) to the ACA. I want a manager to manage those gains and get a few more. I don’t want new “hope and change” because I’m satisfied with the direction of the change I have and I like the old hope.
aimai
@rikyrah: I don’t think this is true, though you have a different vantage point. I think how a person choses to run for the presidency doesn’t reflect anything at all about them other than how they think the electorate wants them to run. Al Gore ran away from Bill Clinton’s legacy because he thought he had to, not because he wanted to. If HRC runs on preserving Obama’s legacy because she thinks she has to that’s a) perfectly normal and b) perfectly wonderful. The important thing, to me, is to get a liberal Democrat into the White House to solidify our gains and stem our losses. I don’t care if HRC does it by gyrating naked on the white house lawn to please some constituency. So long as she does it.
Loviatar
@Brachiator: / @aimai:
My point is that the Bernistas feel cheated as they are using the 2008 Obama template and its not working. Thats where their anger is coming from. To them Hillary is the same scandal plagued, centrist bitch you guys made her out to be in 2008 plus Hope and Change revolution 2016 = poof Bernie is the nominee. It worked in 2008 so someone must to be to blame for why it isn’t working in 2016.
—–
Yes there is, when you admit and know you were lucky you won’t depend on it happening again. I get the feeling the Obots still believe they were just good, not lucky and good.
I know a lot of people who are good at what they do, the ones who were lucky and good are running things.
Emma
@rikyrah: We’re in the same page, then. I don’t care how we (either one of us) feels. We have to vote Democrat this year because we’re facing a disaster of massive proportions if we don’t. Agreement on anything else not necessary.
Corner Stone
@Loviatar:
But they aren’t. I do not believe the Sanders campaign is modeling the Obama template very well at all. The call for Hope and Change is drastically different than the quasi-anarchy the people following Sanders seem to want. And Bernie isn’t very good at coalition building, or many of the things Obama either did well as a candidate or at least held his own.
qwerty42
@Emma: I wish someone would explain what they mean by a “coronation.” She has debated, done interviews, town halls, rallies …
Sorry, should have been clearer. At the time Sec’y Clinton started, there looked to be little opposition to her on the Democratic side. At the same time, the (absurd) “deep bench” on the GOP side did not look as though it would degenerate into the circus it has. A Bush or a Rubio or someone (anyone but Cruz and Trump) seemed most likely to emerge (even the grotesque Walker). The fall campaign looked to be an ugly affair. And, no matter the GOP nominee, it is likely to remain so. Hillary has done so much right, I’m with her. (It isn’t just the inquisition – er hearing, which was exemplary. It has been the very debates, meetings, town halls, etc you mention. The small things on the campaign trail, that have been good) But having an adversary has been helpful. I can get irritated with the Bros, but the notion they will sit it out if their guy doesn’t get the nom seems like hokum. It makes for a great story, but is not really what is happening (not that there are not currents out there, that Bernie is tapping into).
mohagan
@Poopyman: That describes me – 64 year old N CA woman who was strongly for Obama in 2008 (at a certain point I wanted to drive a stake through Clinton’s heart to end the primary season), and this season a while ago I realized I’m for Hillary (a little before JC did his post) and Saunders is starting to seriously piss me off with this “disqualified” stuff. I’ll vote for him if he’s the nominee, but otherwise, I’m NOT feeling the Bern.
Loviatar
@Corner Stone:
Please explain to me the difference between Obama’s 2008 Hope and Change and Sanders’ 2016 Revolution. While the specifics may be different the themes are the same. A messianic leader will sweep into office and through his “power” institute changes which will benefit the masses. Both were / are light on specifics and both require a significant congressional component that the leaders didn’t/don’t acknowledge.
I agree they’re not doing it well, however they are trying to emulate it. 2016 Sanders’ supporters constant allusion to the Clinton non-scandals are similar to the 2008 Obama supporters constant allusions to the Clinton non-scandals. 2016 Sanders’ supporters constant refrain that Clinton is a DLC centrist are similar to the 2008 Obama supporters constant refrain that Clinton is a DLC centrist.
aimai
@Corner Stone: Right, I agree with this. But I think the Sanders people do think that its the same thing as Obama. They basically think “little known Senator with funny name and outsider history” and “everyone says he can’t do it!” and take it as proof that these two very different candidates, at very different times, are identical. Its a failure of anaglogic thinking as much as anything else.
glory b
@Chyron HR: I’ve heard some interviewa with the 170 African American female leaders who are supporting Clinton. They said she reached out to them a while ago, before announcing, no cameras, etc. She listened and incorporated their ideas into hers. Others said this as well.
I can’t figure out where this notion of her as lazy and entitled came from. She seems to me to be a grind, a wonk and a worker. She doesn’t have Bill’s flash, so she substitutes with work.
And just who are these laying waste potential candidates? Name three.
Please.
glory b
@aimai: Well, the black guy did it, how hard can it be?
(ducks and runs away)
Corner Stone
@Loviatar: Hope and Change encompasses an infinite amount of possibilities, from incremental change to inevitable change to radical change. I think the ACA, same sex marriage and commutation of non-violent offenders are all somewhere on that spectrum. A revolution, by definition IMO, means an upending of societal, political and economic norms. There is nothing incremental or inevitable about a revolution, only radical.
If a black man named BHO had said he thinks a revolution is in order this election season he’d be in fucking GITMO.
And honestly, with the world seemingly burning down around us in 2008, Hope and Change was the extreme outer edge of a message platform that would be possible to be vague about and float out there. There is no space for a revolution with people of color, people with a mortgage, etc. As Kay has articulated time and again, you say opportunity (revolution) to those people and they pat their wallet and start walking backwards away from you. Because they know instinctively they are going to get fucked.
Corner Stone
@glory b:
Name one. Can’t. But it’s obvious, somehow.
Corner Stone
@Loviatar:
I acknowledge that I was guilty at times of playing up Obama’s Cult of Personality in 2008. I still think there was a significant element of that among his supporters at that time. But the candidate himself stated from day one that he was the best person for the job because he would reach across the aisle. He would outline the fundamental decency and logic of his plans and that would get people who believed in their country to consider assisting him.
Now, I thought then and I continue to think that was utter nonsense. My viewpoint was proven correct over time but Obama did and said what he did for reasons that I honestly believe he felt were true. I have disagreed mightily with PBO on a number of issues. But Obama and Sanders as candidates are worlds apart. And this is also like screwing HRC for bills WJC passed in the ’90s. Not completely transferable and not our world at the moment. Sanders is running in a world where Obama is largely viewed as a positive force in the Democratic party. He can’t run a revolution campaign against that and expect to get the maths to work.
edited a little
Marc
@What Have the Romans Ever Done for Us?: It’s almost as if young people, always, are more likely to skip lower profile races, regardless of who they support. Which is, overwhelmingly, Sanders in this go around.
Same election, no Sanders, and you’d get exactly the same result. Failure to control for demographics is the difference between science and an agenda.
Brachiator
@aimai:
Some of the data seem to indicate that the independent voters were there, but switched to Romney.
Brachiator
@Linnaeus:
I am not a professional statistician, but I can fake it like a sumbitch. But what I know from all kinds of data analysis is that the polls people talk about now may give some indication of current voter sentiment, but they are of little predictive value when it comes to measuring voter intent in the future. The polling data here is meant to be a snapshot, not a prediction.
What people say they will do in a poll may not be the same as what happens when it is November and they have to actually make a decision. You have to take the poll data with a huge grain of salt.
cokane
Good post Richard, people need to calm down over this Dem primary. Both candidates are flawed, it’s easy to see. But both are substantially better than anything the R side has offered in… decades, at least. And both are frankly better than a fair number of Dem nominees in recent memory as well — Edwards, Kerry, Gore and even Bill (minus his campaigning acumen) imo.
Just Some Fuckhead
@cokane: That’s exactly how I feel, but I think in the context of party politics and ability to govern, Hillary is less flawed. If Sanders had launched a third party bid, I’d have more respect for him. The notion that we are going to award the nomination to someone who has never done a single thing for the Democratic party he wants to head is ludicrous.
Even so, the nonstop smears on Sanders that he’s a closet racist or hates women, and the attempt to smear all Sanders supporters by selectively choosing some internet asshats is just foolish Manichaeism and really makes you question the mental capacity of folks who will on the one hand blindly savage Sanders and his supporters and then on the other hand lament he’d better fall in line and endorse Clinton because we’re doomed without his voters.
J R in WV
@rikyrah:
That age was 21 for me… I was mobile in the USN at the time of my 21st birthday, and my vote would have made no difference anyway – Nixon landslide. Once I was a civilian, I have voted in every election since I got home to WV, except for a bond levy that has passed every (how ever many) years since forever, which passed without me. Embarrassing to admit, but there it is, not a perfect record. But batting .998 or so.
I remember, will never forget, ever, the Saturday Night Massacre, when Nixon decided to fire the special prosecutor investigating the Watergate break-in, and all the other illegal “plumbing” jobs Nixon’s minions did on his behalf. We were at a party, and heard on the radio news about the first move in that long night saga.
So Mrs J and I made our excuses, and went to the mostly closed newspaper office, where we both worked, and went to the Teletype room, where slow noisy mechanical printers supplied current news to newspapers and radio stations all across the nation – world, really. When an urgent story was breaking, the Teletype operators sending stories could ring bells, 4 rings for important news, 5 rings for “flash” breaking news, and 10 bells for events like JFK’s murder.
That night, with all the lights off in the newsrooms, we walked from machine to machine as bells rang into the wee hours, Nixon was taking a pounding as first the Attorney General resigned, rather than fire the special prosecutor, followed by his Deputy A G. Finally, the top guy was the Solicitor General, a guy named Bork, who was the first administrator of the Justice Department willing to fire a Special Prosecutor.
Later on Bork was appointed to the Supreme Court (probably as a payoff for his willingness to do the bidding of Nixon) but after lengthy hearings, Mr. Bork did NOT receive approval from the Senate. He did have the customary meetings, hearings, and a vote by the full Senate.
But listening to those pounding Teletype machines typing out bulletins from Washington DC in the darkened newspaper office, bells ringing as we had never heard before. It was quite a night, and we thought that Nixon was doomed from that point on.
I’m sorry he didn’t hang on for impeachment, though.
PatrickG
@rikyrah:
Will you vote for Hillary Clinton if she’s the Democratic nominee?
BubbaDave
@Loviatar:
Going into the 2008 election the Dems had, and looked likely to hold, a majority in both the House and the Senate; we were electing a President who would be able to work with Congress to implement change though legislation.
Going into the 2016 election the Dems have a majority in neither house of Congress; we are electing a President who will be able to implement change solely through executive orders and promulgating regulations through various agencies.
If the situation were the same as in ’08 I’d be more willing to give Bernie a shot; his light-on-details policy approach would be compensated for by the involvement of Democrats in the House and Senate. In the current situation, I want a President who’s detail-oriented and understands issues down to the nuts and bolts, because good intentions don’t mean much without good execution.
So that’s how this ’08 Obot became a ’16 Hilbot. (Although at the beginning of the race I was only 60/40 Hillary/Sanders; today I’m 90/10 or so.)
Elie
Late to the thread (again). Of some comfort at least to me, both Sanders and Clinton seemed to “walk it back” a bit yesterday. Clinton said that Bernie was better than any Republican and Bernie said he would support whoever won the Democratic nomination. That is good enough for me for now, anyway.