Here’s centrist-curious Matt Yglesias, apparently hoping to get “typical liberals” to puke up their locally-sourced, gluten-free, vegan granola into their hemp totebags:
[The argument that Trump is too dangerous to be President] is the best argument to use if Clinton wants to persuade right-of-center voters to cross the aisle and vote for her, stay home, or take a look at Gary Johnson and the Libertarian Party.But it’s not an argument that’s going to warm the hearts of liberals. Pursuing the argument that Trump is simply too risky to serve as president requires Clinton to try to denude the campaign of as much ideological content as possible. Any talk from her side about the big issues and ideas in politics necessarily reminds people that for any given set of big issues and ideas, not everyone is going to agree. By contrast, pretty much anyone can be open to the basic idea that Trump is a loose cannon who doesn’t know much about foreign policy.
Some progressives fear that this kind of campaign means Clinton won’t build a mandate for progressive policy if she wins the election.
Some progressives? Citation needed, motherfucker.
You know what will give this progressive a whole lot of joy? The Democratic-controlled Congress that will come from the 70-30 landslide that Yglesias imagines in that piece. I can’t think of too many of us who would have a sad because Clinton won by pointing out the obvious truth that the “serious” Republican party nominated an unstable, petty narcissist who might be capable of starting World War III over a minor insult.
The thing that makes me wonder about the Vox boys is why they try so fucking hard to run away from what is apparently the awful truth: despite their feeble protestations to the contrary, the rest of the world calls them liberals. Citation provided.
Bob2
I remember the time Yglesias got mugged on his way home from McArdle and Suderman’s house.
Reggie Mantle
Jesus, are you this much in denial?
Here’s a hint: you can find a few million of them among the people you and your fellow Lite Republicans despise and call “BernieBros.”
Mr. Mack
Centrist-curious. Ha.
I know I for one am hoping for a landslide Ca. primary vote to put Sanders to bed…forever, then a swing state blitz from now till November. Clintons’ surrogates can do some heavy lifting attacking the empty headed Trump. If I have a concern, it’s that the Repubs panic and find a way to nominate someone else who may not provide as much low hanging fruit.
Patricia Kayden
I don’t really understand Matt’s point. Trump is dangerous and that’s a powerful argument why no one should vote for him, regardless of political affiliation.
As far as I know Libertarians are just Republicans who are okay with smoking pot. I wouldn’t trust Supreme Court nominations in their hands.
Bob2
Matt is one of those people that’s been so browbeaten by conservatives that he thinks fighting back is going to look bad for liberals.
Mr. Mack
Reggie, I can only speak for myself, but it’s not the progressive mandate I don’t like…it’s Sanders. I was rooting for him to offer an aggressive lefty msg through-out the primary, but it devolved into this insane vanity exercise that now threatens a unified Dem party.
A Ghost To Most
@Reggie Mantle:
Apparently you are.
Marc
He also happens to be correct that liberals need different persuasion tactics than typical Republican-leaning voters do. Why is that controversial?
BillinGlendaleCA
Just remember folks don’t leave kibble out for the trolls, they only come back for more and they scare the children.
Reggie Mantle
@A Ghost To Most:
The type of response beloved for years by wingnuts: various iterations of “Nuh-uh, YOU are!”
It really is getting harder and harder to distinguish this place from a wingnut blog.
geg6
@Reggie Mantle:
You are a Republican troll and no one gives a shit what you’re spewing. Go away, GOPer.
Reggie Mantle
@BillinGlendaleCA:
Like I said, you people can’t help it. Lese majeste must be punished as treason.
Reggie Mantle
@geg6:
Apparently, enough people care enough to foam at the mouth in rage whenever the adoration of the Dear Leader is questioned.
Things to do now, but I’ll be back.
Betty Cracker
@Marc: The argument is dumb because it assumes mutual exclusivity. “Trump is too risky to elect” is an argument that should resonate with any sentient voter, but it’s not the only argument Clinton is now or ever will make.
Chyron HR
@Reggie Mantle:
OzarkHillbilly
@BillinGlendaleCA: Delusions of grandeur mixed with a persecution complex.
Patricia Kayden
@Betty Cracker: Exactly. Why wouldn’t Liberals/Progressives be moved by the fact that Trump as President would be disastrous for this country and the rest of the world? That argument should appeal to all sides of the aisle.
Marc
@Betty Cracker: I remember when Democrats thought that this argument would be enough to defeat Reagan. It wasn’t. You also need a positive case for your candidate.
Chyron HR
@Marc:
And yet we get blamed for Bernie “SHE HAS SPEAKING FEES! SPEAKING FEES! ELECT ME BECAUSE OF HER SPEAKING FEEEEEEEEEEEEES!” Sanders losing the primary election. Go figure.
Marc
@Chyron HR: Get over your Sanders hatred. Seriously, it’s unhealthy and completely not the point here.
A Ghost To Most
@Reggie Mantle:
The butthurt is strong is this one.
Patricia Kayden
@Marc: Reagan won because the demographics were different back then. I don’t see Trump getting a significant percentage of the minority vote and even with the majority of White voters, he most likely will not win in key states. Trump has probably pissed off enough Republican women, that he’ll have a huge gender gap as well.
Amir Khalid
I don’t understand why Yglesias is worried about Hillary using an anti-Donald argument (that he’s too dangerous to have in office) that appeals to centre/right voters but not so much to liberals. Yes, it’s an ideology-free argument; but it’s true, and she’s under no obligation whatsoever to make the rest of her campaign ideology-free for the sake of … um, what, exactly?
Nor is using this ideology-free argument going to upset liberals. A liberal is most likely going to vote for her anyway. Not everything is, or needs to be, about liberal ideology. And for the liberal who still needs persuading, there are plenty of other sound arguments that she can make.
Betty Cracker
@Marc: Well, yeah, but contra Yglesias, “Trump is too risky” doesn’t constitute the whole of Clinton’s argument. If you think it does, you may want to review the transcript of yesterday’s speech, take a look at the FP section of Clinton’s website and listen to what she says in future speeches about her vision for American conduct abroad. Agree with it or not, there’s a helluva lot more to it than “not-Trump.” That’s why Yglesias’ argument is bogus.
Thor Heyerdahl
@Reggie Mantle:
IMAX projection…today at the pancake house!
MikefromArlington
FFS the cnvention will be a love romance and everyone will be focused like a laser to keep trump out of office except journalists that don’t want to be seen as taking sides to keep thier career options open.
You can take that to the bank.
p.a.
Matt reminds me of the Onion headline (paraphrase) ‘ACLU Defends Nazi Right to Burn Down ACLU HQ’.
If we attack them we’ll make them worse.
If we defend ourselves we’ll make them worse.
If we exist we’ll make them worse.
Matt’s solution, therefore, is…
?
comity!
gvg
@Marc: Regan wasn’t as nuts as Trump. I can’t believe I am almost defending Regan…Look Regan had actually governed and compromised when nessesary too. So had a lot of the people on his team. Trump hasn’t ever served in elected office and the idea is laughable too. His business record isn’t that great either in spite of the fact he is too served by yes men to even know that. Of course the real scarey part is that enough voters LIKE Trump, meaning he is a symptom. Regan talked so scarey I did expect a possible nuclear war and he wasn’t as directly bad as I feared, though quite bad. Trump though…..he really might start a war of a minor insult.
Yeah it might not be enough of an argument alone. So? You can’t put the whole encyclopedia in one speech. Clinton will say and do other things and already has before this.
Trump near the nuclear button actually is enough to persuade me and many I know so naturally I and other like minded people will fasten on this point. I’d be pretty worried if she hadn’t made this point actually. I think it’s required or she would look less capable herself. Other worriers like me will repeat this point alot though. Can’t help it. It’s not just persuading others. It’s what worries us.
dmsilev
@BillinGlendaleCA: Have we considered a Trap/Neuter/Release plan?
yellowdog
@Marc: One speech cannot do everything. There is no indication that Clinton is a one-trick-pony. This speech was a shot across the bow to engage in battle. There will be much more shooting in the next several months. And to extend the naval battle metaphor, she has a flotilla behind her (Obama, Biden, Warren, etc.) to carry some of the weight on both offense and defense.
Dan
@Betty Cracker:
This is a common tic when people armchair quarterback an election and it drives me nuts. People will criticize an individual line, tweet, or speech – which is fine! But then they’ll assume that the Thing They Don’t Like will represent the entirety of the candidate’s campaign strategy. Which: no. Modern campaigns are multi-pronged beasts, particularly presidential campaigns.
Like so much other online behavior that drives me bonkers, it says much more about the commenter than about what they’re commenting on.
Bart
Going off-topic: cats on a ship: http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/2/11842490/russian-cruise-cat-sailors
amk
@Marc: your concern duly noted.
Patricia Kayden
@efgoldman: The Iran hostage crisis also hurt President Carter, if I recall correctly. You’re right that in many ways, Reagan is not comparable to Trump. For one, Reagan was a Governor. Trump has zero political experience.
gene108
@Marc:
This is not 1980 and Trump is not Reagan.
Reagan was a two term governor of CA. He unsuccessfully ran for President in 1968 and 1976. He spent decades working for Movement Conservatism.
Trump does not have that level of a political record. He has his statements, which are all over the place and are all that we have to evaluate him on.
The Thin Black Duke
The hard truth is, Matt Yglesias is the manifestation of White Male Privilege and in the world Matt lives in, he wouldn’t experience the brutal consequences of a President Trump. Not immediately, anyway. Still, that’s why he has the luxury to indulge in these ridiculous theories. The rest of us wouldn’t be so lucky, however. No thanks, Matt. I’m voting for Hillary Clinton to save my life, and if he think I’m being melodramatic, that’s because Mr. Yglesias doesn’t live in my world.
geg6
@Chyron HR:
You notice he doesn’t deny he’s a Republican troll. No doubt in my mind that’s what he is.
dr. bloor
@Patricia Kayden:
We’ll let you know the first time he publishes a piece that actually has one.
srv
Liberals waving Mexican flags, attacking Trump supporters and burning American flags will no doubt win a majority.
Roger Moore
Concern troll is concerned. Unfortunately, we have to run the best campaign we can against the actual Republican nominee, not against some hypothetical thoughtful conservative. Since the actual nominee is a loose cannon, we run against the thought of making a loose cannon president. That’s how real campaigns work.
Aaron Morrow
Other progressives assume that this kind of campaign means Clinton can’t start building a mandate for centrist policy during the general election if she runs an issue-free campaign.
For example, this is very good news for foreign policy now that Clinton is agreeing with Obama that “Don’t do stupid stuff” is an organizing principle.
rikyrah
Trump is dangerous. Too many people, including some purity ponies on the left don’t take Trump at his word. They pretend that he doesn’t mean what he has said about Mexicans, Muslims, attacking a Federal judge. They don’t connect the dots to what it would mean to have a President who would actually SIGN a Paul Ryan budget. They seem to have gone blind to the MILLIONS of Americans who would be harmed by a Donald Trump filling that seat on the Supreme Court. Object One-keep a DEMOCRAT in the WH. Object Two: Flip the Senate. However we get there…just make it happen! !!
Reggie Mantle
@geg6:
Actually, I have. Explicitly.
And Chyron, aren’t you the one who got caught lying when you claimed I said I was never going to vote for Hillary?
So now we’ve taken on another of the wingnut strategies: bald faced lying about what people have previously said. The transformation of the BJ’ers into Republicans continues.
LAC
@The Thin Black Duke: Exactly! I do not have the luxury of bullshitting myself into “things could be worse”. With this asshole the head of that party, the two paths this county could take is starkly laid out.
Benw
What’s this about Hillary campaigning in denude?
Good thinking, Matt Y, Hillary should totally tack to the center for those elusive center-right voters in this election. What a CLEVER strategy you’ve invented!
NobodySpecial
Yglesias is too dumb to know that raising fears about nukes is not an argument tailored for his generation. It’s one tailored to depress turnout in Trump’s demographic, and it’s damned effective.
But then again, this is one of the crew that brought us McMegan and her Himalayan Pink Salt. Doesn’t really qualify them as liberal in my book.
Chyron HR
@Reggie Mantle:
Next time you flounce out in a huff, how about staying gone for more than 45 minutes? Thanks.
Gin & Tonic
@Reggie Mantle:
Like your bald-faced lying about commenters here supporting the Iraq war. Cite or GTFO.
Roger Moore
@efgoldman:
Just get the damn pie filter and use it to ignore the trolls. It will do the signal to noise around here a world of good.
Reggie Mantle
@Chyron HR:
So you’re not going to address the fact that you lied about what I’ve posted?
Reggie Mantle
@Gin & Tonic:
Asked and answered. Another Rethuglican trick: demanding answers to questions already addressed.
sherparick
@efgoldman: Also, Reagan had perfected the “dog whistle” as regard race and ethnic bigotry. Famously, Reagan started his 1980 election campaign after the Republican Convention with a speech near Philadelphia, Mississippi, the place where the KKK and local law enforcement killed Cheney, Schwerner, and Goodman in 1964, by making a speech extolling “States Rights.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan's_Neshoba_County_Fair_%22states'_rights%22_speech Reagan would have found Trump far to much “in your face.”
geg6
@Reggie Mantle:
You are a liar. You are a GOP troll and you give it away in almost every comment. Not to mention how you showed up out of the blue, try to take over every comment thread and spend all day trying to depress enthusiasm for the Democratic candidate. Sad that it just increases our enthusiasm, isn’t it?
Thor Heyerdahl
@Reggie Mantle: Must be a Republican. Reading comprehension is not one of the troll’s strong suits.
amk
Is cole getting paid by tbogg units per thread? If yes, he should then acknowledge the pivotal role of trolls here.
Loviatar
@rikyrah:
A suggestion, in the future just post a link to Republican Legislation that Donald Trump would sign as president. Or a link to lower court decisions that would be impacted by Donald Trump’s Supreme Court appointees. Some people just can’t make the connection until they see an actual piece of legislation or court decision that would be enacted if Donald Trump was president.
Keep it on hand and just post it in every response to the Sanders’ supporters. Hammer home the point of this is what you’re risking.
—–
I’d like to see on the Front Page a list of the Republican Legislation and Supreme Court decisions that would be implemented by a Donald Trump presidency. Let everyone know what they’re risking if they don’t get out and vote for Hilary Clinton.
jonas
Clinton’s speech wasn’t aimed at potential Trump voters — they *like* the fact that Donald is an unhinged, belligerent lunatic, and pointing that out isn’t going to sway them. Clinton was talking to 1. California primary voters who needed to be reminded who in this race really has the right stuff to be president, and 2. to big Democratic donors who may have been getting nervous about HRC’s ability to really hit back hard against Trump. Were I some progressive billionaire, I would feel pretty good about breaking out my checkbook after seeing that speech.
Ramping Up
@sherparick:
Still flogging that myth?
To summarize:
1) he started his campaign with a televised announcement from NYC in late 1979
2) The speech wasn’t on Philadelphia, but seven miles away at the Neshoba County Fair
3) It was a well known, popular event where politicians speak (Mike Dukakis would speak there in 1988) not some crypto Klan event. He got the idea from reading National Geographic.
4) Mississippi was a swing state in 1980
5) “States Rights” wasn’t even an applause line
6) Reagan followed it up with a week long appeal to AA voters, giving a speech at the National Urban League and the South Bronx, just to name a few events
So give it up. Stop repeating easily debunked lies.
Gin & Tonic
@Reggie Mantle: No, not answered.
geg6
Back on topic, I tend to see Matty Y as the left version of Bill Kristol. Ridiculously privileged, hilariously confident in his “superior intellect” and always wrong. If he thinks this is a bad strategy for Hilz, obviously it’s exactly what she needs to do.
Reggie Mantle
@geg6:
Yes, how dare an actual Democrat (who’s been one since the Carter years, thank you) challenge The Republican Lite direction this blog and the party have taken! How dare he “depress” enthusiasm for the Dear Leader?
Pheh. If anyone’s a Republican it’s you neo-wingnuts. Sad thing is you don’t even know it.
Tom Levenson
I did not realize that Matt the Y had voted for Romney for governor. He’s dead(er) to me for that: Romney ran against a competent, solid MA Demorcratic secretary of state who happened to be female. There were plenty of reasons the election turned out the way it did, but a significant one was the way a lot of comfortable types thought the tall, square-jawed male guy “looked” like a governor, and his opponent did not.
TL:DR A vote for Romney in his one victorious election makes you a wanker.
Tom Levenson
@Reggie Mantle: Only if you pay no attention to what’s actually written here.
Wapiti
@Mr. Mack: I think yesterday’s speech did some of the work to prevent a late nomination of a new Republican candidate as well. The Republicans who ran this year pretty much caved when attacked by Trump. I think they’re craven enough that none of those will jump into the ring with Secretary Clinton after that broadside against Trump. The mere fact that they’ve already kissed Trump’s ring is an attack point in itself.
different-church-lady
@Reggie Mantle: That was really good fellas, but you know… I coulda used more cowbell on that last comment.
Paul in KY
@Patricia Kayden: I guess he’s talking about dead-enders like Reggie (if he really is some kind of far left progressive). They are butthurt about Bernie getting waxed & will require some stroking to salve their fee fees.
Chris
@Tom Levenson:
FTFY.
liberal
Matt got it in one.
HRC’s campaign is starting to resemble Kerry’s campaign, or at least this rendition of it.
Just Some Fuckhead, Clinton Supporter
How terribly convenient.
How terribly delusional.
Bobby Thomson
They actually aren’t that liberal. Klein is a techno wonk and Yglesias is a union busting, Rand curious troll.
Paul in KY
@efgoldman: Once the hostage rescue failed, Pres. Carter was toast.
El Caganer
“Denude the campaign?” That fat guy tried it at the Libertarian convention; how’d that work out for him?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
You’ve been posting here, at least under the Archie comics name, for… two weeks?
Reggie Mantle
@liberal:
Exactly.
“You HAVE to vote for Kerry!”
“Why?”
“B–b–because BUSH!”
Didn’t work for Kerry. “I’m not the other guy” didn’t work for Romney, either.
scav
Assertions of long-term “actual Democratic” status are cheap and easy, especially when the behavioral tics suggest otherwise.
ETA: Oh no, not another claim of long-term lurkerdom as the sole basis for superiority of argument! Is this one wearing a a uniform too?!
amk
Things that matter. Unlike the stupid trolls.
UE at 4.7%. The lowest in da kenyan usurper presidency.
liberal
@Roger Moore:
Yes and no. Attacking Trump as beyond the pale is great strategy. But a campaign cannot be entirely negative.
The little in Hillary’s speech (which was good on attacking Trump) that put forth policy was vague at best, and neocon-curious at worst.
Reggie Mantle
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Long time lurker. You’ve heard of that, right?
liberal
@amk: Yes, the economy has slowly improved, but are you really such a low-information voter that you don’t understand that the headline UE rate is pretty much meaningless since it doesn’t count discouraged workers who have dropped out of the labor force?
Ramping Up
@amk:
Lowest number of jobs created in seven years and the real rate is an order of magnitude higher. Why are people voting for Bernie and Trump, why do 60%+ feel we are on the wrong track as a nation of unemployment is that low?
Just Some Fuckhead, Clinton Supporter
@liberal: Or the number of part timers who would like full time employment so they can pay all their bills and keep their house and stuff.
different-church-lady
@Reggie Mantle:
Especially with the benefit of retrospect, I have no idea how anyone could find that logic assailable.
liberal
@Reggie Mantle: I think a more accurate description than Republican-lite is “let them eat identity politics and neoliberalism.”
amk
@liberal: yeah, heard that rethug trope before, hence your ‘view’ consigned to the same bs pile.
liberal
@different-church-lady: It’s not the logic that’s a problem. It’s that it’s not effective campaigning.
Hillary pivoting to the right is both wrong (speaking normatively) and bad tactics (speaking descriptively).
different-church-lady
@Ramping Up:
Because cynical pessimism is now the coin of the realm.
liberal
@amk: Huh. I see you’ve joined Karl Rove in the coalition against reality. I thought Democrats were the reality-based community?
Chyron HR
@Reggie Mantle:
Isn’t that exactly the argument Sanders is using to demand that he be given the nomination in spite of the primary results?
Oh, sorry, it’s DIFFERENT when the Great One does it! Somehow I keep forgetting! Silly me.
amk
@Ramping Up: donald dreck got what? around 30% of rethug votes? what are you blathering about?
different-church-lady
@liberal: You just said noun and pivoting to the right and speaking normatively like you playing Mad Libs.
liberal
@different-church-lady: Putting aside whether Bernie/Trump are the solution, it’s not cynical pessimism, but rather that wages have been, by and large, stagnant since about 1973 or so. But to know that you’d have to belong to the reality-based community, not the “clap louder!” community.
amk
@liberal: meh.
Immanentize
@Ramping Up: I see the Saint Reagan re-mytho-project of whitewashing the race whistles continues and is still well funded:
Bob Hebert explains in 2007:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/13/opinion/13herbert.html?_r=0
I really must get to work…. Betty, I still owe you a recipe (so sorry).
different-church-lady
@liberal: People have been voting for Trump since 1973? No wonder his campaign is broke.
Tom Levenson
@Ramping Up: “an order of magnitude higher” = real unemployment at 47%…or rather, displays a rather spectacular degree of innumeracy in anyone who writes such bilge.
liberal
@Just Some Fuckhead, Clinton Supporter: I don’t understand something, JSF. How can you say things like that and still be a “Clinton Supporter”? Is it because you can hold more than one thought in your head at once? WOW! That puts you ahead of, what, 96% of the B.J. commentariat.
The Thin Black Duke
“Reggie Mantle” is a void, a waste of pixels. As Edward Albee put it, “If he existed, I’d despise him”. However, Reggie has one job to do, and that’s to derail the conversation and make it all about him and I wish people would stop enabling him. It’s boring.
magurakurin
@The Thin Black Duke: Matt Yglesias lost me back when he had his blog and he spent a couple weeks defending his idea that he wasn’t really rich at all because in order to get the 2 million dollars that his New York apartment was worth he would have to sell it and then would be homeless. So, I don’t give a flying fuck what Matt thinks Hilary Clinton should or shouldn’t be doing. If all these armchair generals were such fucking geniuses why aren’t they the President?
Oh and fuck Bernie Sanders. Just wanna say that at least once each and every day. I know that God makes a BernBro vote for Trump every time I say it, but I can’t help myself. I’m a bad person.
different-church-lady
@liberal:
That’s an order of magnitude!
Tom Levenson
@liberal: In what sense is HRC pivoting to the right? This is one speech on one topic. Tell me she’s pivoting to the right when she opposes the Obama call for expanded social security, for example — or comes out against the Paris accord, or what ehave you.
Paul in KY
@Bart: Thanks for link. Very cute cats. Liked the comment that the water carried on the ship had to be purchased extra. I guess you do have all that sweet river water to drink.
different-church-lady
@The Thin Black Duke: Certainly we should agree to stop talking about Reggie Mantle, or mentioning Reggie Mantle, or conversing with Reggie Mantle. All references to Reggie Mantle ought to cease immediately. Don’t you agree? Please reply to signal your agreement about Reggie Mantle.
Redshift
Ah, the classic pundit myopia. A campaign can only be “about” one thing. This speech shows that “the strategy” is about attacking Trump in a certain way, therefore that’s all we’ll hear from now to November, and Clinton will never again mention any of the positive policy proposals she’s made for fear they might sound “ideological.”
And he gets paid for this?
catclub
@Patricia Kayden:
I am white. That is still depressing. Thank goodness for the rest of the US voters.
Ramping Up
@Immanentize:
So is Michael Dukakis also a white supremacists? Are politicians no longer allowed to give speeches within a certain radius of Philadelphia, MS?
Zero substantive evidence in Hebert’s columns. Just pleating on heartstrings and waving the bloody shirt.
Reagan went there because he read about the Fair in National Geographic and it was an easy way to meet voters in what was then a swing state.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@liberal: yeah, defending the Iran deal reeked of neo con. I’m sure McCain and Graham jumped up and cheered when they heard that part. The constant insistence on international cooperation, calling for a diplomatic solution to the Syrian civil war? straight out of Rumsfeld. She might as well have started chortling about old Europe and the chocolate-making countries.
magurakurin
@Reggie Mantle:
you’re not even trying now. If you’re gonna come here to troll the least you can do is have the courtesy to not phone it in.
Just Some Fuckhead, Clinton Supporter
@liberal: I’ve always been a bit of a thought leader.
Matt McIrvin
@gvg:
In Reagan’s first term, I think the danger of his starting a nuclear war was very real. We had things like Al Haig becoming Secretary of State and publicly talking about the crazy “nuclear warning shot” idea, then the Able Archer ’83 exercise and the accidental nuclear war that was narrowly averted while it was in progress.
Weirdly, watching “The Day After” on TV seems to have actually deeply affected Reagan, which I guess shows the level his thought processes were operating on. In his second term he’d mellowed considerably and was receptive to Gorbachev’s disarmament overtures–which is probably the single best thing I can say about him.
Redshift
@liberal:
Yeah, pity she’s only ever given one speech, so that’s all we have to judge her policy positions.
chopper
@liberal:
man, it’s too bad that was the only speech Hilz is gonna give this campaign.
Yutsano
*sprays Troll-B-Gone*
@Reggie Mantle: @liberal: Bernie fought. Bernie lost. Nothing is going to change that now. Believe everything you want about the commentariat here. Nothing changes those fundamental facts.
Emma
It took me a while to figure it out (coffee uber anything, especially thought in the morning). Hillary had a real big win yesterday, so all the Hillary haters and Republican trolls are out to make sure doubt and division is sown.
Hillary turned right= for those who fear another Middle East war/intervention.
The leader must be worshipped= for those naturally predisposed to dislike blind loyalty.
You’re all turning into neocons= for those who despise neocons.
Divide and conquer. This is what this is.
Matt McIrvin
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I’m sympathetic to many of the left criticisms of Hillary Clinton’s foreign-policy history, but if there’s one thing that can make me dismiss a critic as not serious, it’s claiming that Clinton is eager to start a war with Iran. How one gets that out of anything she’s said on the subject, or anything she did at State, is beyond me.
Alain the site fixer
@Reggie Mantle: we won’t hold it against you should you need a few more days or weeks to get things done. We’ll be fine without your boring thoughts – great thinker or propagandist you are not!
The Thin Black Duke
@Yutsano: Unfortunately, it ain’t just right-wing nutjobs who are victimized by epistemic closure.
Matt McIrvin
…The other thing is for someone who is generally against US intervention abroad to start complaining that Hillary “supported the Honduras coup”, when her support basically amounted to arguing against US intervention (something that most people on the ground in Honduras would probably agree would have been a bad idea). To listen to them you’d think it was like the CIA plotting against Mossadegh.
Betty Cracker
@Yutsano: Maybe it’ll sink in Tuesday when Clinton officially clinches the nomination.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Matt McIrvin: near as I can tell, that thing she said in ’08 about Iran being obliterated if they attacked Israel means the deepest desire of her cold, dark heart is to obliterate Iran.
and FTR, I haven’t forgotten her vote on Iraq, and I do worry about an excess of faith in the effectiveness of military force, but words mean things, even “neocon”.
ETA:
it helps to remember that these are people who seem to think she caused a forty year trend in stagnant wages and decreasing blue-collar jobs on the fact that she gave a speech to an investment bank in 2013
Redshift
@catclub:
Seriously! WTF, white people?
Patricia Kayden
@magurakurin: $2,000,000 for an apartment? Wow. That’s rich.
@different-church-lady: Reminds me of that scene from THE TEN COMMANDMENTS when Sethi solemnly decrees that no one is to speak the name of Moses henceforth.
magurakurin
@Betty Cracker: The landscape is going to change dramatically that is for sure.
The Thin Black Duke
@Emma: Exactly. The usual suspects are working overtime using smoke and mirrors while cranking the noise up to 11 trying to make us disbelieve what we heard. It was a damned good speech and they’re terrified.
Alain the site fixer
@srv: or plants pretending to be liberals. Or anarchists. I suspect Trump has agents provoking anti-Trump fever in such situations, it reifies him and his message of being the savior white folks need.
amk
@Emma: Yup. Pity the blog fp’ers either don’t see it or see it and don’t care.
different-church-lady
@Yutsano: It was never about Bernie winning. It will always be about Hillary losing.
Patricia Kayden
@Emma:
She certainly did. I noticed that the news shows I watched this morning, started off with her speech. I hope she keeps up the attack on Trump since he has no way of responding to the substance of her speech. All he can do is shout “She should be in jail” and racially profile the Judge in his University scam trial.
NorthLeft12
Hopefully the Clinton campaign can manage to do more than one thing at a time. For instance, hammer Trump on his obvious failings, AND outline an alternate path forward on important issues that are positive changes that appeal to the more liberal voters.
Why the hell does Yglesias think that her appeal will only be to the “anybody but Trump” crowd?
chopper
@Emma:
that’s pretty much it.
burnspbesq
@Reggie Mantle:
You spout shit like that, and you wonder why your every appearance here is greeted with hostility.
You’re a dick, sir. You are nothing else.
Terry chay
@Reggie Mantle: either the Berniebros were always going to vote for Clinton (most) or they never were (few). Clearly the Clinton team has figured out that there are very few persuadesables there once the primary process played out or they’d have writer a different speech.
And everything from the behavior of the BernieBros indicates that they aren’t persuadeable. For instance, most of there regiments against Clinton are either dishonest or they aren’t a passionate belief. For instance bringing up Bernie’s more liberal stance on the death penalty as the reason to vote against Hilary when further questioning shows the person doesn’t care about it themselves. This shows the belief doesn’t have to do with policy and therefore is not a persuadeable. If Hillary changed on that view, the BernieBro will give a different reason ad infinitum showing the view is entrenched — fixed against for the primary and fixed for or against (but not revealable) for the general. In any case the Democratic Party should not be held hostage in fear of those few like the Republican Party was successfully held by its nativist wing this cycle.
As for the other crowd of liberals. Is Matt Iglesias vote in question (either by not voting or voting for Trump or a third party). The answer is no, obviously.
This is not to say that people like Matt didn’t push Hillary to the left — people like him pretty much funded Bernie’s campaign and NOT the BernieBros (my experience is that you either give your time or your money to a cause but never both because it puts a price on the former to give the latter). That moved Hillary far to the left than she would have otherwise and these people will bank that and move on, just like they did for Obama.
For example, I remember being very happy in 2008 that Obama won, but I expressed some reservations with my brother about the Chicago School monetarism that permeated his economic team, an issue very important to me especially given the market crash. However I took the view I’d take the warts over the alternatives. I sucked it up then and Iglesias has to suck it up now. The disgusting thing is unlike me he’s a faux-liberal who doesn’t have to move much to get to Hillary and the little he does is probably to the LEFT to be honest, but he whines about that little bit like the sky is falling because of his pearl clutching fear of the… militant left? Left-wing hardliners? Give me a break, it’s very clear that the two biggest Bernie or Bust cheerleaders on Balloon Juice are 1) an astroturfer operating out of Putins troll factory and 2) RNC operative. These are not real votes. Heck, there was a hilarious moment yesterday where (2) tried to convince (1) to vote for Jill Stein! :-D
Yes the arc of history bends toward justice, but nobody said it has to move to justice at your timescale.
Fuck Iglesias and his pearl clutching.
nominus
yggy has his liberals confused with the mouth-breathers who can only hold one idea in their heads at a time. Everybody else on the planet understands quite well that there will be multiple messages coming from the campaign, and a different message today doesn’t invalidate what she said yesterday, because life is a little more complicated and you can’t get through it just repeating the same mantra everyday.
rikyrah
@sherparick:
Bring it again. Reagan was born in the Midwest, and was Governor of California. Why da phuq would he go to MISSISSIPPI of all places, and Philadelphia in particular, if not to do dogwhistle politics. No.other. reason.
Racist muthaphucka?
Patricia Kayden
@liberal: Nobody but you believes that Secretary Clinton has pivoted to the right though. You don’t get to speak for other people or to act as if your beliefs are facts. She didn’t pivot to the right in her speech.
@amk: President Obama has done a great job with turning around our economy despite Republican obstructionism. Nothing but applause for a great President! This is why we need President Clinton to build on President Obama’s accomplishments.
chopper
@NorthLeft12:
one of the reasons for her speech yesterday was to aim at the never trump guys on the right. not as much to peel away votes as much as to sow a bit of discontent and slow down trump’s efforts to gather the party around him.
NorthLeft12
@liberal: Are you so ill informed that you would account for the drop in unemployment completely to people giving up, part time jobs, or poorly paid full time jobs?
That takes a bit of work too, not just sitting back and trotting out the usual vapid arguments to “prove” that the economy and jobs situation is far worse than that portrayed by some of this data.
Ramping Up
@rikyrah:
Mississippi was a swing state in 1980. He only narrowly beat Carter there. Read the article.
Weaselone
@liberal:
You do realize that the other versions of unemployment that include discouraged and part-time workers looking for work have also improved, don’t you? U6 has gone from over 17% to below 10%
Amir Khalid
@Patricia Kayden:
Speaking of Judge Curiel, what is the line that Donald must cross to get himself punished for contempt?
rikyrah
@amk:
DAMN that Barack Obama. ….he is ruining the economy ?
rikyrah
@catclub:
Always remember : Willard got 60% of the White vote. ..and it didn’t even matter.
D58826
Dick Polman on Paul Ryan’s surrender.
My favorite line:
http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/national-interest/item/94275-lets-decode-paul-ryans-craven-surrender
SenyorDave
Clinton and Sanders are running for POTUS, not POTUS for liberals/progressives
different-church-lady
@Ramping Up:
And at this rate it might be a swing state in 2016
magurakurin
In order to honor our special guest, paid Republican troll, Mickey Jackson, I just sent Clinton 50 bucks. I don’t want the troll to feel his effort has been wasted. You’ve inspired me. Thanks.
Terry chay
@Marc: since Hillary’s main message is that “America doesn’t need to be made great again because America IS already great.” I hate to see what passes as “positive” in your world. It seems to me the team that needs a positive message this cycle is the Republicans.
If you analyze the speech you see that she referenced Trump’s 1987 adverts to co-opt the city on the hill stuff. The tables have turned. Yes, the Democrats lost the bigot vote to the party of Reagan, but that year they also lost the much larger section of people like the Eisenhower republicans. Hillary is basically pointing to those (probably very few by now, but certainly enough to run up the score) republicans that they have a home in voting for her.
schrodinger's cat
MY and his friend McCardle along with Luke Russert are examples of who your parents are matters as much if not more than your abilities
Betty Cracker
@amk: I choose to err on the side of free speech rather than censor comments merely because they piss me off or I find the commenter divisive and/or non-supportive of my political objectives. Yes, it means putting up with mewling dickheads, but the alternative is Stepford Site. No thanks.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@SenyorDave: a point that can’t be made often enough (or maybe it can, I don’t know): If you think Balloon Juice and Clinton supporters represent the right of the American electorate, even the right of the Democratic Party, you need to get out more.
schrodinger's cat
@Betty Cracker: Back from bird watching? How are your pups? Did they go with you? You should put up a photo of seal doggie soon. We miss her.
Paul in KY
@Matt McIrvin: I was in military then & I was scared.
Emma
@Amir Khalid: Most judges don’t throw contempt around. Civil court contempt, if I understand it correctly, is used mostly when someone fails to comply with a court order. Being an ass about a judge only triggers the judge’s sense of self and his ego. And in this case, I think, Trump picked a really bad target. I’ve heard that Curiel used to tangle with the narcotraficantes. Compared to them, Trump mouthing off is being nibbled to death by ducks.
Paul in KY
@Patricia Kayden: So is it written, so shall it be done.
ruemara
“Identity politics”? The dogwhistle on the left. Fuck you. That’s why Bernie lost. The issues of left-curious white males with Robin Hood ego complexes are party platforms, but the issues of women, POC & LGBTQ are “identity politics” that mess things up. Your progressivism is worthless.
catclub
@rikyrah: How many record setting consecutive months of positive job growth can a nation stand?
sloan
Did Yglesias even watch that speech or notice the way Democrats reacted to it?
“This argument — and this speech in general — is not one that will be especially appealing to them.”
Um, what? Clinton received pretty much universal praise from everyone in the party. Best speech of the year!
You know what doesn’t appeal to me? These “Yeah, but…” think pieces
from people who’ve spent their entire careers talking about politics instead of actually picking a side and fighting back.
When Matt Yglesias spends some time with actual Democrats in a phone bank for 3 hours he might have a clue what they think.
Yellowdog
@Ramping Up: An order of magnitude higher would be 47%. Don’t try to play with the adults.
Thoughtful David
@burnspbesq:
This is what really pisses me off about BernieBros. All of the Sanders supporters I know (save one) have never put in one fucking hour trying to get any liberal or progressive or Democrat elected. They’re not the ones who have been standing at the booth at the county fair in 100 degree 95 percent humidity while the wingnuts yelled at them “communist” or “baby killer” or worse. They’re not the ones out at 5:30 am on a freezing November morning handing out sample ballots. And yet they want to call us “Republican Lite.” Assholes.
Cat48
I don’t care how Hillary wins. I doesn’t matter if she has a mandate bc the GOP will fillibuster. Hillary wins & she picks the JUDGES. Then Dems have the Power to protect what they have,and to add to it. Power is having Judges who won’t overturn the advances we make. GOP has had that for 30 years. Our turn.
Roger Moore
@Bobby Thomson:
I believe the term you’re looking for is “neoliberal shill”. People who want to use the term should look at him, given that he’s the type specimen.
Amir Khalid
@Emma:
I see. So being rude to the judge wouldn’t get Donald in trouble; he’d have to refuse a court order or do something along those lines before the judge smacks him down.
schrodinger's cat
@Roger Moore: Agreed. Bob in Putinland and other Bernies supporters use it as a catchall insult for anyone who doesn’t acknowledge the greatness of St. Bernie.
Emma
@Amir Khalid: Pretty much, I think, though maybe some of the lawyers around here can chime in.
Gin & Tonic
@Amir Khalid: IANAL, but basically yes. It’s called “contempt of court”, not “contempt of judge.” Although the latter doesn’t strike me as optimal legal strategy.
Matt McIrvin
@Terry chay: I know some sincere Bernie-or-Busters. They are sincere, but are generally not habitual Democratic voters; they’re basically divided between Jill Stein 2012 supporters, one or two former Ron Paulites, and some people who usually don’t vote and try to convince others not to vote.
The dynamic I see right now is that most of the people who supported Sanders in the campaign are generally coming around to support Clinton in the general, and when they say so in public, the get a lot of flak for it from the remnant of dead-enders who are doubling down in their rhetoric to compensate.
And there are some in between with a sort of #notallbernfeelers dynamic, who will vote for Clinton, but get extremely personally offended that people keep calling out the deranged Bernie-or-Busters as if they were characteristic of Sanders’ supporters. They’re not, of course, but they’re so loud that they’re able to get a lot of attention, and like the ’08 PUMAs, they generate the dramatic conflict that the media like.
SFAW
@efgoldman:
The conclusion I came to the other day was that he’s not really interested in engaging, he just wants to pick a fight, and then whine about how liberals — uh, excuse me, I mean BJ commenters — are mean to him.
Let’s see, of which presidential candidate does that remind me? Pugnacious, with no rational argument to speak of, big on puking out insults, thin skinned? Thinking ….
Well, whoever that candidate might be, it’s probably a good bet that that’s who Mantle is really supporting.
One wonders if Mantle’s “real” name (so to speak) is “John Baron.”
Cermet
@rikyrah: Agreed; also, Mississippi a swing state in 1980!? LOLOLOLOLOLOL; what utter bullshit.
Roger Moore
@Matt McIrvin:
In his second term, the Alzheimer’s was taking over, so more and more stuff got handled by his reasonably professional subordinates. Of course some of his less professional subordinates went off and did crazy shit like Iran/Contra, so it wasn’t 100% positive.
guachi
Ouch. The May job growth number is really weak. Like worst since September 2010 weak. It also the third straight month of lower job growth numbers.
Obama’s second term was on pace to have stronger job growth than Reagan’s second term and it looks like it won’t reach that now. I hope that the numbers don’t tip negative. Even if they come down from 215k per month average to half that it should be good enough for Clinton to avoid any (factual) negative talk on the economy. But if it turns negative it takes away the ability to say “record number of consecutive months of job growth”, which is what we currently have.
Paul in KY
@Amir Khalid: He could be trying to get the judge to recuse himself (due now to his enmity due to all the nasty things The Donald has said about him).
I guess his lawyers would try to fancy it up, but it takes some chutzpah to try that as a legal strategery,
hueyplong
Reagan going to phila, ms because he read there was a fair there is even funnier than trump’s inevitability due to UNLIMITED CORPORATE CASH.
Loviatar
This is what we’re risking with a Donald Trump presidency; attacks on the EPA, The Clean Water Act, Planned Parenthood, the CFPB, the NLRB, budget busting Defense bills, the building of the Keystone Pipeline and the repeal of Obamacare.
Barack Obama: Vetoed legislation
SJ Res 22 – EPA rule – January 19, 2016
– A resolution that would nullify a rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army to clarify the jurisdictional boundaries of the Clean Water Act.
HR 3762 – ACA repeal – January 8, 2016
– This legislation would cost millions of hard-working middle-class families the security of affordable health coverage they deserve.
– Reliable health care coverage would no longer be a right for everyone: it would return to being a privilege for a few.
– The bill, which proposed defunding Planned Parenthood, “would limit access to health care for men, women, and families across the Nation, and would disproportionately impact low-income individuals” who use the reproductive healthcare organization’s services.
SJ Res 23 – EPA rule – December 19, 2015
– It would overturn carbon pollution standards that are critical to protecting against climate change and ensuring the health and well-being of our Nation.
SJ Res 24 – EPA rule – December 18, 2015
– This resolution would overturn the Clean Power Plan, which is critical to protecting against climate change and ensuring the health and well-being of our Nation.
HR 1735 – NDAA – October 22, 2015
– It proposed increasing defense spending by using “a separate account for wartime operations that is immune to the spending limits.
SJ Res 8 – NLRB rule – March 31, 2015
– It would overturn the National Labor Relations Board’s recently issued ‘representation case procedures’ rule and block modest but overdue reforms to simplify and streamline private sector union elections.
S 1 – Keystone XL Pipeline – February 24, 2015
– United States Congress attempts to circumvent longstanding and proven processes for determining whether or not building and operating a cross-border pipeline serves the national interest. … And because this act of Congress conflicts with established executive branch procedures and cuts short thorough consideration of issues that could bear on our national interest — including our security, safety, and environment — it has earned my veto.
HR 3808 – Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act – October 8, 2010
– It is necessary to have further deliberations about the possible unintended impact of H.R. 3808, on consumer protections, including those for mortgages, before the bill can be finalized.
HJ Res 64 – Continuing Appropriations – December 30, 2009
The enactment of H.R. 3326 (Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, Public Law 111-118), which was signed into law on December 19, 2009, has rendered the enactment of H.J.Res. 64 (Continuing Appropriations, FY 2010) unnecessary.
These are just legislation that President Obama has vetoed, this does not include legislation that has been proposed/discussed but not voted upon because of the threat of veto.
—–
I’ll post another comment with the lower court decisions which would be impacted by a Donald Trump presidency.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
before getting offended, they should reflect on the fact that Sanders insists on using these loud, obnoxious and deranged jackasses as surrogates– Sarandon, West– right up (or down) to his campaign manager. And he and Jane don’t exactly help matters by constantly issuing passive-aggressive warnings/ultimatums about what Clinton has to do
(not directed at you so much as at the Universe, in the hopes it will fall as the gentle rain from heaven on Bernie!’s consciousness, and that of his trolls here)
Cermet
@Ramping Up:Carter was a dyed in the wool southern good-o’l boy so of course Carter did ok there but that in no way makes Mississippi a swing state. Ray-gun winning Mississippi or not mattered not at all to the election outcome. A swing state has to be able to matter to be called as such and size matters a lot. This argument of your’s is stupid. Ray-gun knew dog whistles and used them without any remorse or concern.
Reggie Mantle
@Emma:
Fearing another Middle East War, disliking blind loyalty and despising neocons are actual liberal values. Shame you seem to have abandoned them.
MomSense
Ok, here is what gets me about the idiocy of Bernie or Bust. We went through a similar exercise in 2000 when “progressives” kept saying there was little to no difference between Gore and Bush. Looking back on that campaign after the disastrous 8 years of W’s presidency it is hard to remember that Bush presented himself as a moderate, folksy, a compassionate conservative, someone who would be “humble” in foreign affairs. He promised to bring serious, respectable people in to serve in his administration. Those of us who knew about him were shouting from the rooftops not to believe it, that he would be far more radical than his campaign persona would indicate. Obviously it didn’t work and hundreds of thousands of people died as a result of a pretty tame sounding candidate becoming president. The world economy crashed, dealing with climate change was setback irreparably, we launched two wars, completely fucked up the Israel/Palestine mess even more than I thought likely, and created the hydra of ISIS/ISIL, Syria, Libya, N.Korea, etc. I mean really the man broke the fucking world. Guess what – hundreds of thousands of people did not survive, hundreds of thousands of people did not recover from those eight years.
Now we have Trump who is saying undeniably fascist and racist things. He has talked openly about criminal punishment for women who receive abortive services. He is calling for economic policies that are lunacy and would add tens of trillions to the debt and undo all the progress we have made in reducing our budget deficits. Trump has called publicly for torture and war crimes. Bush tried to hide the torture regime because even those evil bastards knew it was illegal and wrong. They did it anyway of course. Trump has outright called for unpredictable actions in foreign policy somehow thinking a keep em guessing approach from the world’s one superpower will be reassuring to our allies? The guy has been endorsed by Kim Jong-Un and Putin. I can’t even believe his horrifying statements about nuclear weapons weren’t disqualifying but this whole spectacle has frankly shocked the hell out of me.
I guess my point is that Bush at least pretended to be somewhat respectable and within the established parameters of US behavior (far too right IMHO but I lost that argument then). People who foolishly and selfishly believed that we could survive Bush had much more reason to come to that opinion than we have now. Trump is so extreme by comparison and such a terrifying wild card that we can not delude ourselves for a second about how grave the consequences of his election would be. He is an existential threat. I honestly don’t think that I am exaggerating.
Anyone who is flirting with voting for Der Trump, not voting, voting 3rd party is choosing to cause harm. I have people for whom I am responsible and cannot imagine acting so carelessly on their behalf.
Gin & Tonic
@Cermet: Not that far off, actually. Reagan’s winning margin in most of the Confederate states was between 1-2%. Georgia, of course, went big for Carter, but MS and AL were around 1.3% red.
Ramping Up
@Cermet:
So New Hampshire hasn’t been a swing state the last six cycles? It has fewer EVs than MS did in 1980.
Mississippi DID matter in 1976 and remember the ’80 election was close until the last week. Mississippi Was absolutely a swing state.
Ramping Up
@Gin & Tonic:
Thank you, at least one proggie isn’t impervious to historical facts. Carter nearly pulled off winning most of the old Solid South in ’80. Heck Clinton did pretty well in MS in ’92 even.
Reggie Mantle
@different-church-lady:
LOL. Perfect.
Ramping Up
@hueyplong:
So nobody can give a speech within a certain radius of Philadelphia, MS because homida homida homida BLOODY SHIRT!
I wonder what you would say to Mike Dukakis, then, who spoke at the exact same fair in 1988. The progressive mythology about Reagan’s speech is about ten years old.
Reggie Mantle
@Thoughtful David:
I’ve done all of those things or the equivalent (i,e town street fair rather than county one), and in one of the reddest corners of a red state where you’re taking your life in your hands to do so. Don’t put your dedication to liberal values up against mine.
NotMax
@Amir Khalid
Broad brush generalized explanation: Speech outside the courtroom absent an ongoing trial is not grounds for being held in contempt. Speech inside the courtroom or made outside by a participant in the case while a trial is underway can be.
Trump’s ‘argument’ is no different in essence from a KKK official announcing that an African-American judge ought to be automatically disqualified from presiding over a case against him, and just as puerile and devoid of any semblance of merit.
Mike in NC
Two of Reagan’s favorite themes were Welfare Queens driving Cadillacs
and Strapping Young Bucks buying T-Bone Steaks with Food Stamps.
But the troll will continue Ramping Up, Rolling Along, and Jerking Off for our amusement.
Seanly
@Bob2:
All three of them are a bunch of turds, floating around the toilet bowl that is our nation’s supply of idiot pundits. If Yglesias is a liberal or progressive then I’m f’king Santa Claus (read that either way).
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Of course you have. Did your girlfriend Morgan Fairchild go with you?
Matt McIrvin
Sam Wang put up a great post recently about changes in regional voting patterns:
http://election.princeton.edu/2016/06/02/the-realignment-myth/
Basically what he’s doing here is factoring out all nationwide swings in the popular vote, and looking only at state-by-state correlations and how they evolved. What he finds is that there was a gigantic change in 1968, post-Civil Rights Act, when the Southern Strategy first kicked in, and 1976 was also an anomaly in which Carter temporarily got back the South–but all other cycle-to-cycle change has been very gradual, and it’s been getting less dramatic over time as the US hardens into the red state/blue state map we all know.
And, surprisingly, one of the things the analysis indicated was that 1976 to 1980 wasn’t that huge a swing in regional alignment. Carter still got a considerable chunk of the Southern vote; it was just not enough for him to carry most states. The post-CRA shift to the solid Republican south had been temporarily set back, but the gradual process would continue through the 1980s; it just wasn’t obvious until the 1990s when the Republicans weren’t winning everything any more.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Seanly: it was Brian Beutler who got mugged (and shot), and he’s not a turd, even if he is IMHO too nice to some of the guests on his podcast– Bernistas and right-wingers alike.
Emma
@Reggie Mantle: Nice try, kiddo, but complete fail. Keep trying, though. You’ll reach the adult conversation table real soon.
Reggie Mantle
@burnspbesq:
I don’t wonder at all. I know the truth hurts to hear, and I know you True Believers are going to push back against every act of lese majeste, especially knowing as you do in your hearts that your Empress is going to have to deal with major unfavorables down the road and would get smashed like a glass goblet by anyone except Trump. And the way you’re going so far, even Trump has a shot.
Just like I push back against so-called “liberal” hippie punching.
Reggie Mantle
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Nice handwaving away of any inconvenient facts. Very Republican of you.
catclub
Have any Republicans come to Donald Trump’s defense after that speech by Hillary? I have seen no evidence of that. No backing by the rest of the party will hurt him overall.
Chyron HR
@Reggie Mantle:
That’s nice, dear.
chopper
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
hey now. ol’ princess reggie here is more of a democrat than any of us. hence his unflinching need to lower enthusiasm and sow discord over the democratic nominee. cause he’s a solid democrat. it’s science.
you have to realize, real democrats take hostages when their man fee-fees aren’t appropriately validated because their guy lost. screw everybody else, i’m a take your ball and go home, etc etc.
LAC
@Ramping Up: I think you are confusing a state with a lot of swing sets as a swing state. But nice try…
Cacti
@Matt McIrvin:
Watergate was the reason there ever was a President Carter in the first place. He didn’t exactly steamroll accidental President Ford in their 1976 tilt. Reagan came along in 1980 and consolidated what Nixon had put in place 8-years earlier.
But for Nixon’s overt criminality, Republicans would likely have held the White House from 1968 to 1992.
hueyplong
@Ramping Up: Your reference to actually going boody shirt in mississippi is so stupid that it gives me great comfort going forward. I am on the verge of praying that you become a chief trump strategist.
Matt McIrvin
@Matt McIrvin:
Sorry, I should have said 1964. The Southern Strategy was actually inspired by Goldwater’s pattern of regional support.
LAC
@Reggie Mantle: in your case, it would be just be plain punching.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Reggie Mantle: if you live in the reddest corner of a red state, and you’ve been threatened with violence for political volunteer work, and you still think Balloon Juicers are “Republican lite” and snarky comments are “hippie punching”, you’re actually dumber than your comments suggest. But Occam and I are gonna stick with the notion that you’re a self-righteous hashtag “activist” who can’t even figure out how to lie well.
Reggie Mantle
@Chyron HR:
Still lying about what I’ve actually said, I see. Wasn’t it you who claimed I’d said I’d never vote for Hillary and then I showed you were lying by reprinting the post where I said I still might? That was you, wasn’t it? Now, you’re doing the dishonest reframing, straight out of the wingnut playbook.
Reggie Mantle
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
You tell yourself whatever it takes to make you feel better about yourself.
Reggie Mantle
@LAC:
Now we see the violence inherent in the system.
gwangung
@MomSense: Yeah, pretty much this. The difference between Gore and Bush is A LOT smaller than between Clinton and Trump. The behavior of the civil rights DOJ team alone shows you what a disaster Bush was as a president.
Anyone saying there’s no difference is a flat out idiot.
Chyron HR
Just a reminder that when our resident Sanders supporters are here on November 9th throwing a fit over Donald Trump losing the election, they’ll be doing it from the left.
amk
@Betty Cracker: There is a difference between free speech and hate speech blather. Most of us here, including you, take the msm to task for mainstreaming the hate speech. Sounds to me like a double standard.
chopper
@Chyron HR:
“bernie would have won bigger! bluh bluh bloo!
SFAW
@Reggie Mantle:
Still pretending you’re here to have a sincere discussion, I see.
Not that I expect you to admit that your only purpose here is to troll and pick fights, not necessarily in that order. It’s certainly your prerogative to lie to us about your true motive(s), but you shouldn’t lie to yourself.
You can report back to Trump Central, now — just let them know that we’re onto you, and they’ll probably give you a new assignment. A huuuuge assignment. The biggest one ever, because you’re JUST THAT GOOD at emulating your hero, Deadbeat Donnie.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@gwangung: seeing the return of Sarandon to professional left politics (after endorsing and campaigning for John Edwards in ’08), reminds me of Joe Conason’s column from 2000, when he pointed out to her, Michael Moore, Bill Maher, Arianna Huffington and other rich and famous not a dime’s worth of difference types: For them, there actually was no difference, but it could literally be life and death for the people they were pretending to be so concerned about.
and if you really care about the influence of the billionaire class, maybe you should be talking more about the Supreme Court and less about “Wall Street Speeches!”
gwangung
@SFAW: Yeah. Some of us have been working the equity and social justice beats for decades now. Too much to do to play “more progressive than thou;” it’s literally a game that has no use in the real world.
Ramping Up
@Reggie Mantle:
Don’t even bother with them. Patriotic progressives such as yourself were run out of the party long ago by the Clinton-Obama Cartel. Anybody opposed to them are “racists”, a word which has lost all meaning.
SFAW
@Racist Hump:
Wow, you’re getting really good at packing in more lies per sentence than previously thought possible.
You lying, racist, misogynist asshole.
ETA: Oh, and regarding your “Anybody opposed to them are “racists”, a word which has lost all meaning” bullshit? The term “racist” is reserved for entities such as yourself, because you have proved that you are. Which, if you recall, moron, is why you were banned back when Jeb? was the object of your affections.
LAC
@Reggie Mantle: “help! Help! I’m being oppressed”. Trying to ruin a funny movie too, I see.
Just Some Fuckhead, Clinton Supporter
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
That’s pretty much how I view Bourgeois Juice’s predominant comfortable boomer class who are more concerned about Obama not getting enough credit for our middling economic turnaround than the unprecedented number of Americans who have been left behind in that economy.
Reggie Mantle
@Chyron HR:
Found the part where you got caught lying. From June 1st:
So, again, if you think you have such a strong case, why do you feel like you have to lie in support of it?
LAC
@Ramping Up: if you are not going to bother with us, could you go back to watching your “college girls showering” cam? Because grown folks are speaking.
Matt McIrvin
@Cacti:
I’m sure that is true. However, I think that explains the nationwide swing (which Sam Wang factored out of his analysis) but I’m not sure it explains the wild swing in regional patterns, which seems to have been more about Southern cultural affinity for Carter.
Reggie Mantle
@LAC:
Again with the weird fantasies about what other posters are doing. It’s a little creepy.
SFAW
@Reggie Mantle:
Interesting that you consider someone asking you a question to be “lying.” Well, whatever works to keep you from having to admit you’re looking for reasons NOT to vote for Hillary.
Gin & Tonic
@Reggie Mantle: Now that you’re done with that, why don’t you find and quote the comment(s) here where someone supported the Iraq war, as you said was done.
NotMax
@Ramping Up
Sheesh. Get a room.
Hear there are lots of vacancies now at Trump Hotels.
Maybe one of you will even put on the costume.
And remember, the safe word is “BRINKS.”
What a maroon.
chopper
@Reggie Mantle:
so you “might” vote for the democrat in the fall. maybe. hard to say, really, you might stay home and jerk off instead. yeah you’re certainly more of a democrat than anyone else here.
Bob In Portland
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/06/02/the-bigger-nuclear-risk-trump-or-clinton/
opiejeanne
I saw someone refer to the Republican politicians (and others) now supporting/endorsing Trump as Trump’s Chumps. I kind of like that.
singfoom
I like how you can’t have a nuanced or rational reason for voting for HRC without being a sell out or a “neo-liberal shill”. Yes, the Chicago school economics will most likely continue under HRC.
One can actually have an ideological closeness to Bernie’s positions, have voted for him in the state primary and then decided after everything that has happened in the primary that HRC is going to win the nomination, so hey, let’s work towards a Democratic Senate and getting a Democratic President.
It’s your vote and your choice, but if you keep insisting that everyone who disagrees with you is undemocratic and/or “Republican Lite”, how the fuck do you expect you’ll be treated.
“Can’t you see your thought process is wrong and you’re voting for a evil harpy? God you’re so mean and denigrating to those of us who don’t want to vote for her.”
Uh, ok. The self-awareness doesn’t burn, does it?
Betty Cracker
@amk: Got a link to the hate speech are you referring to? I see a lot of stupid shit, but not hate speech. Perhaps I just missed it…
SFAW
@singfoom:
He’s not looking for a discussion, he’s looking to pick a fight. It’s been that way from the start (although it took me awhile to realize it). He’s just changing his focus slightly, thinking to distract from his underlying “ethos.” (Said in the Walter Sobchak sense of the word.)
Bob2
@Seanly: Remember when blogs were supposed to save journalism? Yeah.
Fair Economist
@MomSense:
Well said!
different-church-lady
@Bob2: Word. Fuckin’ digital utopians really get on my nerves.
Fair Economist
@Just Some Fuckhead, Clinton Supporter:
I care a lot about the people who have been left behind. That’s why I’m a big supporter of the candidate who has a plan to actually help them – with big but tailored minimum wage increase, incentives for more unionization, action against wage theft, a major childcare initiative, and cracking down on gender pay discrimination.
Patricia Kayden
@Loviatar: This. A million times this. Wish there was an upvote button for your comment because you’re addressing the crux of the matter as to why we need a Democratic President to continue President Obama’s legacy.
J R in WV
So Y says:
But this sentence doesn’t show the proper logic to lead to his conclusion. The fact that Trump is too risky to be elected has nothing to do with Hillary’s ideology, not the Democratic party’s ideology. And I don’t think Ms Clinton intends to run away from the Democratic ideology, as it forms the foundation of her campaign so far.
Y is too like Friedman and Brooks. An airhead.
El Caganer
@chopper: Not me! I’m going to go jerk off in the voting booth! Multi-tasking, doncha know.
Donut
@Marc:
This is the take I had on the piece, my-own-self.
I don’t get the apoplectic reaction, except for the fact that it’s Yglesias and he’s douchey and an easy mark to be annoyed with.
What he says is actually right on target. Lots of progressives and liberals think we need to have logical, reasoned arguments for every issue and make sure they are at least leaning strongly in he direction of ideologically pure, to boot, and just convince the fuck out of everyone else that we are right about everything.
Anecdotally, most Sanders voters I know fall into this category right now.
And yeah, I do think progressives and liberals are generally right about everything. I am one, too.
But at the least, a strong majority of people don’t vote with their heads and don’t listen to logic and reason when it comes to politics. They need other reasons to vote
Paul in KY
@Just Some Fuckhead, Clinton Supporter: And I guess that’s OBummer’s fault?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Fair Economist: all that and… that’s why I support top ticket candidates who have a basic understanding of how our government works and realize that a candidate whose “Revolution” consists of supporting 1% of Senate candidates and just under 1% of House candidates is probably not gonna do a whole lot to advance slogan politics, no matter how loud he shouts or how loud his supporters yell “whooooo!” in response to every mention of his name
Cacti
@Donut:
I don’t think logic, reason, and objective analysis is what’s fueling most Sanders supporters these days, if they ever did. The longer the campaign has worn on, the more Sanders has shown that he has a tenuous grasp of policy and a superficial understanding of what are supposed to be his signature issues.
People have been enthusiastic for Sanders because “yay, revolution! fight the power! feel the Bern!”.
burnspbesq
@Amir Khalid:
In general, he can say anything he wants outside the courtroom.
WaterGirl
mistermix:
Thanks for that. I have been looking for a succinct (a single sentence) but persuasive statement that I might be able to use to make an argument for why they should either vote for Clinton or stay home.
Hey front pagers: could we have a thread where everyone can put in their single sentence persuasive statement for why people should either vote for Clinton or stay home? I am actually thinking that I might print the best statement I/we can come up with on business cards and give one to anyone I run into who is considering voting for Trump.
burnspbesq
@Thoughtful David:
Amen, brother.
WaterGirl
@The Thin Black Duke: I completely agree. Do not feed the stray kitty unless you want him to come live in your house. You’d think with all the cat people we have here, they could figure it out.
Reggie Mantle
@Gin & Tonic:
Already explained it. But you go ahead and keep beating that dead horse.
burnspbesq
@Reggie Mantle:
I will, and I do. I think you’re lying.
Johnnybuck
@different-church-lady: Fuckin’ A
Just Some Fuckhead, Clinton Supporter
@burnspbesq: Seriously Burns? You are basically a Republican and you’ve never worked for a Democratic candidate in your life. You’re probably one of the people hurling accusations of “communist!”. WTF?
Reggie Mantle
@burnspbesq:
Handwave away then.
On a related matter, I see the BJ’ers have adopted the “well, you really don’t mean it” dodge beloved of the Obama-hating wingers. An example:
“Obama hates police officers!”
(Show video of Obama praising police officers)
“Wellll…he doesn’t MEAN it!”
You’re narrowing the gap between yourselves and the right wing thugs with every post. Which is why it’s so easy to tweak your smug little noses. I’ve seen all this stuff before, only from the people you claim to be against.
Reggie Mantle
@different-church-lady:
And yet, enough people did to put Bush back in the White House.
And now you’re making the same mistake.
burnspbesq
@Just Some Fuckhead, Clinton Supporter:
Clueless as always. GFY.
Reggie Mantle
@burnspbesq:
Not so much fun when the “you never worked for Democrats” BS is aimed at you, is it, Burnsy?
LAC
@Reggie Mantle: creepy, like spending time on blog getting your jerk on with your ” look at me!! I got something contrary to say!” Creepy like that? I disagree with everything stormfront says, but I do not feel the need to get on their comments board because brain cells. Why do you?
Gin & Tonic
@Reggie Mantle: Already explained it
Really? Where?
patroclus
Well, I read the article and I don’t think it’s as bad as many are saying. Yglesias is saying that yesterday’s great speech was aimed at a broader electorate than just we liberals and that, if she keeps it up, she might be headed for a landslide that will swing the Congress as well. It’s the LBJ campaign again. With the Daisy ad and the “in your heart, you know he might” kind of rhetoric. The Dems haven’t run this kind of campaign since 1964 (Carter tried it in 1980 but without success and he didn’t do it nearly as good as Johnson). The thing about the 1964 campaign, though, is that LBJ did run also on liberal values and liberal ideas and liberal policy proposals. The Great Society emerged from that – including the Voting Rights Act, the Fair Housing Act, all the first environmental laws, virtually all of the education laws, Medicare, Medicaid etc… If that’s the kind of campaign that Clinton is going to run, then I’m actually excited about it – because we have a long list of policy proposals that need to be enacted. The greatest speech LBJ ever gave also happened in that campaign – the “N-word, N-word, N-word” speech in Louisiana that shocked the audience into stunned silence, followed by a 7-minute-long tumultuous standing ovation. Liberals WILL be attracted to those kinds of speeches and Hillary needs to deliver them in addition to the Daisy-ad-like speeches. If we can get the Congress and the Courts back, we could see a flowering of liberal legislation the likes of which we haven’t seen since the 60’s and that would be incredible to behold!
tastytone
The speech was primarily Clamp Clinton getting out-front early and defining Trump. It was presented as a foreign policy speech, but the selling-point was that she was going to go bash-heavy on the Yuge Yam. It’s why I tuned-in, FWIW. Knicker-twisting about there not being enough in it to “warm the hearts of liberals” is beside the point (and if the words are coming out of Clinton’s mouth there may never be enough for some.) As folks have mentioned above, she’s running for POTUS, not just president of those progressives in constant need of heart-warming.
I appreciate that she also backhanded Sanders by giving a speech that Sanders, based on his prior debate and interview performances, can’t give–and she did it just before the big primaries. Whether you like her viewpoint or not, she at LEAST knows what the hell she’s talking about.
In short–
Clinton: “Basically, here’s what it’s like driving a bus. I can drive the big bus, because I have been driving a bus for years. Based on his blathering I can assure you that Trump would immediately drive the bus over a cliff and kill us all”.
Sanders: “Busses should not be driven like Clinton has driven them. Busses should be driven more safely (and yes–this may or may not be a clutch.)”
Loviatar
@Patricia Kayden:
This should be an attachment to every response to the BernieorBusters along with the question of which one of those acts do they think a Donald Trump would veto. I’ve condensed it bellow for better reading or you can just use the link.
I’m coming to the realization that as much as I fear what Donald Trump would do as president, I should fear just as much what he would allow an stupid, greedy, evil Republican Congress to do were he president.
—–
Barack Obama: Vetoed legislation
SJ Res 22 – EPA rule: A resolution that would nullify a rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency / Department of the Army to clarify the Clean Water Act.
HR 3762 – ACA repeal: This legislation would cost millions of hard-working middle-class families the security of affordable health coverage and defund Planned Parenthood.
SJ Res 23 – EPA rule: It would overturn carbon pollution standards that are critical to protecting against climate change.
SJ Res 24 – EPA rule: This resolution would overturn the Clean Power Plan, which is critical to protecting against climate change.
HR 1735 – NDAA: It would increase defense spending by using “a separate account for wartime operations that is immune to the spending limits.
SJ Res 8 – NLRB rule: It would overturn the National Labor Relations Board’s recently issued ‘representation case procedures’ rule and block reforms to simplify and streamline private sector union elections.
S 1 – Keystone XL Pipeline: United States Congress attempt to circumvent longstanding processes for determining whether or not building and operating a cross-border pipeline serves the national interest — including our security, safety, and environment.
HR 3808 – Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act: The possible unintended impact of H.R. 3808, on consumer protections, including those for mortgages.
HJ Res 64 – Continuing Appropriations: The enactment of H.R. 3326 (Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, Public Law 111-118), has rendered H.J.Res. 64 unnecessary.
gwangung
@Gin & Tonic: Dude’s gonna lie and continue to lie every time someone tries to get a straight answer from him. Classic troll behavior.
chopper
@Reggie Mantle:
anybody who’s even considering staying home on election day is a fair weather liberal, a weekend warrior.
you talk about ‘being progressive’ but it’s clearly all for show.
Monala
@Cermet: Only because Carter – the first openly evangelical Presidential candidate – won there in 1976. Otherwise, Mississippi has been red every presidential election since 1964.
Gin & Tonic
@gwangung: Yeah, I should know better.
tastytone
@patroclus:
I agree. I think where Yglesias and others come off as whiney is when they seem to expect each speech to contain requisite ideological bullet points. We’ve got a long summer ahead, and party unification is going to be paramount after the primaries. I’m sure she’ll get to the liberal values–and a more nuanced statement of foreign policy that doesn’t involve Trump-bashing as much.
(then again, I’ve also said–hopefully–“I’m sure he’ll get to it” about Sanders a lot this year, and he never did.)
Mike in DC
Here’s the deal, Sanders diehards:
1. Concede that your candidate will not be the nominee.
2. Articulate the reasonable concessions you would like to see the nominee make in order for you to feel more comfortable supporting them.
3. Everybody e-hugs and we work to elect Democrats and defeat Trump! Yay.
Reggie Mantle
@Gin & Tonic:
You know where.
When you shout down everyone who brings up Hillary’s disastrous vote for the Great Mistake, you tacitly approve of said mistake. I already explained this to you. Being against that war used to be a liberal value until Hillary became the nominee. Now it’s apparently taboo for anyone, especially Sanders, to even bring it up.
Mike in DC
@Reggie Mantle:
I feel like all this stuff was previously litigated on the campaign trail back in 2008. She’s admitted that her vote was a mistake. She’s repudiated several policies of her husband’s administration. Short of hopping into a TARDIS, what more could she do?
Reggie Mantle
@Mike in DC:
Barring some untoward and un-hoped for event, this is true.
DWS has to go.
Superdelegates need to go.
No more primaries that exclude independents.
Commitment to doing something about income inequality, starting with $15 minimum wage and tax code reform.
Commitment to doing away with banks that are “too big to fail” so that their bad decisions don’t have to be paid for by the rest of us while their executives reap big bonuses.
I’ll believe it when I see the end of the hippie punching and Bernie bashing. Which ain’t gonna happen. You’ll probably get railed against for even asking, but thanks for doing so.
The Blog Dahlia
@Reggie Mantle:
Well now, why don’t you humor the rest of us and give us all a look-see. Gotta link?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
no mention of the profoundly undemocratic caucuses to which Bernie! owes so many of his delegates. What a shocker.
The Blog Dahlia
@Reggie Mantle:
The last three democratic tickets have included at least one person who also voted for said mistake. I assume that means you haven’t pulled the lever for the Democrats since, oh, 2000 or so? Did you stay home in 2008 and 2012 since warmonger Biden was on the ticket, a heartbeat away from the presidency?
The Iraq war was a huge fuck up. OTOH, I voted for Kerry/Edwards and I voted twice for a ticket with Biden on it, so I don’t understand why I should consider it a dealbreaker only when it comes to Clinton. Care to clue us in?
2liberal
bob_herman
on reagan and philidelphia ms , his first speech after being winning republican nomination
singfoom
@Reggie Mantle: I wasn’t aware the BJ commentariat was part of the Democratic Convention Committee.
– I agree with you, but there’s people worried about changing horses in midstream right before an election.
– Well, that’s a discussion that could happen at the convention. Nothing said about it here will affect any change.
– Again, that’s something that could be discussed at the convention but I also think it’s up to each state party as to how it runs it’s primaries. I also don’t think open primaries are a good idea. If you want to vote in a party’s primary, being a member of that party isn’t a big hurdle.
– Seems like this is addressed by HRC’s campaign here: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/plan-raise-american-incomes/
– This requires congressional action and cannot be resolved during the Democratic convention.
Just because you’re being punched doesn’t mean you’re a hippie. You can keep using that phrase and acting all aggrieved but your tone and your content over the last couple of days doesn’t really define “civil”.
If you can stop Hillary bashing, the Bernie bashing might stop. But when you call everyone neoliberal shills, wingnuts and Republican lite, you’re going to get attitude.
So perhaps you might consider trying to not bash others and see if that reduces the bashing. All of this is said assuming you’re making an argument in good faith. Only time will tell.
Reggie Mantle
@singfoom:
The Bernie bashing and hippie punching has been going on for a while now. Every comment thread, seems like, has contained multiple railings of OMG I HATE BERNIE SANDERS AND HIS FOLLOWERS SO FUCKING MUCH WHY DOESN’T HE JUST GO AWAY AAAGGH AAAGH AAAGH.
Thanks for the credit, but I’m a reaction to that, not the cause of it.
The Blog Dahlia
@Reggie Mantle:
Right, that’s why you walk into threads about other topics and childishly shout “HEY LOOK, YOU GUYS WENT 100 POSTS WITHOUT ATTACKING BERNIE, CONGRATULATIONS!!1!”, because the mean jerks on BJ did it first.
Look son, if you’re going to be a self-righteous prick, knock yourself out. At least have the grapes to admit it to the world instead of hiding behind a cheap facade of twee angst and bullshit like “I’m just reacting to others”.
singfoom
@Reggie Mantle:
Well, you go then white knight. Make sure you police every thread here to remind people to knock off the Bernie bashing. And while you’re at it, keep assuming that you’re a hippie when you’re being punched instead of being punched for being you.
The fact that you responded to only one piece of my response tells me that as SFAW said above, you’re not interested in a conversation, just a fight. So no reason for me to bother engaging with you again. Have a nice life.
Reggie Mantle
Oh, and BTW, there was once a time when “hippie punching”–attacking the actual left in favor of some idea of “reasonable centrism” — was considered a BAD thing here, instead of a pastime:
https://balloon-juice.com/2010/03/03/better-living-through-hippie-punching/
https://balloon-juice.com/2010/01/23/why-dont-you-all-f-fade-away/
Reggie Mantle
@singfoom:
Okey dokey.
Reggie Mantle
@The Blog Dahlia:
Now you’re getting it.
Deeee-lighted to.
The Blog Dahlia
@Reggie Mantle:
Are you still going to show us all “the comment(s) here where someone supported the Iraq war” as promised, or are we to understand that you’re full of shit on that one?
Reggie Mantle
@The Blog Dahlia:
I’m not explaining it again. If you want being deliberately obtuse to be your go-to response to everything you can’t answer otherwise, that’s your lookout.
The Blog Dahlia
From what I can see you never explained it in the first place.
It’s simple enough. But I guess you got nothin’. So, “full of shit” it is. I guess that’s your schtick here.
Gin & Tonic
@The Blog Dahlia: Magic 8 Ball says “signs point to yes.”
The Blog Dahlia
@Gin & Tonic:
Maybe he ‘knocked himself out’ and can’t post. God, perish the thought.
Donut
@Cacti:
I’m not arguing that Bernie’s supporters are making rational arguments. I’m arguing that they think their guy and that Dems, progs and liberals more broadly, can win elections because Bernie and others like him make what they think are logical positions derived from a relatively pure ideological basis.
I don’t agree that this is true. I think elections are largely won on emotions. But lots of us on the left don’t want to accept that fact.
Davebo
@The Blog Dahlia: Well, Cole did support the Iraq war so I can’t imagine it would be impossible to find some commenters who agreed with him.
Davebo
@Donut: Elections are won on good candidates, smart campaigning and a fantastic ground game especially regarding GOTV efforts and now digital communications and community building.
And that’s true from city council seats to the presidency.
chopper
@Davebo:
if you’re willing to go back 13 years maybe. i mean come on.
SFAW
@Reggie Mantle:
Bullshit is as bullshit does. Always seems to be the case with you, child. Just like your bullshit “well if you can’t find what I [allegedly] said, then I’m not gonna tell you. Suck it libtards!” routine.
I hope Deadbeat Donnie pays you before his “self-funded” campaign runs out of money. One wonders how many other morons he bankrolls to go onto leftwing sites to try to start a fight.
No doubt you’ll come back with some more of your “No, I’m really a liberal and Bernie supporter! REALLY! Why are you being SO MEAN TO ME?” bullshit. Good luck with that.