In some ways I wish I had paid more attention as the campaigns went on. In other ways, I don't wish that; I already knew that my candidate wouldn't win. I voted for Clinton, but she wasn't my candidate. I dedicated my attention to viva from August on, and the election went the way it went.
Only the good progressive ones Ritchie. She only did that to keep Bernie and his millions of first time democratic voters from going third party over DNC gerrymandering.
Two things can be true. Bernie made it harder for Hillary to win the general, and she also had so many of her own self-inflicted failures that it probably wouldn't have mattered.
On the pony anecdote, though. Do we want politicians who make huge, aspirational promises and can't back them up, but hopefully they get elected and somehow make it happen through sheer force of will? Or do we want them to be more realistic and go for things we can achieve in steps?
I do ask the Bernie folks, though. If she was elected, would we have a Muslim ban, AG Jeff Sessions, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, Charlottesville, no DACA, no Paris Agreement... and are we better off this way.
To be fair, I don't think the Zone Bernie voters are that representative of Bernie voters in general. Lot of folks here who seem like they never voted for Democrats and reject the two-party system altogether, which I respect in a way, because it's consistent. It's the long-time Dems who decided Hillary wasn't liberal enough, who in the face of pure evil decided to just sit it out because they couldn't pull the lever for someone who's a little too cozy with the big financial players and a little too interested in explosion-based diplomacy -- when what we got is so much worse on both fronts.
I guess I kind of get this morality idea, that you just couldn't bring yourself to vote for someone who you feel will behave antithetically to your deep convictions. I don't really understand it though. I've always seen voting as a defensive act -- have to protect myself and the vulnerable out there from the other guys -- and not as an affirmative and complete expression and reflection of my morals, such that I could never vote for someone who doesn't fully align with them. But that's democracy, I guess.
So this weirdsteve guy wants to dictate how complete strangers vote, and now he's buttsore we committed thought crimes against the person he voted for because our votes had no effect on the outcome of the GE? FFS get ahold of yourself man, you're way over the edge.
I notice everyone is attacking weird steve personally but not really responding to any of his points. Though he's a little too polemic, he's not that far off from what many Hillary voters feel about Bernie and his supporters, and I think they're justified in quite a bit of it, although I again disagree with him that there's any one reason why she lost, when there were so many failings and breakdowns.
>>> Who did hillary blame 2008 on? No one wanted her then, either.
Obama beat Hillary in 2008 because he out-organized her and ran a better primary campaign. But she came incredibly close to beating him, much closer than Bernie got to beating Hillary. Don't forget that in 2008 Obama was the insurgent, but he performed incredibly and brought huge numbers of superdelegates to his side.
I notice everyone is attacking weird steve personally but not really responding to any of his points.
weird steve has been harping on the same shit weekly since before the GE, we're bored with "responding to his points" because he's a broken record and will just re-word his "points" next week when he flips out again with the same attacky flamebait rephrased. He just needs to wear himself out. Hope that helps.
You think Hillary would have rescinded DACA and reversed every one of Obama's policies like Trump is doing now? you think she would have defended fucking Nazis and brought them into the administration? You trust Trump more with the Nuclear codes?
No, I'm saying she wouldn't have won even if I voted for her in 2016, and I didn't want her to run in 2008 when there was also a better candidate, either.
Children, it's time to admit that Hillary would have been the far better choice for us all..and whoever the Dems put up will be better next time. Grow the fuck up, T.
I don't think weird steve does either, though maybe I'm giving him too much credit. But I think what he's trying to express is a challenge to a value system that says that it's better to not vote for someone because they're somewhat morally objectionable, and let the chips fall where they may, than it is to hold your proverbial nose and vote defensively to help at least keep the ship afloat.
GOP voters will always vote GOP because their goal is victory and domination so they can preserve white supremacy (most of them) and lower taxes (the rich ones). That's why they came out for Trump, even though a sizable portion of their party finds him reprehensible. It's a somewhat ugly way to behave, but they get results, because winning elections results in political power. When some on the left decide that they won't vote for the candidate who's objectively better than the GOP alternative, despite their shortcomings, it's frustrating to those who want to fight GOP fire with fire, and focus on winning elections. I don't think I'm just speaking for myself when I say they would have absolutely voted for Bernie if he was the candidate in the general, because if you don't win first, you have nothing.
<<<<<< But I think what he's trying to express is a challenge to a value system that says that it's better to not vote for someone because they're somewhat morally objectionable, and let the chips fall where they may, than it is to hold your proverbial nose and vote defensively to help at least keep the ship afloat.
First time voters don't hold there nose and vote for people. There not that schooled in politics. Those of us that were held our noses at the 2 worst candidates in history. I'd bet more people voted against someone than for someone in the general. I did!
Where does Gary Johnson fit into this? If you look at the actual election results, far more people who "felt the Johnson" turned out for their candidate than Stein voters and would have made a real statistical difference in the critical swing states and would have thrown the election in Hillary's favor had they been so inclined.
Barely over 50% of eligible voters voted. Of those who did vote, the vast majority of them had no clue about the issues, or even what either Party stands for.
Bernie pissed me off because he made vapid promises to gain support. As I said earlier, that Facebook thing in the book nailed it. It isn't why Hillary lost, though. As 73 said, she simply didn't get the voters out on key states. Hillary lost because she made a strategic fuck-up.
>>Children, it's time to admit that Hillary would have been the far better choice for us all..and whoever the Dems put up will be better next time. Grow the fuck up, T.
Gio fuck yourself.
If Hillary had won we'd be fucked, and in several new wars, and there would be no mass protests against it. At least with Trump, who has been pretty much ineffectual, we have people rising up.
I don't vote for evil. Never have, never will. If the Dems want my vote, they need to run someone who I respect and who is mainly in agreement with my principles and beliefs. They fucked bernie out of the niomination and seem to be sticking to the corporatist right wing road. They are losing election after election (by the way, the corporate dem running for a winnable seat lost big and the progressive running for an unwinnable seat came very close) and their fundraising is in the shitter.
incredible. no way that is real. god damn. HRC is forever a complete mess, amazing. she'll literally say anything to make a buck. trash.
<<<<>>>>Children, it's time to admit that Hillary would have been the far better choice for us all..and whoever the Dems put up will be better next time. Grow the fuck up, T.
this is the scary part. trump is so hated by the dems (of course rightfully so), that they seem to be just waiting for their perfect corporatist candidate to show its head, the perfect puppet. of course they don't want to really back a true candidate like bernie, which is a shame b/c they could really take advantage of that scenario, which could catapult their power and influence to new heights. they're fucking up again, it may pay off though, as so many people are disgusted w/ the current events-throwing up another "HrC" type candidate may work in 2020.
meanwhile, bernie hasn't stopped campaigning for the people, trying to educate people and bring about honest change and some god damn healthcare to all.
all while HRC has been writing and slinging some absolute trash about why she lost, ripping suckers off to make even more money....kind of like some other dick head...too funny. #america
Again, there is no one reason why Hillary lost. In such a close election, any one factor could be the "deciding" factor. Personally I'm skeptical that giving a speech and shaking some hands in Grand Rapids or Green Bay would've done much for her in any case, but there were so many other issues that it doesn't make sense to say that that was why she failed.
On Gary Johnson, I don't think he actually has that much support, based on how he did in the last presidential. I think a lot of Republicans and maybe some Bernie folks (you'll have to tell me) voted for him as a protest vote, but didn't actually support him, and yes, could've moved the election to Hillary if they'd gone her way, though I'm inclined to think most of them wouldn't have supported her anyway. With Stein, I don't know, but I do know that she got more votes in PA/WI/MI than the difference between Hillary and Trump in each of those states (and then ran a scam recount campaign shortly after). I do think a good percentage of her voters in those states have never voted Dem at all, but again, I'm unsure.
>> of course they don't want to really back a true candidate like bernie, which is a shame b/c they could really take advantage of that scenario, which could catapult their power and influence to new heights.
If this was true, why wouldn't they? Bernie running was about Bernie. He ran against the Democratic Party from within it. Bernie winning the nomination would catapult Bernie's power and influence, but I don't think it would've done much for the Democratic Party, whose infrastructure he benefitted from but he really wanted nothing to do with.
Also can someone explain to me what a corporatist is?
Corporatist - someone who thinks corporations should have more power; who thinks large corporations are good for the planet, or just for them and their friends; who thinks corporations should have more rights, more influence in government, fewer regulations.
The lies and propaganda distributed and then shared in the US about Hillary played a major role in getting Trump elected. Spoiler candidates like Jill Stein, Johnson and Bernie also helped to get Trump elected.
While some folks seems to understand the facts, Negman and the some of the other suckers who fell for the CON continue to cling to the lies that have been debunked and exposed long ago. Got Pizzagate?!
>> Corporatist - someone who thinks corporations should have more power; who thinks large corporations are good for the planet, or just for them and their friends; who thinks corporations should have more rights, more influence in government, fewer regulations.
Thanks. To my understanding, that doesn't match the Democratic Party or the Hillary 2016 campaign's platform, but maybe I'm missing something.
Being right? T child, I didn't know that Russia was responsible for spreading the propaganda or that Trump..and apparently Jill Stein were Putin's puppets. I only knew that the better choice was Hillary. the facts are there if you want to see them.
I do know that now though and also know that unless people come to their senses and work together and with the Dems and Democratic Socialists to fight the fascist GOP administration we are all fucked.
ask not what the Democratic Party can do for you, ask what you can do for the Democratic Party.
Bernie was the best candidate, that much is clear. Too bad the "democratic" party couldn't see that re-running a failed, hated candidate was not in their best interests. Even placating the Bernie movement by putting him on the ticket would have been enough in my estimation. Oh well.
Remember when getting Billy Clinton in office was good because, he wasn't a Bush? Remember when Obamma had hope? This shit got us nowhere.
Steve and Uncle Sam are making sense. Don't think it matters to some here though. Nothing like mentioning HRC and Burnie to get the angry folks going. I was angry too, in my "cant believe that it was elected" period. Have to move ahead. Personally im working locally for change, hoping we don't go to war, the economy stays stable, and looking ahead to 2020. Its coming fast. United We Stand.
I think most folks here can agree on disliking Trump.
>> Remember when getting Billy Clinton in office was good because, he wasn't a Bush? Remember when Obamma had hope? This shit got us nowhere.
Only if you think strong economic and job growth, broad expansions of rights and protections for the vulnerable, and hundreds of progressive judges on the bench for life is nowhere
regardless of who you cast your vote for, the premise that your candidate is entitled to someone else's vote as well because they simply don't have the numbers, is ludicrous
I refuse to accept that Democrats are Republican lite because they take campaign contributions from large financial interests. The Republican Party is dedicated to lowering taxes for the wealthy and maintaining and sustaining white supremacy. The Democratic Party is not. Everything else is just noise.
When Thom says "The problem the progressive left faces is that there will always be someone who will offer to give you even more of other peoples money," that's Republican "fuck you, I got mine" politics. That's not the Democratic Party.
>I refuse to accept that Democrats are Republican lite because they take campaign contributions from large financial interests<
its a bit more complicated than that.
but for the most part. yeah. repub-lite.
clinton/obamma continued many of the same policies for the vested economic interests. they in fact were terrific republicans. they were better speakers and seemingly more intelligent/articulate than any of the repub candidates that ran against them. that's what makes the repubs nuts. the fact that they offer "some" progressive social platforms should not take away from their continued failed neo-liberal economic policies.
If Hillary needs to assign blame to someone other than herself, let's look at the numbers.
Johnson took in 3.28% of the vote.
Stein took in 1.07% of the vote.
So the "spoilers" took in a combined 4.35% of the vote.
The total turn out of eligible voters was 54.7%. That means 45.3% of eligible voters stayed home or otherwise couldn't be bothered to show up for anyone.
So if you are going to blame voters for not showing up for Clinton, the shamey finger really needs to be wagged at the 45.3% of the eligible voters who did not participate at all, rather than the 4.35% who decided to vote their conscious with a third party and who probably have voted third party in previous elections and really weren't in play for the Dems or GOP to begin with.
>> it is incumbent on mrs clinton to publicly apologize for attacking the most valuable asset the democratic party, and the country, has at the moment.
She doesn't owe Bernie a damn thing. And he's not an asset of the Democratic Party as long as he keeps railing against it.
>Only if you think strong economic and job growth, broad expansions of rights and protections for the vulnerable, and hundreds of progressive judges on the bench for life is nowhere
and billions of dollars in tax cuts for the rich, elimination National Monuments (parks).
anyone who believes that the Dems are GOP lite only need to look at every Obama policy TrumpCo is reversing.
George Soros and Weather Underground have found a way to control the weather. This has to be true first red state Texas floods and now Florida in trouble.
This will be going around Facebook like Russian propaganda
GOP to Trump "Russia investigation cover for your agenda...deal".
beyond the apology alone, a true sign of comradery and party unity would be for mrs. clinton, like senator harris and many other democrats, to publicly support bernies policy leadership and his single payer bill. it's time to come together.
Mrs Clinton isn't serving in Government, she is retired. Makes no difference if she supports DEMOCRAT Kamala Harris' bill for single payer health care. It IS important for the other DEMOCRATIC Senators to support the Bill, and for VOTERS to support the DEMOCRATIC candidates like Kamala Harris who are nothing like the GOP counterparts. Do I need to spell it out slower for the children here?
>beyond the apology alone, a true sign of comradery and party unity would be for mrs. clinton, like senator harris and many other democrats, to publicly support bernies policy leadership and his single payer bill. it's time to come together<
Lava, has Sanders shared his donor/mailing list with the DNC?
Facebook says it sold political ads to Russian company during 2016 election
By Carol D. Leonnig, Tom Hamburger and Rosalind S. Helderman
September 6 at 3:59 PM
Representatives of Facebook told congressional investigators Wednesday that it has discovered it sold ads during the U.S. presidential election to a shadowy Russian company seeking to target voters, according to several people familiar with the company’s findings. Facebook officials reported that they traced the ad sales, totaling $100,000, to a Russian “troll farm” with a history of pushing pro-Kremlin propaganda, these people said.
yes, nanc, glad to have harris on-board – let's see if her support extends into campaign season, that's the true test.
Sen. Kamala Harris backs Bernie Sanders’s single-payer bill [wapo link]
great question, tom. the frequent high-profile public appearances bernie and the dp have jointly managed, since the election, are indeed having an impact in bringing the party back into relevancy, with, both, older and younger generations, and in recovering from that electoral embarrassment. bernie has been visiting deep red regions of the country, a courageous move, alone, not many in the party have done, with on the ground messaging pushing left-leaning policies of the dp in trump country. and yes, aside from the new generation of left-leaning digital and strategy groups incubated from the 2016 campaign that have since fertilized the left, co-mailing with members of the dp has occurred.
think mrs. clinton will, at some point, participate in the policy co-campaining bernie is doing with the party, or has she become too much of a liability, now?
unclesam, it's not common practice to 'give' lists away, instead it's more common to share access – political entities, public and private companies do this all the time.
barry shared access to, but did not provide his own list to the dnc until late into his second term, which was a point of contention amongst party establishment, unclesam, your middle link states this and also partially articulates why it isn’t a good idea to simply give lists away, or sell them.
data has saturated everything, including political campaigns, and not all data is the same. for instance, in political campaigns voter data and other behavioral data sets can often be shared with greater results than, say, data obtained with a degree of trust, like, fundraising or email lists.
I think I need to read this book when I can d/l for free to my non-existent kindle. HRC doesn't need any of my money...Planning on giving it all to Bernie in another couple years! Bitter is as bitter does, that is what my momma used to say. Who cares about email lists, do any of you guys actually read political emails? I sent all my bernie emails to spam, and then unsubscribed when I couldn't take it any more. {{{steal this book}}}
Lava I don't really know what point you're trying to make now besides that different datasets have different purposes. I think you're trying in a roundabout way to defend Bernie not giving his email list to the Democratic Party, which I don't really have a problem with, but that's all I'm getting.
thanks for the link again, us, i got pulled away. yeah, peeps were pissed at barry during the midterms, but he did provide access to his list. anyway, i bet we can both agree that the next few election cycles are going to be real interesting!
I am way more relevant than you, Nancy. You see, people read and listen to what I have to say, because I think for myself. Unlike you, who has been brainwashed by the very epople that are fucking you in the ass.
Just think of this, how many people know who I am and love and respect me and how few do you.
i was briefly explaining why it's uncommon, and not best practices, to simply give away lists, especially in political campaigns, and that one of your links supports that reality by highlighting what obama did, himself.
what bern is doing now, for the dp, is unequivocally more substantial than simply giving the dnc his list. from his down ballet to state level to national races and policies, bern has been busting ass since she lost the ge.
the viral talking point that bernie not handing over his list to the dnc as proof he doesn't support democrats is a nothing more than a false premise raddled out from the damaged and increasingly isolated and divisive establishment left echo chamber.
Wasserman-Shultz is in real trouble if anyone ever starts paying attention to the case against her staffer, Imran Awan , and his brothers and associates. It still baffles me we aren't talking more about these guys that ran the IT accounts of over 40 key democratic lawmakers (many on Intelligence Committees) and were involved in a known breach of DNC data.
I see yesterday that Awan's wife is being extradited back to the US in relation to all of this now.
>>viral talking point that bernie not handing over his list to the dnc as proof he doesn't support democrats is a nothing more than a false premise raddled out from the damaged and increasingly isolated and divisive establishment left echo chamber<<
The donor list has been a point of contention, no? I get the impression that many in the DNC would like to have that list, and that Sanders' unwillingness to share it is viewed with both mistrust and fear.
President Donald Trump may be the only person in politics truly excited about Hillary Clinton’s book tour.
Democratic operatives can’t stand the thought of her picking the scabs of 2016, again — the Bernie Sanders divide, the Jim Comey complaints, the casting blame on Barack Obama for not speaking out more on Russia. Alums of her Brooklyn headquarters who were miserable even when they thought she was winning tend to greet the topic with, “Oh, God,” “I can’t handle it,” and “the final torture
Asked whether she was excited about Clinton’s book tour, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), one of Republicans’ top 2018 targets, responded first with, “Beg your pardon?”
Asked again, she started shaking her head, walking away
Even among some of Clinton's former aides, there's an exhaustion of not wanting to have to defend her anymore. They’ve spent the past two weeks chattering among themselves about the rollout, including frustration over the sheer number of Twitter jokes about Clinton visiting Wisconsin on the tour — something she famously didn't do during the general election.
>>>You see, people read and listen to what I have to say, because I think for myself.
Apparently you read and listen to what Nancy says because you just replied. While Obama could have done more he was still a good President considering what he was handed coming in, your commentary on him is no more relevant than anything Nanc says around here. The anal comment is low brow BTW.
tom, that bernie list mumbo jumbo is nothing more than an establishment manufactured red herring. as discussed above, it is uncommon to give away lists, in any sector, obama didn't give his own list to the dnc until well into his second term.
it's become clear the establishment will continue to bruise bernie until he's no longer perceived as an electoral threat to their own interests, interests which are increasingly at odds with the democratic party's own voting blocs.
"Most Popular" lmao. Bernie's base is Hipsters & Socialists. He has nearly Zero appeal with minorities or white working class rust belt-ers. Unelectable. No charisma, and his Mel Brooks Movie-esque Jewish nerd looks & combined Brooklyn/New England accent are a HUGE turnoff to anyone not a hipster or socialist. So, yeah, UNELECTABLE.
Also pile on this story, which demonstrates to me (and anyone not a hipster or socialist), even if he did nothing wrong, that his priorities are all in the wrong place, because, after all, what America really needs is another Elite New England Liberal Arts College:
<<<<<He has nearly Zero appeal with minorities or white working class rust belt-ers.
Quit sniffing gorilla glue!
That why Bernie killed it in the rural area's only he & Trump got those votes. 2nd half of the primaries Bernie outreach to minorities delivered California primary even though HRC was declared the winner before the polls opened! Had Bernie's outreach to minorities that his policy greatly benefit them to been better in the 1st half he would be president.
Every Poll showed Bernie beating Trump but hey it's time to ram a woman down your throats who Fox News and the GOP have been campaigning against since 1992. They were never going to lose to HRC after 25 years of preparing to beat her.
Progressives have enthusiasm in fight for the Democratic party. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker & Chris Murphy or will we get Obama retreads Joe Biden or Duval Patrick...No thanks in the Democratic primary but hell yes against Trump!
Sideshow has a point, look who we just elected, we really need someone new to step up that is more electable. I'd gladly vote for Bernie, just think we can do better.
>> Had Bernie's outreach to minorities that his policy greatly benefit them to been better in the 1st half he would be president
The argument that if only some group of people had heard your message better, you would've won, is always a poor excuse for losing, especially in 2017 with so much information available for anyone who wants it. Also, arguing that if only minorities had paid attention they would've seen the light of Bernie is also incredibly condescending and patronizing. Black women, especially, vote at higher rates than any other group. They are informed.
Separately, Bernie certainly had appeal in the rust belt among white working class voters. So did Hillary in 2008 -- when she was the non-black candidate. This time she embraced Black Lives Matter (even if they weren't so warm to her all the way through) and took on the mantle of racial justice, which Bernie gestured at occasionally but certainly didn't make the focus of this campaign. Not saying the white Bernie voters were racist, just that they voted against the candidate for whom the issue was central, just as in 2008.
Outreach that HRC husband Bill Clinton cut deals with GOP during his presidency that resulted in minorities being thrown in prison in great numbers. Police brutality (hello Michael Bennett) Hillary nothing, Bernie addressing. Bernie's progressive economic policy would lift all Americans up. Single Payer Healthcare good for everyone regardless of race.
HRC dog whistling during 2008 campaign against Obama. Maybe that's why Obama voters stayed home in 2016 general.
I like Bernie as a person and agree with many "Socialist" policies (I support Single Payer health care amongst others), but, like Ralph Nader before him, he loses me when he runs for president. Stay on the sidelines & keep fighting the good fight, & I support him. Keep everyone in suspense about whether you're gonna run or not for month after month, ginning the drama up to 11, you've lost me & I will work against him.
Tom Perez named head of DNC over Keith Ellison by incumbent career democrats. Perez is a entrenched democrat doing a shitty job of running the party into the ground instead of a open debate of ideas.
DNC leadership has lead us to our lowest percentage of State and Federal public offices held.
Warren/Sanders/Harris wing have great enthusiasm.
Who's got enthusiasm in HRC wing????????? Nobody except for It's Bernie's fault-ers!
no weird steve. its because of right wing monetary donations flooding in, gerrymandering, corporate media, and precisely the opposite. they have moved so far to the right on most issues there is little difference when it comes to foreign policy and wall st banking...you're way off mark.
>>> there is little difference when it comes to foreign policy and wall st banking
But there are so many other issues out there where the parties couldn't be further apart, and they're the ones that affect people's rights and freedoms every day -- reproductive health care (frankly, all health care), labor rights, environmental protections. You can't just focus on those two areas, frustrating as the Democrats are when it comes to them. There is so so so much more at stake.
i get that uncle sam. and thanks for articulating your point of view nicely.
like i said, i mostly vote dem for most offices because, well for those very reasons. not much choice...how is it that monied interests can basically re-program the thought processes of the very people that they oppress?
too bad the dem party as an organization, with their super delegate bullshit and willingness to directly undermine the candidate that was resonating with millions of americans.
>> how is it that monied interests can basically re-program the thought processes of the very people that they oppress?
Not quite sure what you're getting at here? But to the fact that you vote Dem most of the time, that's good, but I'd just note that which party is in the White House has as big if not a bigger impact on how those issues I mentioned play out, particularly because of who they put on the Supreme Court and other federal courts, then what party your local city council/congressperson is. Republicans know that really well, which is why a lot of them voted for Trump even though they couldn't stand him.
Also, would just quickly note again that Bernie would've lost without the superdelegates too, and that despite some shady behavior at the DNC, nothing that they did there had much of an impact on the primary race. But we should probably leave that aside.
I hear Kentucky will soon be the 1st state w/o an abortion clinic. So when some poor woman hemorrhages & dies because she had to have a coat hanger bare bulb bootleg abortion, she can thank all the Leftists for whom Hillary wasn't Pure enough.
>>>>>>> directly undermine the candidate that was resonating with millions of americans
Yeah, because there was/is such a Critical Mass of Bearded Gen Y Hipsters and Balding Baby Boomer/Millenial/Gen X Avowed Socialists just waiting to vote Bernie in. If he's the candidate in either 2016 or 2020, he loses in a landslide ala McGovern in '72. Mark. My. Word.
Oh yeah and inaction on/denial of climate change whilst 3 giant hurricanes fueled by warm oceans churn off our shores, yeah, we can thank NOT having Hillary in office for that too . . .
Uh yeah it most certainly does. Warmer oceans are fueling these storms & they've grown in intensity faster than any storms in recent memory. One after the other. How much Science do you know?
>>>>>>>> uh sideshow bob...if it were just hipsters...how did he WIN like 20+ states?
'Cause it's the Primaries, Duh, and of course, just like on the Repug side, in Primaries the Fringe voters are always more enthusiastic/turn out in greater numbers. And let's not forget the Avowed Socialists. And oh yeah Hillary was the Turdiest of all Turd Sandwiches Ever.
let's hope that mrs. clinton and her friends are able to eventually get behind bern and the rest of the party with single payer and other initiatives like the fight for $15. time to come together, especially if they have the most popular politician in the country, atm, on their side.
I'll tell you what went wrong with Hilary's campaign:
1) she is universally unlikable
2) she was fairly branded dishonest, and it was obvious she was in bed with the DNC to steal the primary at any cost, disenfranchising millions of voters.
3) she let herself collapse in public, and the video went viral.
4) to summarize, she was universally viewed as a sickly, unlikable, dishonest candidate. One that lost to donald fucking trump, which also makes her one of the weakest politicians in modern times.
and imo, not qualified to carry Bernie Sander's gym shorts. I'm
>>>>>>> I'll tell you what went wrong with Hilary's campaign:
Going to Ohio & stating that she was going to eliminate coal mining jobs was probably the one thing that lost her the election. Even if she was technically correct, and in fact the erosion in coal mining jobs has very little to do with Gov't policy, & way more to do with Fracking making natural gas dirt cheap.
And I'll keep saying these thing to the point of Insufferability:
One thing the Dem's (& especially the liberal/left wing) keep Fumbling the Ball on, is that MESSAGING is entirely VITAL to WINNING. Unfortunately most Lefties have the attitude (and I'm just as guilty of this on occasion): "I'm Right because I'm Knowlegable & Study the issues, therefore, I MUST convince those on the other side of my Rightness". Instead, change the MESSAGE. Example: Let's stop calling it "Socialized Medicine" That's TRULY a Dog Whistle term for the Right. Even "Single Payer" is not good. I can envision Thom & my Dad: "Libtard Snowflake Communist Hippies Just Want More Handouts from the Gov't". Let's, instead, call it "Medicare for All". EVERY senior citizen LOVES their Medicare, and Medicare is one thing the Gov't does Competently. Postitive Messaging, Maaannnnn
Also the Idealogical Purity thing hurts. Look at the Evangelicals, willing to vote for the Pussy Grabber, whilst Hillary was simply not Pure enuff for the Bernie Bots. Another example: Today/last night I've seen nothing but Vilification from Bernie bots about the news that Max Baucus changed his mind on Medicare for All (remember: MESSAGING). Instead, you should be Rejoicing that his mind was changed, hey, isn't that what you guys are trying to do? Change Minds? And hey, if you changed his mind, you can change Others!!!!! Positive Vibrations, Mannnnnn!!!!!!
How do you lose the presidency to a man like Donald Trump? He was the most unpopular presidential candidate of all time, compounding blunder with blunder and heaping gaffe upon gaffe. Keeping him from the Oval Office should have been the single-minded mission of the Democratic party. And it should have been easy for them.
Instead they lost, and now their 2016 candidate Hillary Clinton comes before us to account for this monumental failure, to tell us What Happened. Unfortunately, her new book is less an effort to explain than it is to explain away.
No real blame ever settles anywhere near Clinton’s person. And while she wrestles gamely with the larger historical question of why the party of the people has withered as inequality grows, she never offers a satisfying answer. Instead, most of the blame is directed outward, at familiar suspects like James Comey, the Russians and the media.
Still, by exercising a little discernment, readers can find clues to the mystery of 2016 here and there among the clouds of blame-evasion and positive thinking.
Start at the beginning: why did Hillary Clinton run for president? “[B]ecause I thought I’d be good at the job,” she writes. Then, 13 pages later: “It was a chance to do the most good I would ever be able to do.”
A would-be do-gooder needs problems to solve, of course, and so Clinton says she turned next to the people who knew what was wrong. “I started calling policy experts,” she writes, “reading thick binders of memos, and making lists of problems that needed more thought.” Lists of problems and solutions are everywhere; reeling them off one after another is one of her favorite rhetorical devices, her way of checking the boxes and letting everyone know that she cares.
Proceeding in this rational, expert-sanctioned way, Hillary Clinton set out resolutely on the road to oblivion.
She seems to have been almost totally unprepared for the outburst of populist anger that characterized 2016, an outburst that came under half a dozen different guises: trade, outsourcing, immigration, opiates, deindustrialization, and the recent spectacle of Wall Street criminals getting bailed out. It wasn’t the issues that mattered so much as the outrage, and Donald Trump put himself in front of it. Clinton couldn’t.
To her credit, and unlike many of her most fervent supporters, Hillary Clinton doesn’t deny that this web of class-related problems had some role in her downfall. When she isn’t repeating self-help bromides or calumniating the Russians she can be found wondering why so many working-class people have deserted the Democratic party.
This is an important question, and in dealing with it Clinton writes a few really memorable passages, like her description of a grotesque campaign stop in West Virginia where she was protested by a crowd that included the former CEO of the company that owned the Upper Big Branch mine, where 29 coal miners died in 2010.
But by and large, Clinton’s efforts to understand populism always get short-circuited, probably because taking it seriously might lead one to conclude that working people have a legitimate beef with her and the Democratic party.
Countless inconvenient items get deleted from her history. She only writes about trade, for example, in the most general terms; Nafta and the TPP never. Her husband’s program of bank deregulation is photoshopped out. The names Goldman Sachs and Walmart never come up.
Besides, to take populism seriously might also mean that Bernie Sanders, who was “outraged about everything,” might have had a point, and much of What Happened is dedicated to blasting Sanders for challenging Clinton in the Democratic primaries. Given that he later endorsed her and even campaigned for her, this can only be described as churlish, if not downright dishonest.
That Clinton might have done well to temper her technocratic style with some populist outrage of her own only dawns on her towards the end of the book, by which point it is too late.
Not to mention impossible. Hillary Clinton simply cannot escape her satisfied white-collar worldview – compulsively listing people’s academic credentials, hobnobbing with officers from Facebook and Google, and telling readers how she went to Davos in 1998 to announce her philosophy.
And then, in her concluding chapter, returning to her beloved alma mater Wellesley College and informing graduates of that prestigious institution that, with their “capacity for critical thinking” (among other things) they were “precisely what we needed in America in 2017.”
I wish it were so. I wish that another crop of elite college grads were what we needed. I wish Hillary’s experts and her enlightened capitalist friends could step in and fix this shabby America we inhabit today, where racists march in the streets and the Midwest falls apart and cops shoot motorists for no reason and a blustering groper inhabits the White House.
I wish it were all a matter of having a checklist of think-tank approved policy solutions. But I know for sure it isn’t. And voters knew that, too.
After Tax reform fails Trump works with Democrats rest of his short presidency. GOP will assist in sacking Trump over Russia in favor of Mike (make abortion illegal) Pence. He will toe the GOP line unlike Trump. Congress the House specifically has to vote for a Senate trial correct on the Mueller findings??
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: I rang a silent bell
What Happened
What Happened
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: treat island
I would have liked a pony.
I would have liked a pony.
In some ways I wish I had paid more attention as the campaigns went on. In other ways, I don't wish that; I already knew that my candidate wouldn't win. I voted for Clinton, but she wasn't my candidate. I dedicated my attention to viva from August on, and the election went the way it went.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Ken D.
>>>What Happened
>>>What Happened
Bernie stole tactics from a Ben Stiller movie and fucked it all up for everyone. I think that is the gist of her analysis.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: good at drinking water
It is possible that page is
It is possible that page is out of context, I haven't read the book and found this excerpt on Joe Scarborough's twitter feed.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
HRC sank her best chance
HRC sank her best chance taking that horde of banking cash. I still held my nose and voted against Trump in the general.
It's always the candidates fault for not reaching voters not vice versa.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: good at drinking water
The Bernie people are the GOP
The Bernie people are the GOP's wet dream.
The Democrats were already fucked by racism, misogyny, gerrymandering and the electoral college.
Now the Bernie people won't vote for anybody but a Socialist.
Great.
Welcome to One-party rule.
The Nazi party.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
http://www.mercurynews.com
http://www.mercurynews.com/2015/05/05/as-hillary-clinton-arrives-in-bay-...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
What about HRC gerrymandering
What about HRC gerrymandering the DNC?
Bernie people are the problem said the entrenched!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Briank
That little Facebook post
That little Facebook post nails it.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: free to come, free to go
"in Poland, all little girls
"in Poland, all little girls had ponies....I had pony!"
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: St. Mark
Hillary Clinton needs to just
Hillary Clinton needs to just go away.
She's actually a Full Ten on the Insufferabilty Scale.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: steve.m
wait , were we supposed to
wait , were we supposed to get ponies ....
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: good at drinking water
The cool kids loved George
The cool kids loved George McGovern.
2/3rd of the states are run by the GOP.
The GOP owns the Supreme Court, and has my entire lieftime (look it up).
The GOP owns the Senate, and will until at least 2020.
The Gop owns the House until 2018.
If you want to guarantee GOP ownership of the House in 2019,
let's have the Bernie people deciding that they won't vote for anybody who is a 'centrist".
You Bernie people fail to understand the opposition:
the GOP would vote for Kid Rock if he's the GOP nomiee.
They don;t care.
They understand warfare, and they are at war.
10% of the Democrats think only the purest of the pure deserve their vote.
That is why Hillary lost.
No, certain zoners in California and New York who voted for 3rd part idiots did not elect Trump by their votes.
But as they spent last fall proudly proclaiming that they would not vote for the democratic nomicee (HRC), they went national with their hatred.
That had an apparent impact, amplified by Russian propagandas techniques.
The result was Cheetolini.
I see a LOT of denial among the HRC hating Bernie people.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
^^^^^More ALEC fault than
^^^^^More ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Coucil) fault than Bernie voters
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Roarshock
Hillary needs to saddle up
Hillary needs to saddle up the pony and ride off into the sunset.
The democrats better shape up or they will keep being losers. Why would people vote for a party that views them with contempt?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
<<<<<<<Why would people vote
<<<<<<<Why would people vote for a party that views them with contempt?
Worked for the GOP in 2016
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
hey weird steve, go fuck
hey weird steve, go fuck yourself.
and take that pretentious unapologetic corporatist with you.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: troubador
Well said, Turtle.
Well said, Turtle.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Richie Nagan
It was actually Hillary that
It was actually Hillary that followed Bernie's lead on the issues.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
Only the good progressive
Only the good progressive ones Ritchie. She only did that to keep Bernie and his millions of first time democratic voters from going third party over DNC gerrymandering.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
Two things can be true.
Two things can be true. Bernie made it harder for Hillary to win the general, and she also had so many of her own self-inflicted failures that it probably wouldn't have mattered.
On the pony anecdote, though. Do we want politicians who make huge, aspirational promises and can't back them up, but hopefully they get elected and somehow make it happen through sheer force of will? Or do we want them to be more realistic and go for things we can achieve in steps?
I do ask the Bernie folks, though. If she was elected, would we have a Muslim ban, AG Jeff Sessions, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, Charlottesville, no DACA, no Paris Agreement... and are we better off this way.
To be fair, I don't think the Zone Bernie voters are that representative of Bernie voters in general. Lot of folks here who seem like they never voted for Democrats and reject the two-party system altogether, which I respect in a way, because it's consistent. It's the long-time Dems who decided Hillary wasn't liberal enough, who in the face of pure evil decided to just sit it out because they couldn't pull the lever for someone who's a little too cozy with the big financial players and a little too interested in explosion-based diplomacy -- when what we got is so much worse on both fronts.
I guess I kind of get this morality idea, that you just couldn't bring yourself to vote for someone who you feel will behave antithetically to your deep convictions. I don't really understand it though. I've always seen voting as a defensive act -- have to protect myself and the vulnerable out there from the other guys -- and not as an affirmative and complete expression and reflection of my morals, such that I could never vote for someone who doesn't fully align with them. But that's democracy, I guess.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
Speaking for Bernie voters...
As a Bernie then HRC 2016 voter...
HRC lost one of the tightest races in history. Any one of twenty excuses work so find another to cry into your beer about. But Bernie...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: ParadiseWaits
So this weirdsteve guy wants
So this weirdsteve guy wants to dictate how complete strangers vote, and now he's buttsore we committed thought crimes against the person he voted for because our votes had no effect on the outcome of the GE? FFS get ahold of yourself man, you're way over the edge.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: ParadiseWaits
Who did hillary blame 2008 on
Who did hillary blame 2008 on? No one wanted her then, either.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
I notice everyone is
I notice everyone is attacking weird steve personally but not really responding to any of his points. Though he's a little too polemic, he's not that far off from what many Hillary voters feel about Bernie and his supporters, and I think they're justified in quite a bit of it, although I again disagree with him that there's any one reason why she lost, when there were so many failings and breakdowns.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
>>> Who did hillary blame
>>> Who did hillary blame 2008 on? No one wanted her then, either.
Obama beat Hillary in 2008 because he out-organized her and ran a better primary campaign. But she came incredibly close to beating him, much closer than Bernie got to beating Hillary. Don't forget that in 2008 Obama was the insurgent, but he performed incredibly and brought huge numbers of superdelegates to his side.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
She probably blamed
She probably blamed superdelegates first time, then bought them the second time around.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: ParadiseWaits
\i{I notice everyone is
I notice everyone is attacking weird steve personally but not really responding to any of his points.
weird steve has been harping on the same shit weekly since before the GE, we're bored with "responding to his points" because he's a broken record and will just re-word his "points" next week when he flips out again with the same attacky flamebait rephrased. He just needs to wear himself out. Hope that helps.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
Why encourage him by
Why encourage him by responding then? Why not just let him wear himself out in silence?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: ParadiseWaits
lol Knotesau. The electoral
lol Knotesau. The electoral college must go!!!!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: ParadiseWaits
He's probably already
He's probably already sleeping it off.
PS-I voted for BO because he was a better candidate. The clinton's collective mountain of baggage was apparent in 2008, too.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
Dise your so freaking wrong
Dise your so wrong it's Butthurt not Buttsore on the zone. Judit do we have a penalty box? Hope not.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: ParadiseWaits
lol.
lol.
it was my phone
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
You think Hillary would have
You think Hillary would have rescinded DACA and reversed every one of Obama's policies like Trump is doing now? you think she would have defended fucking Nazis and brought them into the administration? You trust Trump more with the Nuclear codes?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
don't mean to be personal.
don't mean to be personal. but i object to being patronized like some delusional child.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: ParadiseWaits
No, I'm saying she wouldn't
No, I'm saying she wouldn't have won even if I voted for her in 2016, and I didn't want her to run in 2008 when there was also a better candidate, either.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
Children, it's time to admit
Children, it's time to admit that Hillary would have been the far better choice for us all..and whoever the Dems put up will be better next time. Grow the fuck up, T.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
>>> don't mean to be personal
>>> don't mean to be personal.
I don't think weird steve does either, though maybe I'm giving him too much credit. But I think what he's trying to express is a challenge to a value system that says that it's better to not vote for someone because they're somewhat morally objectionable, and let the chips fall where they may, than it is to hold your proverbial nose and vote defensively to help at least keep the ship afloat.
GOP voters will always vote GOP because their goal is victory and domination so they can preserve white supremacy (most of them) and lower taxes (the rich ones). That's why they came out for Trump, even though a sizable portion of their party finds him reprehensible. It's a somewhat ugly way to behave, but they get results, because winning elections results in political power. When some on the left decide that they won't vote for the candidate who's objectively better than the GOP alternative, despite their shortcomings, it's frustrating to those who want to fight GOP fire with fire, and focus on winning elections. I don't think I'm just speaking for myself when I say they would have absolutely voted for Bernie if he was the candidate in the general, because if you don't win first, you have nothing.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
I voted for the rents too
I voted for the rents too damn high party.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
<<<<<< But I think what he's
<<<<<< But I think what he's trying to express is a challenge to a value system that says that it's better to not vote for someone because they're somewhat morally objectionable, and let the chips fall where they may, than it is to hold your proverbial nose and vote defensively to help at least keep the ship afloat.
First time voters don't hold there nose and vote for people. There not that schooled in politics. Those of us that were held our noses at the 2 worst candidates in history. I'd bet more people voted against someone than for someone in the general. I did!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Ken D.
Where does Gary Johnson fit
Where does Gary Johnson fit into this? If you look at the actual election results, far more people who "felt the Johnson" turned out for their candidate than Stein voters and would have made a real statistical difference in the critical swing states and would have thrown the election in Hillary's favor had they been so inclined.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: smiley
Remember how Bernie voters
Remember how Bernie voters kept Hillary from physically entering Wisconsin and Michigan to campaign?
Me neither.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: charmskooldropout
Pony>>jackass
Pony>>jackass
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Briank
Jesus, all this s is BS.
Jesus, all this s is BS.
Barely over 50% of eligible voters voted. Of those who did vote, the vast majority of them had no clue about the issues, or even what either Party stands for.
Bernie pissed me off because he made vapid promises to gain support. As I said earlier, that Facebook thing in the book nailed it. It isn't why Hillary lost, though. As 73 said, she simply didn't get the voters out on key states. Hillary lost because she made a strategic fuck-up.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: ...
>>>>>Nails it:
>>>>>Nails it:
Nice little story, where there concrete examples of this dynamic in the book?
"Hillary's Pony Play"
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Without a net
Bernie, Hillary, Johnson, and
Bernie, Hillary, Johnson, and Stein.
Your candidate other than Trump was NEVER gonna win.
Because of Russia!
The fact that people even argue anything other then that. Blows my mind!
Any argument of "would've, should've, could've" is just normalizing the election that was CLEARLY stolen.
Chaos and Destroying everything this Country stands for.
While trying to grab all the wealth and power when the ship is sinking, is the plan.
Repugs break shit... They don't fix shit!
They have rang the Division Bell and it's working!
We will not have Peace until we get Justice....
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Richie Nagan
>>Children, it's time to
>>Children, it's time to admit that Hillary would have been the far better choice for us all..and whoever the Dems put up will be better next time. Grow the fuck up, T.
Gio fuck yourself.
If Hillary had won we'd be fucked, and in several new wars, and there would be no mass protests against it. At least with Trump, who has been pretty much ineffectual, we have people rising up.
I don't vote for evil. Never have, never will. If the Dems want my vote, they need to run someone who I respect and who is mainly in agreement with my principles and beliefs. They fucked bernie out of the niomination and seem to be sticking to the corporatist right wing road. They are losing election after election (by the way, the corporate dem running for a winnable seat lost big and the progressive running for an unwinnable seat came very close) and their fundraising is in the shitter.
Again, let me reiterate, GO FUCK YOURSELF!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: ogkb
wow, that's real?
wow, that's real? hahahahhahaahhahahahahahaha.
incredible. no way that is real. god damn. HRC is forever a complete mess, amazing. she'll literally say anything to make a buck. trash.
<<<<>>>>Children, it's time to admit that Hillary would have been the far better choice for us all..and whoever the Dems put up will be better next time. Grow the fuck up, T.
this is the scary part. trump is so hated by the dems (of course rightfully so), that they seem to be just waiting for their perfect corporatist candidate to show its head, the perfect puppet. of course they don't want to really back a true candidate like bernie, which is a shame b/c they could really take advantage of that scenario, which could catapult their power and influence to new heights. they're fucking up again, it may pay off though, as so many people are disgusted w/ the current events-throwing up another "HrC" type candidate may work in 2020.
meanwhile, bernie hasn't stopped campaigning for the people, trying to educate people and bring about honest change and some god damn healthcare to all.
all while HRC has been writing and slinging some absolute trash about why she lost, ripping suckers off to make even more money....kind of like some other dick head...too funny. #america
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: nebulous nelly
>>If Hillary had won we'd be fucked, and in several new wars<<
You've written that on several occasions, and I'm sure you believe it....But that doesn't make it true.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
Again, there is no one reason
Again, there is no one reason why Hillary lost. In such a close election, any one factor could be the "deciding" factor. Personally I'm skeptical that giving a speech and shaking some hands in Grand Rapids or Green Bay would've done much for her in any case, but there were so many other issues that it doesn't make sense to say that that was why she failed.
On Gary Johnson, I don't think he actually has that much support, based on how he did in the last presidential. I think a lot of Republicans and maybe some Bernie folks (you'll have to tell me) voted for him as a protest vote, but didn't actually support him, and yes, could've moved the election to Hillary if they'd gone her way, though I'm inclined to think most of them wouldn't have supported her anyway. With Stein, I don't know, but I do know that she got more votes in PA/WI/MI than the difference between Hillary and Trump in each of those states (and then ran a scam recount campaign shortly after). I do think a good percentage of her voters in those states have never voted Dem at all, but again, I'm unsure.
>> of course they don't want to really back a true candidate like bernie, which is a shame b/c they could really take advantage of that scenario, which could catapult their power and influence to new heights.
If this was true, why wouldn't they? Bernie running was about Bernie. He ran against the Democratic Party from within it. Bernie winning the nomination would catapult Bernie's power and influence, but I don't think it would've done much for the Democratic Party, whose infrastructure he benefitted from but he really wanted nothing to do with.
Also can someone explain to me what a corporatist is?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Scott Schaffer
Who leaves a country packed
Who leaves a country packed with ponies to come to a non-pony country?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Def. High
Corporatist - someone who
Corporatist - someone who thinks corporations should have more power; who thinks large corporations are good for the planet, or just for them and their friends; who thinks corporations should have more rights, more influence in government, fewer regulations.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
>Because of Russia!
>Because of Russia!
yes, a major factor in the election.
The lies and propaganda distributed and then shared in the US about Hillary played a major role in getting Trump elected. Spoiler candidates like Jill Stein, Johnson and Bernie also helped to get Trump elected.
While some folks seems to understand the facts, Negman and the some of the other suckers who fell for the CON continue to cling to the lies that have been debunked and exposed long ago. Got Pizzagate?!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
...
...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
>> Corporatist - someone who
>> Corporatist - someone who thinks corporations should have more power; who thinks large corporations are good for the planet, or just for them and their friends; who thinks corporations should have more rights, more influence in government, fewer regulations.
Thanks. To my understanding, that doesn't match the Democratic Party or the Hillary 2016 campaign's platform, but maybe I'm missing something.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Without a net
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
>Grow the fuck up, T.<
>Grow the fuck up, T.<
lol.
i'll try mom.
must be pretty frustrating for you nanc, always being right and all....
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: smiley
https://twitter.com
https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/904355180933734400
Sketchy.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Without a net
IF you voted for ANYONE other
IF you voted for ANYONE other then Hillary, bad candidate or not.
Who the fuck cares other than your ego?!
Because that shit is insignificant now...
Do you see what's going on with the fate of our Nation?!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
Being right? T child, I didn
Being right? T child, I didn't know that Russia was responsible for spreading the propaganda or that Trump..and apparently Jill Stein were Putin's puppets. I only knew that the better choice was Hillary. the facts are there if you want to see them.
I do know that now though and also know that unless people come to their senses and work together and with the Dems and Democratic Socialists to fight the fascist GOP administration we are all fucked.
ask not what the Democratic Party can do for you, ask what you can do for the Democratic Party.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: ogkb
you'd think the democratic
you'd think the democratic party would be all ears at this point....
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
Assange the Con is working
Assange the Con is working for Putin.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Ausonius
"amplified by Russian
"amplified by Russian propagandas techniques."
Some fantasies never die.
The problem the progressive left faces is that there will always be someone who will offer to give you even more of other peoples money.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: smiley
<<<Assange the Con is working
<<<Assange the Con is working for Putin
The emails are verified.
Podesta even admitted as much.
I wonder what Bobby Mook thought they had on Bernie and what "the agreement" was.
It might just explain a whole lot.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Without a net
>> The problem the
>> The problem the progressive left faces is that there will always be someone who will offer to give you even more of other peoples money.
Thom - Does it always come down to money with you? What about humanity??
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Def. High
Thom believes that the
Thom believes that the Russians didn't interfere with the election.
>>>>>even more of other peoples money.
Does he believe in progressive income taxation?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Without a net
73 - You think Russia helped
73 - You think Russia helped Trump get elected?
Even if you do a lil...
Isn't that the real issue here??
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
>ask what you can do for the
>ask what you can do for the Democratic Party. <
help them become not republican-lite?
Bernie was the best candidate, that much is clear. Too bad the "democratic" party couldn't see that re-running a failed, hated candidate was not in their best interests. Even placating the Bernie movement by putting him on the ticket would have been enough in my estimation. Oh well.
Remember when getting Billy Clinton in office was good because, he wasn't a Bush? Remember when Obamma had hope? This shit got us nowhere.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Fly
Steve and Uncle Sam are
Steve and Uncle Sam are making sense. Don't think it matters to some here though. Nothing like mentioning HRC and Burnie to get the angry folks going. I was angry too, in my "cant believe that it was elected" period. Have to move ahead. Personally im working locally for change, hoping we don't go to war, the economy stays stable, and looking ahead to 2020. Its coming fast. United We Stand.
I think most folks here can agree on disliking Trump.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
https://mobile.nytimes.com
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/opinion/democratic-party-rich-thom...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Johnny D
I'm not exactly sure why so
I'm not exactly sure why so many people are supposed to fuck themselves...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
>> Remember when getting
>> Remember when getting Billy Clinton in office was good because, he wasn't a Bush? Remember when Obamma had hope? This shit got us nowhere.
Only if you think strong economic and job growth, broad expansions of rights and protections for the vulnerable, and hundreds of progressive judges on the bench for life is nowhere
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: fish
regardless of who you cast
regardless of who you cast your vote for, the premise that your candidate is entitled to someone else's vote as well because they simply don't have the numbers, is ludicrous
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
I refuse to accept that
I refuse to accept that Democrats are Republican lite because they take campaign contributions from large financial interests. The Republican Party is dedicated to lowering taxes for the wealthy and maintaining and sustaining white supremacy. The Democratic Party is not. Everything else is just noise.
When Thom says "The problem the progressive left faces is that there will always be someone who will offer to give you even more of other peoples money," that's Republican "fuck you, I got mine" politics. That's not the Democratic Party.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
well uncle sam, some of that
well uncle sam, some of that may be true...
also see the wars and continued status quo, the wall st. fiasco...the continued corporate plundering of our system...etc.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
>I refuse to accept that
>I refuse to accept that Democrats are Republican lite because they take campaign contributions from large financial interests<
its a bit more complicated than that.
but for the most part. yeah. repub-lite.
clinton/obamma continued many of the same policies for the vested economic interests. they in fact were terrific republicans. they were better speakers and seemingly more intelligent/articulate than any of the repub candidates that ran against them. that's what makes the repubs nuts. the fact that they offer "some" progressive social platforms should not take away from their continued failed neo-liberal economic policies.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
If Clinton and Obama were
If Clinton and Obama were Republicans, what does Republican mean to you? And what does Democrat mean?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Def. High
Nothing or nobody is all good
Nothing or nobody is all good or all evil, so let's move on. Both are corporatists, so let's move on.
Dif. is, Trump is dumb, incompetent, and bat-shit crazy.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: tracy
>>>Who leaves a country
>>>Who leaves a country packed with ponies to come to a non-pony country?
Great Seinfeld reference gets totally buried. I blame Russia.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
https://mobile.nytimes.com
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/17/opinion/sunday/the-tent-cities-of-...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
Republican mean to you?
Republican mean to you?
-Corporate Elite fluffers
And what does Democrat mean?
-Corporate Elite fluffers that occasionally throw a bone to a minority demographic on a social issue
hope that helps.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: makaha
it is incumbent on mrs
it is incumbent on mrs clinton to publicly apologize for attacking the most valuable asset the democratic party, and the country, has at the moment.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Ken D.
If Hillary needs to assign
If Hillary needs to assign blame to someone other than herself, let's look at the numbers.
Johnson took in 3.28% of the vote.
Stein took in 1.07% of the vote.
So the "spoilers" took in a combined 4.35% of the vote.
The total turn out of eligible voters was 54.7%. That means 45.3% of eligible voters stayed home or otherwise couldn't be bothered to show up for anyone.
So if you are going to blame voters for not showing up for Clinton, the shamey finger really needs to be wagged at the 45.3% of the eligible voters who did not participate at all, rather than the 4.35% who decided to vote their conscious with a third party and who probably have voted third party in previous elections and really weren't in play for the Dems or GOP to begin with.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
>> it is incumbent on mrs
>> it is incumbent on mrs clinton to publicly apologize for attacking the most valuable asset the democratic party, and the country, has at the moment.
She doesn't owe Bernie a damn thing. And he's not an asset of the Democratic Party as long as he keeps railing against it.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
http://www.latimes.com
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-housing-shortage-law-question...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
yep....not a thing wrong w
yep....not a thing wrong w the democratic party.....
toke.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
>Only if you think strong
>Only if you think strong economic and job growth, broad expansions of rights and protections for the vulnerable, and hundreds of progressive judges on the bench for life is nowhere
and billions of dollars in tax cuts for the rich, elimination National Monuments (parks).
anyone who believes that the Dems are GOP lite only need to look at every Obama policy TrumpCo is reversing.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
George Soros and Weather
George Soros and Weather Underground have found a way to control the weather. This has to be true first red state Texas floods and now Florida in trouble.
This will be going around Facebook like Russian propaganda
GOP to Trump "Russia investigation cover for your agenda...deal".
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: O'Toole
Nanc is correct as usual.
Nanc is correct as usual.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
>and billions of dollars in
>and billions of dollars in tax cuts for the rich<
oh yeah, the dems are good at that too!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
T is getting cranky again.
T is getting cranky again.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: makaha
beyond the apology alone, a
beyond the apology alone, a true sign of comradery and party unity would be for mrs. clinton, like senator harris and many other democrats, to publicly support bernies policy leadership and his single payer bill. it's time to come together.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: smiley
Pretty condescending to
Pretty condescending to equate programs basic to most other first world countries to "ponies", the flight of fancy of young girls around the world.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
It can't be party unity
It can't be party unity because it's not his party.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
Mrs Clinton isn't serving in
Mrs Clinton isn't serving in Government, she is retired. Makes no difference if she supports DEMOCRAT Kamala Harris' bill for single payer health care. It IS important for the other DEMOCRATIC Senators to support the Bill, and for VOTERS to support the DEMOCRATIC candidates like Kamala Harris who are nothing like the GOP counterparts. Do I need to spell it out slower for the children here?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
Worst recruiter ever.
Worst recruiter ever.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
>Pretty condescending
>Pretty condescending
Must be why I like the bitch.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
children..and poolboys.
children..and poolboys.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: nebulous nelly
>beyond the apology alone, a true sign of comradery and party unity would be for mrs. clinton, like senator harris and many other democrats, to publicly support bernies policy leadership and his single payer bill. it's time to come together<
Lava, has Sanders shared his donor/mailing list with the DNC?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
For Thom and other Russia
For Thom and other Russia truthers:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/facebook-says-it-sold-political-...
Facebook says it sold political ads to Russian company during 2016 election
By Carol D. Leonnig, Tom Hamburger and Rosalind S. Helderman
September 6 at 3:59 PM
Representatives of Facebook told congressional investigators Wednesday that it has discovered it sold ads during the U.S. presidential election to a shadowy Russian company seeking to target voters, according to several people familiar with the company’s findings. Facebook officials reported that they traced the ad sales, totaling $100,000, to a Russian “troll farm” with a history of pushing pro-Kremlin propaganda, these people said.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: nebulous nelly
^Thom probably believes that
^Thom probably believes that Trump had the largest inaugural crowd EVER! PERIOD!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
$100,000 in Facebook adds.
$100,000 in Facebook adds.
did Clinton speak to Zuck about this?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: makaha
yes, nanc, glad to have
yes, nanc, glad to have harris on-board – let's see if her support extends into campaign season, that's the true test.
Sen. Kamala Harris backs Bernie Sanders’s single-payer bill [wapo link]
great question, tom. the frequent high-profile public appearances bernie and the dp have jointly managed, since the election, are indeed having an impact in bringing the party back into relevancy, with, both, older and younger generations, and in recovering from that electoral embarrassment. bernie has been visiting deep red regions of the country, a courageous move, alone, not many in the party have done, with on the ground messaging pushing left-leaning policies of the dp in trump country. and yes, aside from the new generation of left-leaning digital and strategy groups incubated from the 2016 campaign that have since fertilized the left, co-mailing with members of the dp has occurred.
think mrs. clinton will, at some point, participate in the policy co-campaining bernie is doing with the party, or has she become too much of a liability, now?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
Nancy wold view:
Nancy wold view:
all democrats good.
all repubs bad
all independents children
golly it sure is a simple world mom!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
I haven't seen any reporting
I haven't seen any reporting saying Bernie has given his campaign's email list to the DNC, despite his collaboration with Tom Perez
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
https://secure.actblue.com
https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/dwsdefault?express_lane=true&...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
Hush, child.
Oh T..Hush, child.
Turtle's world view:
I can't get what I want so I'm going to throw a hissy fit
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: makaha
unclesam, it's not common
unclesam, it's not common practice to 'give' lists away, instead it's more common to share access – political entities, public and private companies do this all the time.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
i think i have articulated my
i think i have articulated my point of view without being condescending or patronizing.
its ok if you are still stuck in the 80's/90's mode of "holding your nose".
sorry the shit stinks so bad i can no longer be complict.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
Goodbye cruel Democratic
Goodbye cruel Democratic Party- lol.
Dude, you're about as relevant as Negman.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
>> unclesam, it's not common
>> unclesam, it's not common practice to 'give' lists away, instead it's more common to share access
Yes it is, though it's usually a sale and not free
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-dnc-email-list_us_58...
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/252144-dnc-has-full-access-to-obama...
http://adage.com/article/digital/romney-digital-team-unload-data-campaig...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
well when i registered to
well when i registered to vote back in 1988 or whatever....i chose "peace and freedom".
some of us have known the game is rigged for quite some time.
these are not new positions for me.
debate is good.
"they" want us squabbling over stupid shit. we are close on most issues. break out of this legacy mindset. it is not helpful.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
Goodbye, Turtle
Goodbye, Turtle
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
good luck with your party mom
good luck with your party mom.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: That’s Nancy with the laughin’ face
Good luck with the GOP, child
Good luck with the GOP, child.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
...
...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: good at drinking water
my essential point is that
my essential point is that the GOP is a unified* hate group.
Think Taliban. Listen to Sessions talk about little kids who grew up in America (DACA).
(*Well, other than the Donald, he's just a lunatic).
The GOP often wins because of division between democrats.
Bernie helped dis-unify the Democrats in 2016. Nader did it in 2000.
I guess I wish that people who claim to be against the GOP agenda would actually do something to stop the GOP.
Dan Savage sums up my point of view pretty well:
https://qz.com/742168/disaster-will-come-dan-savages-epic-rant-lays-out-...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
i vote 99% dem for most
i vote 99% dem for most offices so i don't know what to tell you people.
address $ in politics and gerrymandering or nothing will get better.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
i vote 99% dem for most
i vote 99% dem for most offices so i don't know what to tell you people.
address $ in politics and gerrymandering or nothing will get better.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Fly
((Troll Farm)). good name for
((Troll Farm)). good name for a message board
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
Census is in 2020 so we need
Census is in 2020 so we need to flip House or it's another 10 years of GOP gerrymandering 2020-2030 Fuck that!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
It's often said that the GOP
It's often said that the GOP is run by wealthy people conning poor people to support them.
The Dem party doesn't need my money.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
Facebook Says Likely Russian
Facebook Says Likely Russian-Based Operation Spent Money On Political Ads
The findings buttress U.S. intelligence agency conclusions that Russia was actively involved in shaping the 2016 election.
Joseph Menn and David Ingram
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/facebook-says-likely-russian-based-o...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
Was Ellen Degeneres actively
Was Ellen Degeneres actively involved in shaping the 2016 election?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
was kid rock?
was kid rock?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
Slacker pupusa gets sore
Slacker's pupusa gets sore whenever I go Russian.
Nostrovia
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
Money well spent.
Money well spent.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: jeff
Tough day for a few folks.
Tough day for a few folks.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
<<<<<<<<Bernie helped dis
<<<<<<<<Bernie helped dis-unify the Democrats in 2016. Nader did it in 2000.
If you believe that your part of the problem!
Trump and Bernie brought RECORD NUMBERS OF FIRST TIME VOTERS. One party accepted them and the other spit on them and said no thanks!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: makaha
unclesam, when did barry
barry shared access to, but did not provide his own list to the dnc until late into his second term, which was a point of contention amongst party establishment, unclesam, your middle link states this and also partially articulates why it isn’t a good idea to simply give lists away, or sell them.
data has saturated everything, including political campaigns, and not all data is the same. for instance, in political campaigns voter data and other behavioral data sets can often be shared with greater results than, say, data obtained with a degree of trust, like, fundraising or email lists.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: pumpkin lurker
I think I need to read this
I think I need to read this book when I can d/l for free to my non-existent kindle. HRC doesn't need any of my money...Planning on giving it all to Bernie in another couple years! Bitter is as bitter does, that is what my momma used to say. Who cares about email lists, do any of you guys actually read political emails? I sent all my bernie emails to spam, and then unsubscribed when I couldn't take it any more. {{{steal this book}}}
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
>> unclesam, when did barry
>> unclesam, when did barry provide his list to the dnc?
I literally included a link! But here it is again, so it can't be missed this time: http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/252144-dnc-has-full-access-to-obama...
Edit to add that Lava edited his post to completely remove and replace his question, but I'll leave the link up here anyway
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
Lava I don't really know what
Lava I don't really know what point you're trying to make now besides that different datasets have different purposes. I think you're trying in a roundabout way to defend Bernie not giving his email list to the Democratic Party, which I don't really have a problem with, but that's all I'm getting.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: makaha
thanks for the link again, us
thanks for the link again, us, i got pulled away. yeah, peeps were pissed at barry during the midterms, but he did provide access to his list. anyway, i bet we can both agree that the next few election cycles are going to be real interesting!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: makaha
not a huge seth meyers fan,
not a huge seth meyers fan, but he's got some timely commentary on mrs. clinton ...
https://youtu.be/TREjEuf52FU
:)
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Richie Nagan
>>Dude, you're about as
>>Dude, you're about as relevant as Negman.
I am way more relevant than you, Nancy. You see, people read and listen to what I have to say, because I think for myself. Unlike you, who has been brainwashed by the very epople that are fucking you in the ass.
Just think of this, how many people know who I am and love and respect me and how few do you.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: thinthread
She's as nasty as wasserman
She's as nasty as wasserman-schultz
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: makaha
Lava I don't really
i was briefly explaining why it's uncommon, and not best practices, to simply give away lists, especially in political campaigns, and that one of your links supports that reality by highlighting what obama did, himself.
what bern is doing now, for the dp, is unequivocally more substantial than simply giving the dnc his list. from his down ballet to state level to national races and policies, bern has been busting ass since she lost the ge.
the viral talking point that bernie not handing over his list to the dnc as proof he doesn't support democrats is a nothing more than a false premise raddled out from the damaged and increasingly isolated and divisive establishment left echo chamber.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
Do you work in politics, Lava
Do you work in politics, Lava?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: smiley
<<<nasty as wasserman-schultz
<<<nasty as wasserman-schultz
Wasserman-Shultz is in real trouble if anyone ever starts paying attention to the case against her staffer, Imran Awan , and his brothers and associates. It still baffles me we aren't talking more about these guys that ran the IT accounts of over 40 key democratic lawmakers (many on Intelligence Committees) and were involved in a known breach of DNC data.
I see yesterday that Awan's wife is being extradited back to the US in relation to all of this now.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: nebulous nelly
>>viral talking point that
>>viral talking point that bernie not handing over his list to the dnc as proof he doesn't support democrats is a nothing more than a false premise raddled out from the damaged and increasingly isolated and divisive establishment left echo chamber<<
The donor list has been a point of contention, no? I get the impression that many in the DNC would like to have that list, and that Sanders' unwillingness to share it is viewed with both mistrust and fear.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: smiley
http://www.politico.com/story
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/07/hillary-clinton-book-tour-democ...
President Donald Trump may be the only person in politics truly excited about Hillary Clinton’s book tour.
Democratic operatives can’t stand the thought of her picking the scabs of 2016, again — the Bernie Sanders divide, the Jim Comey complaints, the casting blame on Barack Obama for not speaking out more on Russia. Alums of her Brooklyn headquarters who were miserable even when they thought she was winning tend to greet the topic with, “Oh, God,” “I can’t handle it,” and “the final torture
Asked whether she was excited about Clinton’s book tour, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), one of Republicans’ top 2018 targets, responded first with, “Beg your pardon?”
Asked again, she started shaking her head, walking away
Even among some of Clinton's former aides, there's an exhaustion of not wanting to have to defend her anymore. They’ve spent the past two weeks chattering among themselves about the rollout, including frustration over the sheer number of Twitter jokes about Clinton visiting Wisconsin on the tour — something she famously didn't do during the general election.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: O'Toole
>>>You see, people read and
>>>You see, people read and listen to what I have to say, because I think for myself.
Apparently you read and listen to what Nancy says because you just replied. While Obama could have done more he was still a good President considering what he was handed coming in, your commentary on him is no more relevant than anything Nanc says around here. The anal comment is low brow BTW.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Sideshow Bob
BOTH Hillary and Bernie
BOTH Hillary and Bernie should GO THE FUCK AWAY!!!!
BOTH Unelectable Turd Sandwiches without the charisma/appeal to excite the base/sway swing voters.
Oh and take Dem leadership with you (Pelosi et/al).
Time for New Blood. We need a GIANT DOUCHE to take on the GIANTEST DOUCHE of all time.
Last time we had a GIANT DOUCHE was Bill Clinton.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Richie Nagan
Growthe fuck up isn't low
Growthe fuck up isn't low brow?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Richie Nagan
The most popular politician
The most popular politician in the country is unelectable? He has no charisma? Are you high?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: makaha
tom, that bernie list mumbo
tom, that bernie list mumbo jumbo is nothing more than an establishment manufactured red herring. as discussed above, it is uncommon to give away lists, in any sector, obama didn't give his own list to the dnc until well into his second term.
it's become clear the establishment will continue to bruise bernie until he's no longer perceived as an electoral threat to their own interests, interests which are increasingly at odds with the democratic party's own voting blocs.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Sideshow Bob
"Most Popular" lmao. Bernie
"Most Popular" lmao. Bernie's base is Hipsters & Socialists. He has nearly Zero appeal with minorities or white working class rust belt-ers. Unelectable. No charisma, and his Mel Brooks Movie-esque Jewish nerd looks & combined Brooklyn/New England accent are a HUGE turnoff to anyone not a hipster or socialist. So, yeah, UNELECTABLE.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Sideshow Bob
Also pile on this story,
Also pile on this story, which demonstrates to me (and anyone not a hipster or socialist), even if he did nothing wrong, that his priorities are all in the wrong place, because, after all, what America really needs is another Elite New England Liberal Arts College:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/15/us/politics/bernie-sanders-jane-sande...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
sideshow wants someone cuter.
sideshow wants someone cuter.
mom says we have to be happy with used old buicks. we can't have t birds.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
"Mr. Sanders remains one of
"Mr. Sanders remains one of the most popular political figures in the country"
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Def. High
Warren/Booker 2020.
Warren/Booker 2020.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
<<<<<He has nearly Zero
<<<<<He has nearly Zero appeal with minorities or white working class rust belt-ers.
Quit sniffing gorilla glue!
That why Bernie killed it in the rural area's only he & Trump got those votes. 2nd half of the primaries Bernie outreach to minorities delivered California primary even though HRC was declared the winner before the polls opened! Had Bernie's outreach to minorities that his policy greatly benefit them to been better in the 1st half he would be president.
Every Poll showed Bernie beating Trump but hey it's time to ram a woman down your throats who Fox News and the GOP have been campaigning against since 1992. They were never going to lose to HRC after 25 years of preparing to beat her.
Progressives have enthusiasm in fight for the Democratic party. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker & Chris Murphy or will we get Obama retreads Joe Biden or Duval Patrick...No thanks in the Democratic primary but hell yes against Trump!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: O'Toole
Sideshow has a point, look
Sideshow has a point, look who we just elected, we really need someone new to step up that is more electable. I'd gladly vote for Bernie, just think we can do better.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
>> Had Bernie's outreach to
>> Had Bernie's outreach to minorities that his policy greatly benefit them to been better in the 1st half he would be president
The argument that if only some group of people had heard your message better, you would've won, is always a poor excuse for losing, especially in 2017 with so much information available for anyone who wants it. Also, arguing that if only minorities had paid attention they would've seen the light of Bernie is also incredibly condescending and patronizing. Black women, especially, vote at higher rates than any other group. They are informed.
Separately, Bernie certainly had appeal in the rust belt among white working class voters. So did Hillary in 2008 -- when she was the non-black candidate. This time she embraced Black Lives Matter (even if they weren't so warm to her all the way through) and took on the mantle of racial justice, which Bernie gestured at occasionally but certainly didn't make the focus of this campaign. Not saying the white Bernie voters were racist, just that they voted against the candidate for whom the issue was central, just as in 2008.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
Hillary won the southern
Hillary won the southern minorities votes and Bernie didn't that's how she won the democratic primaries.
That was Bernie's campaign fault not minority voters. Nice spin straight from the entrenched democrats playbook.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
What could or should Bernie
What could or should Bernie have said to minority voters that he didn't say that would have led them to support him?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
Outreach that HRC husband
Outreach that HRC husband Bill Clinton cut deals with GOP during his presidency that resulted in minorities being thrown in prison in great numbers. Police brutality (hello Michael Bennett) Hillary nothing, Bernie addressing. Bernie's progressive economic policy would lift all Americans up. Single Payer Healthcare good for everyone regardless of race.
HRC dog whistling during 2008 campaign against Obama. Maybe that's why Obama voters stayed home in 2016 general.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Sideshow Bob
I like Bernie as a person and
I like Bernie as a person and agree with many "Socialist" policies (I support Single Payer health care amongst others), but, like Ralph Nader before him, he loses me when he runs for president. Stay on the sidelines & keep fighting the good fight, & I support him. Keep everyone in suspense about whether you're gonna run or not for month after month, ginning the drama up to 11, you've lost me & I will work against him.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
Bernie ginning up the drama??
Bernie ginning up the drama????
Tom Perez named head of DNC over Keith Ellison by incumbent career democrats. Perez is a entrenched democrat doing a shitty job of running the party into the ground instead of a open debate of ideas.
DNC leadership has lead us to our lowest percentage of State and Federal public offices held.
Warren/Sanders/Harris wing have great enthusiasm.
Who's got enthusiasm in HRC wing????????? Nobody except for It's Bernie's fault-ers!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: good at drinking water
What makes you think Bernie
What makes you think Bernie is a member of the Democratic Party?
https://twitter.com/SenSanders
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Sideshow Bob
I The Onion:
I
The Onion:
http://www.theonion.com/article/clinton-already-working-follow-book-cast...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: good at drinking water
Onion rocks.
Onion rocks.
As for insults on this zone, really? L:ife is too short to give a shit. For those interested in insults, whatever.
But here's a simple philosophy I follow:
1) The current* GOP is incredibly bad. 2) Therefore, the goal is to minimize the chance of the current* GOP winning.
*Eisenhower was OK, Nixon did the EPA & OSHA & the Clean Air Act....
I get it, many people think the goal is to attack the democratic nominee for not being left enough.
Many of you, on this thread, claim the fact that the country is dominated by Republicans is an indictment of Democratic party positions.
As I see it, you are citing evidence of the right winning elections...as evidence that the left is not left enough.
Has it ever occurred to you that the right is winning elections because the left is not right enough?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
no weird steve. its because
no weird steve. its because of right wing monetary donations flooding in, gerrymandering, corporate media, and precisely the opposite. they have moved so far to the right on most issues there is little difference when it comes to foreign policy and wall st banking...you're way off mark.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: good at drinking water
>>> its because of right
>>> its because of right wing monetary donations flooding in, gerrymandering, corporate media
And you will fight this by urging policies that will cost the people who run this country money in order to pay for health care for poor people?
Are you sure you really understand how the country is run?
The people who run for state representatives need money to win elections.
P.S. Obama and the Democrats taxed the wealthy to pay for health care for poor people.
The "leftists" claim that Democrats like Obama are "O-same-a" ...that they are no different than the GOP.
I offer the ACA as an example of the Democratic Party being better than the GOP.
P.S.S.: http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/22/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-is-evil...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: good at drinking water
P.S.S.S. Why do you hate
P.S.S.S. Why do you hate bankers?
Should it be against the law to make a lot of money?
Should we tell Phil he has too much money?
How many of you think a marginal tax rate of 50% is too low?
I gotta tell you, nobody I know who works for a living thinks you should have to give 50% or more to the Government.
Democrat? Republican? Doesn't matter, if you work for your pay you think you should get half, at least.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
wow.
wow.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
>>> there is little
>>> there is little difference when it comes to foreign policy and wall st banking
But there are so many other issues out there where the parties couldn't be further apart, and they're the ones that affect people's rights and freedoms every day -- reproductive health care (frankly, all health care), labor rights, environmental protections. You can't just focus on those two areas, frustrating as the Democrats are when it comes to them. There is so so so much more at stake.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
>The people who run for state
>The people who run for state representatives need money to win elections.<
golly, why is that weird steve?
> Why do you hate bankers?<
uhh because, history?
>Are you sure you really understand how the country is run?<
pretty sure. time to change it.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
i get that uncle sam. and
i get that uncle sam. and thanks for articulating your point of view nicely.
like i said, i mostly vote dem for most offices because, well for those very reasons. not much choice...how is it that monied interests can basically re-program the thought processes of the very people that they oppress?
too bad the dem party as an organization, with their super delegate bullshit and willingness to directly undermine the candidate that was resonating with millions of americans.
well we know why, don't we weird $teve?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Back to Back
>> how is it that monied
>> how is it that monied interests can basically re-program the thought processes of the very people that they oppress?
Not quite sure what you're getting at here? But to the fact that you vote Dem most of the time, that's good, but I'd just note that which party is in the White House has as big if not a bigger impact on how those issues I mentioned play out, particularly because of who they put on the Supreme Court and other federal courts, then what party your local city council/congressperson is. Republicans know that really well, which is why a lot of them voted for Trump even though they couldn't stand him.
Also, would just quickly note again that Bernie would've lost without the superdelegates too, and that despite some shady behavior at the DNC, nothing that they did there had much of an impact on the primary race. But we should probably leave that aside.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Sideshow Bob
I hear Kentucky will soon be
I hear Kentucky will soon be the 1st state w/o an abortion clinic. So when some poor woman hemorrhages & dies because she had to have a coat hanger bare bulb bootleg abortion, she can thank all the Leftists for whom Hillary wasn't Pure enough.
>>>>>>> directly undermine the candidate that was resonating with millions of americans
Yeah, because there was/is such a Critical Mass of Bearded Gen Y Hipsters and Balding Baby Boomer/Millenial/Gen X Avowed Socialists just waiting to vote Bernie in. If he's the candidate in either 2016 or 2020, he loses in a landslide ala McGovern in '72. Mark. My. Word.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Sideshow Bob
Oh yeah and inaction on
Oh yeah and inaction on/denial of climate change whilst 3 giant hurricanes fueled by warm oceans churn off our shores, yeah, we can thank NOT having Hillary in office for that too . . .
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: thinthread
LOL
LOL
Doesn't have a damn thing to do w/climate change.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Sideshow Bob
Uh yeah it most certainly
Uh yeah it most certainly does. Warmer oceans are fueling these storms & they've grown in intensity faster than any storms in recent memory. One after the other. How much Science do you know?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
uh sideshow bob...if it were
uh sideshow bob...if it were just hipsters...how did he WIN like 20+ states?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: thinthread
Sure they have
Sure they have
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 2 Room Shack
hillman, you in the
hillman, you in the carolinas?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Sideshow Bob
>>>>>>>> uh sideshow bob...if
>>>>>>>> uh sideshow bob...if it were just hipsters...how did he WIN like 20+ states?
'Cause it's the Primaries, Duh, and of course, just like on the Repug side, in Primaries the Fringe voters are always more enthusiastic/turn out in greater numbers. And let's not forget the Avowed Socialists. And oh yeah Hillary was the Turdiest of all Turd Sandwiches Ever.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: makaha
let's hope that mrs. clinton and her friends are able to eventually get behind bern and the rest of the party with single payer and other initiatives like the fight for $15. time to come together, especially if they have the most popular politician in the country, atm, on their side.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: ParadiseWaits
Just bought Bernie's book.
Just bought Bernie's book. Looking forward to reading it on my day off.
https://www.amazon.com/Bernie-Sanderss-Our-Revolution-Generation/dp/1250...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: CT
I'll tell you what went wrong
I'll tell you what went wrong with Hilary's campaign:
1) she is universally unlikable
2) she was fairly branded dishonest, and it was obvious she was in bed with the DNC to steal the primary at any cost, disenfranchising millions of voters.
3) she let herself collapse in public, and the video went viral.
4) to summarize, she was universally viewed as a sickly, unlikable, dishonest candidate. One that lost to donald fucking trump, which also makes her one of the weakest politicians in modern times.
and imo, not qualified to carry Bernie Sander's gym shorts. I'm
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Sideshow Bob
>>>>>>> I'll tell you what
>>>>>>> I'll tell you what went wrong with Hilary's campaign:
Going to Ohio & stating that she was going to eliminate coal mining jobs was probably the one thing that lost her the election. Even if she was technically correct, and in fact the erosion in coal mining jobs has very little to do with Gov't policy, & way more to do with Fracking making natural gas dirt cheap.
And I'll keep saying these thing to the point of Insufferability:
One thing the Dem's (& especially the liberal/left wing) keep Fumbling the Ball on, is that MESSAGING is entirely VITAL to WINNING. Unfortunately most Lefties have the attitude (and I'm just as guilty of this on occasion): "I'm Right because I'm Knowlegable & Study the issues, therefore, I MUST convince those on the other side of my Rightness". Instead, change the MESSAGE. Example: Let's stop calling it "Socialized Medicine" That's TRULY a Dog Whistle term for the Right. Even "Single Payer" is not good. I can envision Thom & my Dad: "Libtard Snowflake Communist Hippies Just Want More Handouts from the Gov't". Let's, instead, call it "Medicare for All". EVERY senior citizen LOVES their Medicare, and Medicare is one thing the Gov't does Competently. Postitive Messaging, Maaannnnn
Also the Idealogical Purity thing hurts. Look at the Evangelicals, willing to vote for the Pussy Grabber, whilst Hillary was simply not Pure enuff for the Bernie Bots. Another example: Today/last night I've seen nothing but Vilification from Bernie bots about the news that Max Baucus changed his mind on Medicare for All (remember: MESSAGING). Instead, you should be Rejoicing that his mind was changed, hey, isn't that what you guys are trying to do? Change Minds? And hey, if you changed his mind, you can change Others!!!!! Positive Vibrations, Mannnnnn!!!!!!
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Sideshow Bob
>>>>>>> the most popular
>>>>>>> the most popular politician in the country,
Really? 1 % point above the Pussy Grabber? 7%? Gimme a Fuckin' Break. I don't want your Kool Aide.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: good at drinking water
...
...
,
...
...
...
...
...
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Hitchhiker awaiting "true call"
In 2020, Trump will claim he
In 2020, Trump will claim he's the most physically/mentally fit for office because he played 7200 holes last term.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
HRC is selling a book to make
HRC is selling a book to make $$$$$$$$$$$$
It's dividing the party all so she can tell her story for $$$$$$$$$$$
HRC will probably donate the money to the Clinton Foundation
FYI - This shit is why she lost
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
Thomas Frank: Hillary Blames
Thomas Frank: Hillary Blames Everybody for Trump's Triumph But Herself
"What Happened" is less an effort to explain than it is to explain away.
By Thomas Frank / The Guardian
September 12, 2017, 8:53 AM GMT
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/thomas-frank-hillary-blames-ev...
How do you lose the presidency to a man like Donald Trump? He was the most unpopular presidential candidate of all time, compounding blunder with blunder and heaping gaffe upon gaffe. Keeping him from the Oval Office should have been the single-minded mission of the Democratic party. And it should have been easy for them.
Instead they lost, and now their 2016 candidate Hillary Clinton comes before us to account for this monumental failure, to tell us What Happened. Unfortunately, her new book is less an effort to explain than it is to explain away.
No real blame ever settles anywhere near Clinton’s person. And while she wrestles gamely with the larger historical question of why the party of the people has withered as inequality grows, she never offers a satisfying answer. Instead, most of the blame is directed outward, at familiar suspects like James Comey, the Russians and the media.
Still, by exercising a little discernment, readers can find clues to the mystery of 2016 here and there among the clouds of blame-evasion and positive thinking.
Start at the beginning: why did Hillary Clinton run for president? “[B]ecause I thought I’d be good at the job,” she writes. Then, 13 pages later: “It was a chance to do the most good I would ever be able to do.”
A would-be do-gooder needs problems to solve, of course, and so Clinton says she turned next to the people who knew what was wrong. “I started calling policy experts,” she writes, “reading thick binders of memos, and making lists of problems that needed more thought.” Lists of problems and solutions are everywhere; reeling them off one after another is one of her favorite rhetorical devices, her way of checking the boxes and letting everyone know that she cares.
Proceeding in this rational, expert-sanctioned way, Hillary Clinton set out resolutely on the road to oblivion.
She seems to have been almost totally unprepared for the outburst of populist anger that characterized 2016, an outburst that came under half a dozen different guises: trade, outsourcing, immigration, opiates, deindustrialization, and the recent spectacle of Wall Street criminals getting bailed out. It wasn’t the issues that mattered so much as the outrage, and Donald Trump put himself in front of it. Clinton couldn’t.
To her credit, and unlike many of her most fervent supporters, Hillary Clinton doesn’t deny that this web of class-related problems had some role in her downfall. When she isn’t repeating self-help bromides or calumniating the Russians she can be found wondering why so many working-class people have deserted the Democratic party.
This is an important question, and in dealing with it Clinton writes a few really memorable passages, like her description of a grotesque campaign stop in West Virginia where she was protested by a crowd that included the former CEO of the company that owned the Upper Big Branch mine, where 29 coal miners died in 2010.
But by and large, Clinton’s efforts to understand populism always get short-circuited, probably because taking it seriously might lead one to conclude that working people have a legitimate beef with her and the Democratic party.
Countless inconvenient items get deleted from her history. She only writes about trade, for example, in the most general terms; Nafta and the TPP never. Her husband’s program of bank deregulation is photoshopped out. The names Goldman Sachs and Walmart never come up.
Besides, to take populism seriously might also mean that Bernie Sanders, who was “outraged about everything,” might have had a point, and much of What Happened is dedicated to blasting Sanders for challenging Clinton in the Democratic primaries. Given that he later endorsed her and even campaigned for her, this can only be described as churlish, if not downright dishonest.
That Clinton might have done well to temper her technocratic style with some populist outrage of her own only dawns on her towards the end of the book, by which point it is too late.
Not to mention impossible. Hillary Clinton simply cannot escape her satisfied white-collar worldview – compulsively listing people’s academic credentials, hobnobbing with officers from Facebook and Google, and telling readers how she went to Davos in 1998 to announce her philosophy.
And then, in her concluding chapter, returning to her beloved alma mater Wellesley College and informing graduates of that prestigious institution that, with their “capacity for critical thinking” (among other things) they were “precisely what we needed in America in 2017.”
I wish it were so. I wish that another crop of elite college grads were what we needed. I wish Hillary’s experts and her enlightened capitalist friends could step in and fix this shabby America we inhabit today, where racists march in the streets and the Midwest falls apart and cops shoot motorists for no reason and a blustering groper inhabits the White House.
I wish it were all a matter of having a checklist of think-tank approved policy solutions. But I know for sure it isn’t. And voters knew that, too.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: good at drinking water
https://www.wsj.com/amp
https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/senate-panel-likely-to-ask-facebook-to-...
http://www.newsweek.com/mueller-trump-russia-investigation-president-663534
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Oaksterdam Dan
After Tax reform fails Trump
After Tax reform fails Trump works with Democrats rest of his short presidency. GOP will assist in sacking Trump over Russia in favor of Mike (make abortion illegal) Pence. He will toe the GOP line unlike Trump. Congress the House specifically has to vote for a Senate trial correct on the Mueller findings??
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _
Great thread.
Great thread.