Tuesday Morning Open Thread: The (D) Column

… maybe that stands for (D)ueling (D)eities?

Also, a bloc of supporters that only the Dems would, uhhh, solicit (and good for Hillary, doing so!)

…[E]arly organizing in the state and a last-minute on-the-ground push by Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and its supporters paid off. And Mrs. Clinton, who is typically a reserved presence on the trail, seemed to embrace the quirkiness of campaigning in Las Vegas, posing for photographs with Britney Spears, who was in town for her show at Planet Hollywood, and even receiving the endorsement of 500 sex workers, mostly from Carson City brothels, who formed the “Hookers 4 Hillary” group…


More excellent reporting on the Nevada organizing efforts, from Buzzfeed:

… Before Hillary Clinton took the stage to give her victory speech on Saturday, she was introduced not by one of the high-profile Latino surrogates the campaign sent to Nevada in the final days, but by Emmy Ruiz, the state director.

“From the bottom of my heart, I want to thank all my field organizers who have worked so hard and our precinct captains who knocked on doors in 120-degree weather and when it was 15 degrees in Reno and everywhere in between,” she said, through tears.

Last April, Neri and Ruiz arrived in Nevada with a mission. In 2012, they had helped Barack Obama win Nevada with the highest margin of any battleground state that year and 70% Latino support. They wanted to deliver again…

There were a few challenges to begin with: They had to build a new voter list. This was a caucus in a primary, not a general election. Nevada is a transient state, and unlike Iowa and New Hampshire and their established history of early voting, the Nevada caucus is relatively new. Last time, Clinton won the popular vote in 2008, but Obama edged her in delegates — so “equal coverage among different geographical areas,” Neri said, was imperative.

And from the start, they wanted to go right at established narrative that Clinton had waffled on immigration in the past. They wanted to do something big and bold as her first event in Nevada to show that she was serious about making the issue a priority.

So they started the official campaign in Nevada in May at historic Rancho High School in North Las Vegas. Clinton went there. She committed to going further than Obama had on executive action, a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, phasing out detention centers, and protecting the parents of DREAMers from deportation.

The event may actually be one of the most significant of the entire campaign — the Democratic frontrunner staking out a very liberal, expansive position on immigration at the very beginning — and one of the most overlooked…

Despite the strong early lead, things got a little messy at the end. Sanders showed he can compete in a state with a larger nonwhite population, and the campaign, citing an entrance poll of 213 Hispanics, insists that it won the Latino vote. The Clinton campaign disputes this, pointing to the Clark County data.

The entrance poll showed Sanders with 53% support among that group, within the 7% margin of error. Latinos made up 19% of the electorate of about 80,000 caucusgoers — meaning close to 16,000 Hispanics participated, a sign that both campaigns mobilized them. There is now real evidence that Latinos, who are much younger than other demographic groups, will continue to offer an opening to Sanders in getting wide swaths of their support…

Apart from the Neverending Battle — not to mention, the GOP Nevada caucus — what’s on the agenda for the day?

153 replies
  1. 1
    Betty Cracker says:

    Wow, Hillary has Morgan Freeman doing her campaign ad voice-overs? She’s definitely gonna win this thing…

    RE: the final tweets, Dave Weigel really needs to do his face a favor and shave off that hideous dirt squirrel. Or else grow a beard.

  2. 2
    raven says:

    I don’t ever see these twitter images.

  3. 3
    Betty Cracker says:

    @raven: In this case, it’s a mercy!

  4. 4
    Baud says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    I’m trying to get Gilbert Gottfried for my ads.

  5. 5
    satby says:

    I’m not a smoker, and if you’re trying to quit, this may not be a good article to read, because I needed a cigarette after I read it, it was THAT GOOD!

  6. 6
  7. 7
    Schlemazel (parmesan rancor) says:

    I have to go to work so I rarely get to read much of the morning threads, is it blissfully free of the COMMIE-RACIST! / WHORE-PANDERER! shouting matches that have infected the evening ones? I debated just passing by & not reading this one but thought with only 6 comments & knowing the morning people seem to be a lot less vitriolic I’d take a chance. So far so good.

  8. 8
    Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class says:


    Gilbert Gottfried and Bobcat Goldthwaite discussing your most peculiar personal habits in intimate detail as reasons to vote for you….

  9. 9
    raven says:

    @Schlemazel (parmesan rancor): There is a crew of regulars who just shoot the shit for the most part.

  10. 10
    BillinGlendaleCA says:

    @Baud: Are you going to have a talking duck?

  11. 11
  12. 12
    BillinGlendaleCA says:

    @Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: Baud’s peculiar personal habits? You thought “War and Peace” was long?

  13. 13
    satby says:

    @Schlemazel (parmesan rancor): We have enjoyable morning threads because lots of the worst night offenders seem to be late risers.

  14. 14
    Schlemazel (parmesan rancor) says:

    Meh, you could replace Trumps name with any of the Republicans names and the thing still works except for the infidelity part and you should change the never quoting old conservatives crap with constantly misquoting or misunderstanding historical statements.

  15. 15

    I had a brand new bag of Halls honey-lemon cough drops to soothe my sore throat, but I left them in the rest room on my office floor last night. Of course this morning they’re gone. I hope whoever got them appreciates my geriatric generosity.

  16. 16
    satby says:

    @Schlemazel (parmesan rancor): True, but I enjoyed both the near hysterical tone and the fact free alternate universe analysis of both Obama’s Presidency and the “conservative movement.” They really are from another planet.
    Republicans in disarray never gets old.

  17. 17
    PurpleGirl says:

    @Mustang Bobby: Feel better. My throat feels sort of sore but it’s more post-nasal drip and I should wrap a scarf around it to keep my throat warm.

  18. 18
    bystander says:

    I’m watching Matlock on Hallmark and wondering why Lea De Laria is on there acting as if she’s romantically interested in Andy Griffith. Just a ruse to get to Thelma Lou?

    Anyway, Lea would make a great spokesmodel for the campaign, Baud.

  19. 19
    satby says:

    @Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: @Baud:
    I think Gallagher, and he can label each watermelon with a different Republican candidates name.

  20. 20
    Schlemazel (parmesan rancor) says:

    I did enjoy that part.

    And to all you morning regulars – thanks so much for keeping it social. I like a good argument but things have goon off the rails very badly this season. I wish I could read while at work but I have to go now.

  21. 21
  22. 22
    satby says:

    @Mustang Bobby: Hot tea and honey.. and feel better soon!

  23. 23
    satby says:

    Trying to sneak another cup of coffee before I leave to drive the girls to school. It’s an hour round trip and I have had only two cups so far.

  24. 24

    @satby: Thanks. It’s almost all gone. It started a week ago and it’s in the last vestiges.

  25. 25

    @satby: Gotta get yourself a Balloon Juice travel mug.

  26. 26
    Elizabelle says:

    Good morning all. Glad to hear mornings on BJ are more sane. I cannot stand the infighting and the “I am sure Hillary is going to lose — oh noes!” angst. I wish those peeps would shut their pieholes.

  27. 27
    Baud says:


    Chapter I: The Bathroom.

  28. 28
    NotMax says:


    Somehow had pictured/heard Sandra Bernhard as the Baud spokesmodel.

  29. 29
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Baud: A sure fire best seller.

  30. 30
    NotMax says:


    Personally lean more to the late night/overnight threads, but that’s a function of time zone difference.

  31. 31

    The photo in the tweets isn’t Dave Weigel; it’s Thomas Dewey. Exactly why Weigel uses a photo of Dewey on his tweets, I have no idea.

  32. 32
    Baud says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: After 50 Shades of Grey, anything is possible.

  33. 33
    Betty Cracker says:

    @satby: Even though the author demolishes his own credibility by lying about President Obama and engaging in embarrassing knob-slobbering on the topic of Rubio, I think he’s right when he says the only way to stop Trump from getting the nomination is to consolidate behind a not-Trump before March 15. In fact, that might even be too late. I don’t share the author’s confidence that Rubio would beat Trump in Florida, especially if Trump is coming off a really successful Super Tuesday. Rubio won his senate seat here with less than 50% of the vote in a three-way race and is generally viewed as a shitty senator since he abandoned his post to run for president.

    @Mustang Bobby: Glad you’re on the mend. That cold is going around like wildfire. I had it too, and it sucks.

  34. 34
    NotMax says:


    Ditto. Shall take your word for it that there exist images on Twitter.

    Now if there were only a way to block the words copy/pasted from Twitter as well… :)

  35. 35
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    White much? US school district apologizes for black-student-only assembly on gang dangers

    How can one not see the latent racism just in discussing it?

  36. 36

    @OzarkHillbilly: Because white gangs are better known as “PAC’s” or “militias.”

  37. 37
    PurpleGirl says:

    @Elizabelle: Yes, the evening threads can be hard to read. I go over to the kitten cams for entertainment then.

  38. 38
    BillinGlendaleCA says:

    @Betty Cracker: They were making the point(and correct to me) on Joe of the Morning that NOBODY is going after tRump. They’re all trying to be the anti-Trump. That might have been a useful strategy last fall, but now it’s too late for that. The Republican race will be effectively over next Tuesday.

  39. 39
    Baud says:

    @Mustang Bobby:

    To be fair, the white kids were required to write “I am not a sovereign citizen” 100 times on the blackboard.

  40. 40
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Mustang Bobby: And they’re patriotic too! You can tell because they are always wrapping themselves in the flag. I always wonder what they are hiding underneath those flags.

  41. 41
    rachel says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    I don’t share the author’s confidence that Rubio would beat Trump in Florida, especially if Trump is coming off a really successful Super Tuesday. Rubio won his senate seat here with less than 50% of the vote in a three-way race and is generally viewed as a shitty senator since he abandoned his post to run for president.

    See, that’s the thing I find most laughable about the whole article: the idea that Rubio is the only hope to save the conservative movement from Trump, especially after the way Christie pants him as he went out the door.

  42. 42
    bemused says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    If he does get the nomination and has to debate Hillary, water swigging, flop sweating Rubio will have to invest in cases of underarm sweat pads if he doesn’t want to run out of suits and shirts. I have a mental image of Rubio as Airplane’s Stryker with rivers of sweat streaming down his face.

  43. 43
    Baud says:


    She should insist on an 11 hour debate. We know she can handle it.

  44. 44
    Germy says:

    @bemused: I remember Martin Short used to do a character on SNL; a guy cornered by 60Minutes, and the sweat would roll down his face while he tried to defend himself.

  45. 45

    @Baud: Assuming they can spell “sovereign”… or “not.”

  46. 46
    Elizabelle says:

    @rachel: There’s so nothing to Rubio. He makes GW Bush look substantive. It is to laugh.

    That’s why all the doom and gloom and angst on the campaign threads irritates me. Wrong party, idjits.

  47. 47
    Baud says:


    But remember, when it’s time for the debate, Rubio is a strong, articulate, substantive, and fully hydrated debater. It’s all about the expectations game.

  48. 48
    bemused says:

    That would be fantastic! I would put money on 69 year old Hillary mopping the floor with his flop sweat in less than an hour.

    Yes, she was quite impressive outlasting the 11 hour grilling by Republican idiots.

  49. 49
    Kay says:


    If he wins they’ll just bring him into the fold, though. He’ll assemble the same team of “advisers” any other GOP candidate would surround themselves with and he’ll become more and more “establishment”. It’s already happening. Giuliani isn’t “new” on security and the “war on terror” and policing. He’s actually a throwback to George W Bush. Trump is consulting with Bill Bennett on education and drug policy. That goes even further back, to the 1990’s.

    Trump doesn’t actually have any idea how to do any of this stuff. He’ll be quickly and completely absorbed into the “establishment” policy consensus, depending mostly on who he already knows and which group kisses his ass first and are first in line. They don’t have to beat him. They can join him, and that’s what they’ll do. The establishment isn’t going away that easily.

  50. 50
    MomSense says:

    @Mustang Bobby:

    I read that first part Incorrectly, so incorrectly, and it was hilarious. I am going to laugh all the way to the coffee pot.

  51. 51
    Betty Cracker says:

    @bemused & @rachel: Rubio seems to be an easily rattled lightweight, but if he somehow manages to beat Trump and get the nomination, I’d give him a 50-50 chance of winning the general election. The Beltway media is default Republican, loves a pretty empty suit, and they utterly despise Hillary Clinton. They’ll quickly learn to hate Bernie Sanders too if he wins. I could see things going the way they did in 2000. But on the other hand, the media has less influence these days. I just don’t know. It’ll be nerve-wracking, that’s for sure.

  52. 52
    ArchTeryx says:

    @Mustang Bobby: Sounds like you got the sinus flu/cold/bug going around. It’s a nasty piece of work that sneaks up on you. Take care of yourself if you can and get better soon!

  53. 53
    bemused says:


    He would have to have a hidden IV drip to be fully hydrated enough.

  54. 54
    Baud says:

    @Betty Cracker: Agree. They will protect him.

  55. 55
    Applejinx says:

    @bemused: If he does get the nomination and has to debate Hillary, it’s Hillary who would be getting crossover votes from the Republicans.

    Bernie can and does peel off disaffected people with no faith in the economy anymore, and could do that against Trump.

    Hillary can get a sort of ‘I don’t care if she’s Satan so long as she keeps the system running in recognizable form’ vote, and the neat thing is she can do that by outright bullying Rubio, something she’d have to do more subtly against Trump. Against Rubio she could be openly contemptuous (it’s justified) and the show of power would work to get some R voters, provided they believed she was what unicorn-fanciers say she is: the most electable moderate Republican in the whole race. We so easily forget that there used to be moderate Republicans, who didn’t wreck the country the way all our current Republicans promise to.

    Ironically, all the Berniacs’ slams against her through the primary turn around and look like good things to a traditional Republican. They/we are basically accusing her of believing in freemarket conservatism and not being a radical, plus being good for Wall Street. Republicans WANT that, and there’s a danger they won’t get it from their own candidates.

  56. 56
    MomSense says:

    @Mustang Bobby:

    Or a Trump rally.

  57. 57
    BillinGlendaleCA says:

    @Germy: Nathan Thurm, and the ash from his cig would never fall off.

  58. 58
    MomSense says:


    He should get one of those camelbak things.

  59. 59

    Hi everybody. Things are OK. Head back to the doctor tomorrow to see what’s what. Hoping to get cleared to return to work next week.

    Agree with @Schlemazel (parmesan rancor) regarding the threads. I find the sniping, fragging and backbiting tiresome. Believe me, there are losses a lot more personal and enduring than a political primary. Make whatever choice you see fit, but trying to be adult about it wouldn’t hurt.

  60. 60
    Patricia Kayden says:

    @Elizabelle: So true. I cringe whenever I hear someone try to compare him to President Obama because they both ran as first-term Senators. President Obama is intelligent, well spoken, and charismatic. Rubio has none of that. He’s just a thirsty kid who wants to be President. Given how he has slid to the right during his campaign, I doubt he’ll even be attractive to the majority of Latino voters, many of whom want a path to citizenship for undocumented people.

    Rubio against Secretary Clinton in the general will be a joy to behold — for Democrats.

  61. 61
    Thoughtful David says:

    @Schlemazel (parmesan rancor):
    My thought as well. It comes back to the same old Wingnut lament: Trump is making Republicans look bad by saying out loud what we’re all thinking.

  62. 62
    BillinGlendaleCA says:

    @Kay: Then he looses the “outsider” advantage and is just another Rethug retread.

  63. 63
    bemused says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    Nerve racking for sure. I’ve been avoiding cable news and candidate “analysis” as much as possible. I just want to throttle all the opinion robots. No way I can stomach the many months till Nov otherwise.

  64. 64
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Applejinx: You seriously think Republicans of any stripe would vote for Hillary? Maybe some female Republicans would on the down-low, but as a whole, the Republican Party has as serious a case of Clinton Derangement Syndrome as yourself.

  65. 65
    debbie says:


    Republicans in disarray never gets old.

    So true. There’s something satisfying in watching them get exactly what they’ve been putting out for years.

  66. 66
    Applejinx says:

    @Betty Cracker: Trump is the correct kind of pretty empty suit: can think on his feet, and is so arrogant that he’s not easily rattled. They need an empty suit with that kind of personality behind it, but they hate him and he hates them.

    Rubio is not the right kind of pretty empty suit. He’s such a lightweight that Christie can humiliate him, and the media has to generate a field of Proper Decorum around him to shield him, otherwise he generates very telegenic gaffes, whether it’s guzzling water or robotically repeating himself.

    We don’t have that kind of Decorum on either side of the aisle anymore. It’s gone. If we did have it, that Decorum expectation would be helpful against Trump because the media loves to call him a jerk, but since we don’t have it the lack of decorum becomes an advantage against Rubio, because he can only survive in an environment where he’s protected against his own emptiness and lightweightness.

  67. 67
    bemused says:


    Perfect gear but too obvious under a suit. I remember the speculation GW wearing a wire down his back at a campaign debate.

  68. 68
    bemused says:


    Now I’m going to have both Martin Short and Stryker images whenever I see Rubio.

  69. 69
    debbie says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    Rubio seems to be an easily rattled lightweight

    If he is the nominee, what are the odds the GOP will present him as what Obama could have been if only he had not been a Mooslum? And how far short of that will Rubio turn out to be?

  70. 70
    DCF says:


    I’d go so far as to liken her to a ‘liberal’ Republican – but anything beyond the ‘moderate’ moniker would probably damn her to the broader Republican electorate.

    How far to the Right has this country drifted when the Democratic frontrunner may look preferable to any of the Republican candidates?

  71. 71
    Kay says:


    My big concern is Trump in “rust belt” states, extending that to parts of Pennsylvania. I think Democrats underestimated how much Trump’s trade focus would resonate. Trade doesn’t matter at all in a lot of places. but the places it DOES matter it matters a lot and it gets worse when people feel they’re losing ground- it’s almost cyclical. It’s rising right now.

    If Democrats start being (truly) vulnerable in that tier of states it’s a new map and I don’t know how they get around it. For the last two cycles the GOP has claimed Democrats are becoming more vulnerable there and while they exaggerate it, there’s enough truth to it to make me nervous. If Trump gets crossover or independent votes in the primaries in that set of states Democrats should take that seriously.

    The TPP could not have had worse timing, and Trump conflates trade deals and China – he’s made it into one big mass of “you’re getting ripped off with bad deals”.

  72. 72
    debbie says:


    Please tell me you mean “very” empty suit. There’s nothing pretty about them.

  73. 73
    Patricia Kayden says:

    @Thoughtful David: At a rally last night, Trump said that he wanted to punch a protester in the face. He’s the perfect candidate for Republicans. They’re bloodthirsty bigots. The Establishment will come around and support Trump with billions of dollars when he is their candidate against Secretary Clinton. Right now, they’re just pretending that they’re appalled by him.


  74. 74
  75. 75

    @Ben Cisco (onboard the Defiant): Good to hear things are going ok. Hope the doctor appointment goes well.

    Re the evening threads, it always amazes me to see people really relishing conflict because it ties me up in knots.

  76. 76
    Applejinx says:

    @Betty Cracker: Yes, I do think there are Republicans who would vote for Hillary. It depends on whether they’re into raw political power and want to see Washington functioning the way it did when they grew up. There are Republicans who aren’t pleased by the way teabaggers have taken Washington hostage and ground Congress to a sulky halt.

    Being accused of Clinton Derangement Syndrome is odd considering that I’ve been triangulating ever since Nevada and trying to work out what’s good about the situation that could be maximized: the funny thing is, the things I settle on as ‘worth fighting and voting for’ are the exact opposite of the things Republicans would seize on, they’d hate the parts of her candidacy I like, and the things they’d see in her and settle for are the same things that put me off.

    The louder Bernie people scream that she’s a corporate, Wall Street-friendly voice looking to do more of the same, the more Republicans will see that she’s a capable administrator who might not be implacably hostile to their interests. There are plenty of voters, including most of the R side, who do not buy into a radical Left economic vision.

  77. 77
    BillinGlendaleCA says:

    @Kay: And proposes a 35% tax on all consumer goods made in China. So your smartphone will cost 35% more… A tax increase is pretty easy to frame.

  78. 78
    raven says:

    @Iowa Old Lady: I’m not sure what you expect on a political blog?

  79. 79
    bemused says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    Omg. He is disgusting and irresponsible beyond words. He has been inciting the meatheads deliberately. One of these times, some of them are going to bloody a protester. They really want to.

  80. 80
    DCF says:


    The GOP and the maimnstream media agree that Hillary Clinton is an ugly old lying monster, a fairytale evil witch. Clinton hasn’t figured out a way to counteract that message. Beyond that, she’s just the sort of candidate who loses presidential elections — Walter Mondale in 1984 or Bob Dole in 1996, a former primary-season loser who gets the nomination on the basis of being the next in line, but who still reeks of defeat and datedness. There’s no way she’d win against a reasonably strong traditional Republican candidate.

    Fortunately for her, if she’s the nominee (as now seems almost certain), there’s an excellent chance that she’ll run against either Trump or Ted Cruz. I think Cruz could theoretically win a general election, but if he’s the nominee, he’s going to run a failed campaign, because he has a failed theory of what it takes to win.

  81. 81
    Elizabelle says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    I agree with (recent) Birthday Cracker and baud that the media will try to protect and knob-polish Rubio.

    However, he might be unproppable. He’s a lightweight. He does not even show up for his day job, a prestigious and well paid one at that.

    In a year when Trump is succeeding beyond his initial expectations (don’t you think he was a bit surprised too?) because he’s connected with [white] working and middle class angst, is Rubio going to be a supportable candidate?

    Rubio, whose only job has been politics, who does not live on the real economy?

  82. 82

    @raven: Touche! I guess I like my hostility aimed at someone other than my fellow commenters.

  83. 83
    raven says:

    @Iowa Old Lady: Tough balancing act when it’s an open forum.

  84. 84
    Kay says:


    I hope so. Political media focuses on immigration but immigration isn’t a huge factor in OH and MI and PA and it’s really a GOP base issue anyway. Trade crosses over.

    He’s done something really clever- he’s not attacking “trade”- he’s attacking elites who make “bad deals”. People are much more comfortable with that, because it’s not an attack on “markets” or “competition”. He’s saying they could be doing better if they had better and tougher negotiators. Make deals but make good deals. That’s the “fair trade” argument. It was never “anti-trade”- it was always “we are being sold down the river in favor of more powerful players”. Trump makes that argument better than Bernie Sanders does.

  85. 85
    Applejinx says:

    @DCF: But it has. It’s drifted so far right as to be unrecognizable, and candidates like Sanders who stubbornly take a position and yell about it all their lives are (a) rare and (b) unelectable. The ONLY reason Sanders is even slightly here is money. If not for all that grassroots fundraising he’d have been long gone.

    If you say Hillary is what used to be a functional, not-overly-ideological Republican, you’re describing something that’s super left-wing in today’s political climate. The Republicans are literally trying to overthrow the government through obstructionism or worse, and to go along with them requires becoming seriously radical, like ISIS-grade radical and typically Christianist.

    Not everybody on the right will be able to make that stretch. There will be a hell of a lot of crossover because the Right is asking too much, especially if they run a freakshow like Cruz, or strip the nomination from Trump with procedural means.

    In that case the crossover arguments are as follows:

    crossover to Bernie- “Throw the bums out, why not give the crazy old white man a try, he says he’ll give us jobs and what if it’s true? They do say he tells the truth, like Trump kept doing”

    crossover to Hillary- “Our side can’t even keep Congress working or nominate a good candidate: total epic fail. Might as well throw it to the liberals, send ’em a message and see if they get their acts together: at least things will keep working and the job-creating backbone of America will be protected from the real commies!”

    It’s different subsets of the R vote, but it’ll happen.

  86. 86

    @raven: I read the evening threads. I just skim on by the people I find least readable. Lots of commenters have interesting things to say.

  87. 87
    bemused says:


    Will the Republican voters furious at their “establishment” politicos be smart enough by November to realize that the new elitists, Trump or Rubio, would be the same as the old elitists?

  88. 88
    JPL says:

    @raven: Did Joe or Mika mention their support for Trump?

  89. 89
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @raven: Puppies and Kittens! Or at least every now and again. ;-)

  90. 90

    A treat for Kay: Samantha Bee takes on John Kasich’s claim to be moderate.

  91. 91
    raven says:

    @JPL: They are fairly quiet what with all the hubbub about their “town hall” being rigged.

  92. 92
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Applejinx: Republicans think Hillary Clinton is a radical left evil-doer. You think she’s an amoral Republican. I think you and they are suffering from different strains of the same disease: CDS.

  93. 93
    raven says:

    @Applejinx: And now to shatter the morning calm. . .

  94. 94
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @raven: You don’t have to read every post.

  95. 95
    raven says:

    @Gin & Tonic: I would have never known the if you hadn’t told me.

  96. 96
    satby says:

    @Ben Cisco (onboard the Defiant): Good luck at the doctor’s today.

  97. 97
    Gimlet says:

    A little more on Team Trump


    Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump and his campaign have reportedly received advice from an increasing number of controversial Republican figures and political strategists, including former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, political strategist Roger Stone, and former Secretary of Education William J. Bennett

    Former Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) Director Gen. Michael Flynn
    Heritage Foundation Chief Economist Stephen Moore
    Former Reagan Administration Member Art Laffer
    Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton
    Pollster Pat Caddell

  98. 98
    Jeffro says:

    @satby: yeah well in the end, the Author just wants to save the Republican Party and to defeat the Democrats … He has correctly identified all of the problems with trump…so let him decide between Trump and Clinton in November

  99. 99
    Steeplejack says:


    What a rogues’ gallery.

    Thanks for the link.

  100. 100
    Kay says:

    @Iowa Old Lady:

    Thanks. I hope Kasich loses the Ohio and/or Michigan GOP primary. I think that’s the best ending to his political career.

    I’m torn between wanting Cruz and Rubio to lose their respective states and being wary of celebrating Trump as the nominee.

  101. 101
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Gimlet: He’s still a little lacking in war criminals. He needs to up his game if expects Republicans to support him with enthusiasm.

  102. 102
    Applejinx says:

    @Betty Cracker: Oh, settle down. Cruz is an amoral Republican. Kasich is an amoral Republican. Clinton is a centrist Dem accurately reading the political landscape with skill and experience, and aiming down a middle that is only as Left as it is because of Bernie Sanders, who very likely can’t beat her since she’s got so good at this stuff.

    If anything, she is like a moral 50s or 60s Republican, and I’m not saying she represents what the Rs have become. She does not. They’ve gone off into tire rim and anthrax land.

    Given that she will have my vote if she’s nominated and that I’m openly struggling to find any way, any excuse to have enthusiasm for the prospect, exactly how useful is it for you folks to get all Cacti up in my face? I am not childish enough to throw an emotional fit and stomp my little feet and claim I’ll vote against her, except in the primary which is my privilege.

    The way you folks carry on suggests you’re asking me to vote for an enthusiastic round of hippie-punching and public shaming. And yet you expect my vote. Feels like more unforced errors. Settle down with the ‘berniebot’ script, seriously.

  103. 103
    Elizabelle says:

    It’s surreal to listen to Trump victory speeches. He promises his audiences that they are going to win so much, they will get tired of winning. They cheer him.

    It’s so Weimar. If you saw that in a movie, you’d identify that character immediately as the trickster and swindler.

    Personally, I think Trump is no worse than Cruz or Rubio, and possibly a more sensible person than either of them. They are all frauds; Trump is a successful one and, apparently, way more shrewd than anyone gives him credit for.

  104. 104
    Jeffro says:

    @Betty Cracker: I second the thought that it is too late for them to stop him before March 15 . Given the low quality (Rubio) and sheer egos (Cruz) involved I am certain that this will remain a three-way race to and through the convention . And then the GOP is really in a bind because there is no scenario where Trump does not get the nomination and walks away peacefully leaving a unified Republican Party .

    Hopefully party leaders can find a way to pin it all on Cruz’ stubborn refusal to leave the race… Finally a villain that both parties would like to see out of the political arena!

  105. 105
    satby says:

    @Jeffro: well, his problem with Trump is also that Trump is no “true conservative”. And that since Trump is the front runner if the rest of the party doesn’t coalesce around the “highly electable Rubio (quoted because LULZ)” the party may have to be sacrificed on the alter of conservative purity.
    God doesn’t love me that much.

  106. 106
    Elizabelle says:

    Blurb for the top story on NYTimes website right now:

    In Nevada, Trump’s Rivals Hope to Break His Streak

    Tuesday’s Nevada caucuses will be a test of Donald J. Trump’s staying power, and of whether Marco Rubio’s mainstream appeal or Ted Cruz’s right-leaning policies can slow his momentum

    Rubio is for sale to whatever sugar daddy will throw money his way. He’s a mainstream smile to make the plutocrat-favoring policies go down easy.

    Trump’s voters tell pollsters they like Trump because he cannot be bought. Could be fun to see what develops, as the candidates prance through Sheldon Adelson-land. (Oh, and he just bought one of the two major newspapers there.)

  107. 107
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Applejinx: I’m perfectly calm, thank you. I don’t believe I’ve ever used the word “berniebot” nor harangued anyone about insufficient enthusiasm for Hillary Clinton, about whom I’m conflicted myself, so stuff it with your “Cacti” bullshit. I don’t give a flying fuck about your personal levels of enthusiasm, nor do I have any expectations of your individual voting intentions, aside from the observation that you aren’t a complete moron if you intend to vote for whichever Democrat wins the nom. For that, help yourself to a virtual cookie.

  108. 108
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @raven: Glad to be of assistance.

  109. 109
    Keith G says:


    The way you folks carry on suggests you’re asking me to vote for an enthusiastic round of hippie-punching and public shaming

    Undoubtedly a President Hillary would likely be a “mixed bag”, but aren’t all presidents in one way or another? I doubt there will be any hippy punching from her office. There will be some here and other places, at least until HRC ramps up military operations in the usual areas. At that point, being a hippy will be cool again.

  110. 110
    DCF says:


    If you say Hillary is what used to be a functional, not-overly-ideological Republican, you’re describing something that’s super left-wing in today’s political climate. The Republicans are literally trying to overthrow the government through obstructionism or worse, and to go along with them requires becoming seriously radical, like ISIS-grade radical and typically Christianist.

    She is – and I am….

    The current Republican meme – fashionable since the rise of Reagan – is that government is ‘the enemy’, and should be shrunk to the point where it can be ‘…drowned in the bassinet.’ Given that ideology, is it any wonder that the Republican electorate 1) selects incompetent/unqualified candidates and 2) subsequently complains – without irony or self-reflection – that our governing bodies are a collective epic ‘fail’?

    I’m thankful for your ‘Christianist’ reference here…do not, for a moment, underestimate the centrality and power of the Talibangelical cohort within the Conservative movement.

    At a moment in our national history where ‘big’ (read: effective) answers are required to meet the challenges of the day (overpopulation, wealth/income disparities, environmental degradation et al), the conservative and relatively timid responses/proposals for these challenges are inadequate to the task(s) at hand….

  111. 111
    gvg says:

    there are people I didn’t even realize considered themselves conservative voters who are hysterical against Trump. Yes Hillary will get some crossover. I can’t judge how much because I don’t hang in those circles. People burst out with comments like “oh my god, Trump”…I am trying to feel them out to understand.
    My gun nut uncle voted for Obama. Vietnam vet pissed off at the Afghanistan/Iraq fiasco. No idea what he will do the next election. He has always before worried about 2nd amendment freedom but he has real war experience and didn’t buy the bullshit.
    Fox isn’t behind any single candidate. Nobody really is in control of the GOP voters.
    Oh and the polls I looked at had Trump leading big in Florida. Rubio was 3rd, Bush was 4th. “native” sons aren’t very popular so the pundits using that to push Rubio are not checking the facts. The only hope I see of it not being Trump is that he actually had peaked and started to decline in a few states. Not many yet. It may be to late. Be nice if he got it and his numbers continued to slip.

  112. 112
    Gin & Tonic says:


    Trump is a successful one

    Probably less successful than you’d think. This is an interesting analysis of his business.

  113. 113
    rikyrah says:

    Good Morning, Everyone :)

  114. 114
    rikyrah says:

    So, Trump leads Kasich in Ohio…


  115. 115
    Elizabelle says:

    @Gin & Tonic: Oh, I agree. Four bankruptcies and dog knows what else.

    But he conveys the aura of success (and is actually wealthy, thanks Daddy Fred), and sizzle is selling this year, when no steak is on the GOP table.

  116. 116
    Elizabelle says:

    @rikyrah: Please let that continue! Wow.

  117. 117
    Gimlet says:

    I don’t think Bernie’s passionate supporters are going to turn out and vote for Hillary.

    Hillary’s speaking fees are viewed like the Regnery book advances as not genuine fee for service. The lack of a true leftist like Bernie in the race and sense that Clinton can only triangulate not address populist concerns when she is owned by such interests will result in a “Coakley vs Scott Brown” election.

    It will officially be blamed on the poor campaign Hillary ran and Rahm will mutter something about “retarded liberals”.

  118. 118
    Chris says:


    As soon as I saw the line about “protecting the sanctity of conservatism of which I am a passionate advocate,” I was thinking “oh, this is going to be good, isn’t it?”

    “Trump has staked his campaign on being a successful businessman! He is nothing of the sort! His supporters don’t care!” Would I be at all off the mark in assuming that Bahnsen didn’t write an article in 2000 pointing out that George W. Bush had fucked up virtually every job he’d ever touched, and that none of his supporters, including the conservative establishment currently rejecting Trump, cared? Huh.

    “Trump called Reagan a con man and said Bush lied about WMDs!” What a dick! Next you’ll be telling us that he claimed George Bush didn’t keep us safe, just because the worst terrorist attack in American history happened on Bush’s watch.

    “I have written elsewhere that the greatest punditry myth of this election is that voter dissatisfaction with “inadequately conservative” Republicans created Donald Trump.” That might just be because conservative voters are coming to him like iron to a magnet, like they haven’t for anybody since Sarah Palin in 2008 and George W. Bush in 2000, and in response to exactly the same message of “rally to me, I’ll represent you Honest Small Town Folksy People against those pointy-headed politically correct elites in Washington.” Hey, it’s okay; keep trying to explain to the silly yokels that they Just Don’t Understand what Real Conservatism is. I’m sure you won’t come off at all like the kind of elitist the base is primed to hate.

    “Trump’s big mistake was not running as a Democrat! He’d have killed in that primary!” Hilariously, he says this just a couple paragraphs after he assures us that Trump will never be president, because his support maxes out at less than half of the Republican base. If he’d do so well as a Democrat, what’s to stop him from winning the general? He’s so liberal, after all. Maybe they’ll all vote for him.

    “The United States will be the laughingstock of the free world if this man becomes commander in chief.” Again, I take it that you were either in a coma or never set foot outside the United States between January 2001 and January 2009 if you think this would be anything new. And who cares what the rest of the free world thinks? They’re all socialists and hippies and cheese-eating surrender monkeys who’re just too snobby and elitist to appreciate the awesomeness of red meat eating, gun-toting, bitter clingin’ right wingin’ Real ‘Merica. That’s what you told us for eight years straight (much longer than that, in fact). Why start caring now?

    He concludes with an appeal to Rubio and Cruz to set aside their differences for the good of the country and “the movement we have devoted our lives to.” Unfortunately there, Dave, the movement you’ve devoted your lives to believes that “greed is good” and “there is no such thing as society.” Anyone trying to convince one of the Republican Party’s leaders to put the good of the whole ahead of his own selfish impulses has missed the entire point of the conservative movement.

    Thanks for that article. The utter cluelessness of the conservative elites and self-appointed intellectuals and purity guardians in this election cycle… has been firing up my schadenfreude like nothing in years. They are getting the living daylights beaten out of them and they just. Don’t. Understand. Why. Or how. It’s delightful.

  119. 119
    Elizabelle says:

    @Gimlet: I disagree. I know a lot of passionate Bernie supporters, and they can see the forest (a Republican president would doom us; Supreme Court gone for our lifetime) from the trees (speaking honoraria and Goldman Sachs).

    They may hold their noses more tightly than the rest of us, but those I know are voting for the Democrat in November. Period.

    ETA: Besides which, we have months to talk them down.

  120. 120
    Applejinx says:

    @Gimlet: I think there are only two choices here:

    (1) Bernie wins the nomination, which is not impossible but damn that’s a lot to ask at this point

    (2) Bernie’s passionate supporters turn out and vote for Hillary.

    That IS two choices, don’t get me wrong, but it’s only two choices. It still blows my mind how intense people get about this, but I guess if you’re genuinely conflicted, you really really REALLY hate people harping on the stuff about which you’re conflicted. (this IS a thread called ‘the D column’ so, sadly, talking about that stuff is on-topic even if it pisses in your morning cornflakes)

    When you say Clinton can only triangulate: hang on, that’s a blessing! Any number of Rs would take special interest money and NOT triangulate in the least, just do what they’re told. Clinton will work out what the broadest section of the electorate wants, and do that. This includes rightwingers. She’ll cover that base slightly, and will cover whatever else is established as a serious constituency.

    That means Hillary will address populist concerns if it’s demonstrated that they’re held by a significant number of people.

    Such as Bernie supporters… and I daresay she’s keeping an eye on how Trump’s doing, too.

    And that is why I am not down with pledging to endorse Hillary and anything she believes in. That’s for Sanders-type candidates who aren’t really flexible, and who already represent things you want. You could say Hillary listens. In order to listen there have to be voices for her to listen to and define herself around, and if there aren’t hippies in large numbers expressing what they think is important, she won’t go there.

    “Coakley vs Scott Brown” can only happen if the hippies shut up and abandon all hope of directing Hillary’s campaign. Coakley was basically pure DNC fail, and we can’t afford that now. Given that the Sanders campaign began specifically to direct Hillary’s campaign to the left (by providing shade, documenting a constituency and pushing the Overton window) it is very silly to treat it as an all-or-nothing thing now.

  121. 121
    Chris says:


    Trump doesn’t actually have any idea how to do any of this stuff. He’ll be quickly and completely absorbed into the “establishment” policy consensus, depending mostly on who he already knows and which group kisses his ass first and are first in line. They don’t have to beat him. They can join him, and that’s what they’ll do. The establishment isn’t going away that easily.

    Yeah, this is one of the things about a Trump candidacy. I’d love to think that he’ll pull a repeat of Teddy Roosevelt’s accomplishment a hundred years ago, appeal to the Republicans who don’t necessarily like getting fucked over again and again by Wall Street, and break the party in two that way. But Trump ain’t Teddy Roosevelt, and while he may know what the voters want to hear during election season, odds are good that he won’t actually follow up on any of his populist shtick (which was always pretty vague in any case).

  122. 122
    rikyrah says:

    tee hee hee

    tee hee hee

    GOP to Kasich: Get out

    Allies of Marco Rubio want him to step aside for their candidate.

    By Kyle Cheney

    02/22/16 06:39 PM EST

    Updated 02/23/16 01:37 AM EST

    FAIRFAX, Va. — The Republican establishment has a message for John Kasich: get out, and get out of Marco Rubio’s way.

    A string of elected officials, GOP insiders and prominent donors officially threw their support behind Rubio on Monday, calling him their last chance to take down Donald Trump. Their statements had another common theme. Some explicitly called for Kasich to quit, while others sent the same message by saying the Ohio governor’s ongoing presence is holding Rubio back.

    “If at some point John were to decide not to go forward with his campaign, Marco would be the primary beneficiary of that decision,” former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty told POLITICO after his official Rubio endorsement. “It’s not for me or anyone else to say when John should stay in or get out but … John’s decision to stay in or get out could have a marked impact on the race.”

    This is not what Kasich had in mind: He had hoped that if he could be the last governor standing, his record and experience would persuade party power brokers to unite behind him in a challenge to Trump and Ted Cruz. Pushing that point, Kasich’s campaign issued a statement after Jeb Bush dropped out declaring Kasich winner of the “governor’s bracket.”

    Kasich’s theory proved true: Bush’s demise did precipitate a unifying push within the establishment — toward Rubio.

  123. 123
    Gimlet says:


    “Coakley vs Scott Brown” can only happen if the hippies shut up and abandon all hope of directing Hillary’s campaign. Given that the Sanders campaign began specifically to direct Hillary’s campaign to the left

    The loss was interpreted by the administration as saying they were not centrist enough in their policies.

  124. 124
    Chris says:


    At some point in the last election cycle, I said that anti-Chinese/anti-globalization sentiment was a niche waiting to be carved out for modern populism, combining the xenophobic sentiment on the right with the anticapitalist sentiment on the left, and the anti-elitist sentiment (albeit slightly different elites) of both sides. Apparently, Trump came to the same conclusion I did.

  125. 125
    rikyrah says:

    awe, I love this.

    Doc McStuffins Gets a Sibling through Adoption!

    February 15, 2016

    When the news broke on Twitter a few days ago that Doc McStuffins was getting a new sibling, the kids and I couldn’t be more excited! Yes, Doc McStuffins is a big deal in our house – we love Doc, Lambie, and the whole gang!

    Doc McStuffins will become a big sister again, this time through the miracle of adoption! On Friday, March 4, Disney Junior will kick off a month long series of Doc McStuffins episodes about adoption. They will tackle topics like how to burp a baby and change dirty diapers to emotional insecurities siblings may face when a new baby or child joins the family.

  126. 126
    Chris says:


    there are people I didn’t even realize considered themselves conservative voters who are hysterical against Trump. Yes Hillary will get some crossover. I can’t judge how much because I don’t hang in those circles.

    My guess is “not very much.” Most of the demographics Trump offends are already solidly Democratic, since the rise of the teabaggers if not before. Other than that, right wing politics junkies hate the guy, but that doesn’t necessarily amount to much in terms of actual votes. (Just look at Balloon Juice – if you went from the “Hillbot”/”Berniebro” wars in this place, you could be forgiven for thinking the Democratic Party was heading for another 1968 level meltdown, but the reality is that an overwhelming majority of Dem voters like them both just fine).

    I think once the chips are down and it’s Trump the Republican versus Hillary the Democrat, 90% of the conservative and faux-centrist Trump-skeptics will hold their nose and vote for him. The hippie-punching “both sides do it but Democrats are worse” reflex is just too deeply ingrained, and the second half of that sentence was always the more important one. And the rest of these voters won’t necessarily vote for Hillary. They’ll stay home, or write in Ronald Reagan, or make some other meaningless “a plague on both your houses!” gesture.

  127. 127
    rikyrah says:

    In the race to be Trump’s sole rival, Cruz’s cash matters
    02/22/16 12:56 PM
    By Steve Benen
    With Donald Trump having already cruised in New Hampshire and South Carolina, it’s difficult to see him as anything but the current frontrunner. The question is who’ll be his principal rival as the field narrows and the race enters the next phase.

    Rubio, pointing to the Republican establishment’s gushing affections, believes he’s the one for the job. Cruz, meanwhile, points to his actual performances in the early nominating contests – he won Iowa, defeated Rubio in New Hampshire, and is one of only two candidates to finish in the top three in each of the contests thus far – while making the case for himself.

    This is bound to go on for a while, but don’t overlook the significance of campaign financing. The New York Times has a good piece on this today.

    A seven-month, $220 million surge of spending on behalf of mainstream Republican candidates has yielded a primary battle dominated by Donald J. Trump and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, two candidates reviled by most of the party’s leading donors.

    Now, as they approach a pivotal and expensive stage of the campaign, the two insurgent candidates – who have won the first three contests – appear to be in the best position financially to compete in the 11 states that will vote on Super Tuesday, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission on Saturday.

    For all the Rubio hype, Cruz raised $7.6 million in January – the best showing of any Republican candidate, and nearly $3 million more than the Florida senator – and the Texan began the month with $13.6 million in cash on hand, which is also the strongest showing in the GOP field.

  128. 128
    rikyrah says:

    Ted Cruz and Donald Trump Head Toward Super Tuesday With G.O.P.’s Deepest Pockets
    FEB. 21, 2016

    A seven-month, $220 million surge of spending on behalf of mainstream Republican candidates has yielded a primary battle dominated by Donald J. Trump and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, two candidates reviled by most of the party’s leading donors.

    Now, as they approach a pivotal and expensive stage of the campaign, the two insurgent candidates — who have won the first three contests — appear to be in the best position financially to compete in the 11 states that will vote on Super Tuesday, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission on Saturday.

    Mr. Cruz is the best financed candidate in the Republican race, beginning February with $13.6 million in cash on hand. Mr. Trump, a billionaire, has raised millions of dollars from small donors and lent himself millions more, including nearly $5 million in January. He paid out more than $11.5 million that month, the most sustained spending of his presidential bid so far.

  129. 129
    SiubhanDuinne, Annoying Scoundrel says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    Betty, I just woke up and haven’t read through the comments yet, so in all likelihood someone else got there first — and maybe you were being funny — but in case you really think that’s Dave Weigel in the Twitter avatar photo, i invite you to google image Thomas Dewey. Yes, the Thomas Dewey of “Dewey Beats Truman” fame. (I would provide a link, but the mechanism isn’t working for me this morning.)

  130. 130
    ruemara says:

    @Applejinx: She’s not even a moral 50’s Republican. Look, you hate her. Fine. You & DCF have a mutual appreciation of your leftiness. OK. But just because you both agree still doesn’t make what you’re thinking right.Clinton is not as left as you, primarily because she’s trying to do workable policies. She’s not a Republican, she’s not on the right and her primary appeal to Republicans is that she’s not batshit, which many rank and file are.finding distasteful. Betty is hardly calling you a Berniebro, she’s rightly saying you have a serious prejudice against Hillary and you’re blind to the failures of your logic due to it.

  131. 131
    Jeffro says:

    @rikyrah: Great points and yet more reason that Cruz will not leave the race before the convention. He certainly is going to try to extort his way onto the ticket one way or another .

    On a somewhat related note I really have to recommend that everyone read Dark Money by Jane Mayer. I know that most of us have followed the doings of the various billionaire sugar daddies in the GOP but Mayer really pulls it all together.

  132. 132
    J R in WV says:


    If you’re gonna be blasting away on a blog at 2 am, or later in the night, you surprisingly find it hard to be up and at ’em at 7 or 8 am.

    Time zones can help with this, I’m in Arizona for 2 more days, and a 2 am post is, for me, midnight. Or course, working hard physically, I’ve been crashing hard by 10 or 11 pm. Shortened my blogging time no end!

  133. 133
    rikyrah says:

    it’s too early for this coonishness


    Carson: Obama Was ‘Raised White,’ But I’ve Seen ‘What Real Racism Is’ (AUDIO)
    February 23, 2016, 7:50 AM EST

    Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson said President Barack Obama was “raised white,” whereas Carson has “had a chance to see what real racism is” in a Politico podcast published Tuesday morning.

    “He’s an ‘African’ American. He was, you know, raised white,” Carson told Politico as he waited for the results of the South Carolina primary on Saturday. “I mean, like most Americans, I was proud that we broke the color barrier when he was elected, but he didn’t grow up like I grew up.”

    Carson said Obama’s experience as a young man was simply different than his own.

    “Many of his formative years were spent in Indonesia. So, for him to, you know, claim that, you know, he identifies with the experience of black Americans, I think, is a bit of a stretch,” he said.

    The world-renowned surgeon does not often bring up race on the campaign trail, and has called for Americans to “deemphasize race.”

    “Remember now, I’ve been around for 64 years, you know. I’ve had a chance to see what real racism is,” he said.

    Carson told Politico that he hasn’t experienced racism from the Republican Party. Then, when asked to recount his last experience with “real racism,” Carson said he just had to look to the left and progressives.

    “I think the way that I’m treated by the left is racism. They assume because you’re black, you have to think a certain way,” he added.

  134. 134
    SiubhanDuinne, Annoying Scoundrel says:

    Obama talking about Gitmo right now.

  135. 135
    Steeplejack says:


    I took a road trip to Philadelphia last Thursday with my politically savvy, semi-insider friend (former Washington Post reporter who now works with a press foundation), and she was raving about Dark Money in a horror-movie kind of way. “You’ve got to read it, but it will scare the shit out of you!” It’s in my queue, but I haven’t pulled the trigger yet.

  136. 136
    Thoroughly Pizzled says:

    Can we euthanize the meme that Hillary, Obama, et al. are “moderate Republicans?” First off, in what world do Republicans support progressive taxation, LGBT rights, universal healthcare, etc.? Second, this lazy analysis completely ignores the role of Congress. I dream of Obama getting one of Nixon’s Congresses, and if Nixon had Obama’s Congress, the craters would probably still be smoking.

  137. 137
    SiubhanDuinne, Annoying Scoundrel says:


    It is a brilliant exercise in investigative journalism, and a terrifying look into the tentacles of influence people like the Kochs and others have. I fully concur that it needs to be widely read and discussed. Maybe one of our front-pagers could resurrect the old “BJ Book Club”?

  138. 138
    J R in WV says:


    But sallying back and forth with fellow bloggers isn’t stressful like arguing with a co-worker, relative, or boss.

    We all have the same rank: PFC; none of us can harm the other’s prospects; what’s to be stressed about?

    I will admit a few newer posters sometimes give me a pain behind my right temple… but it is rare and not serious.

  139. 139
    eclare says:

    @Betty Cracker: I happen to know at least one who plans to. Will prob make me promise not to tell the relatives.

  140. 140
    The Sheriff Endorses Baud 2016 says:

    @Kay: The donor class will never allow the GOP to bring someone into the fold they can’t control. And they’re not controlling Trump. Just look at all the endorsements Rubio continues to collect while Trump collects remoras past their sell-by date like 911iani. The party wants nothing to do with a loose cannon that’s not on the payroll.

    If they have to burn the GOP village in order to save it, I have a hard time seeing they wouldn’t.

  141. 141
    gwangung says:

    When you say Clinton can only triangulate: hang on, that’s a blessing! Any number of Rs would take special interest money and NOT triangulate in the least, just do what they’re told. Clinton will work out what the broadest section of the electorate wants, and do that. This includes rightwingers. She’ll cover that base slightly, and will cover whatever else is established as a serious constituency.

    Isn’t that the classic definition of what we WANT politicians to do???????

    We keep forgetting that politicians are quite responsive to people who actually write letters and call them; there are countless stories of how Representatives gets lots of calls and mails pounding on right wing points on issues where the majority is quite liberal.

    Abdicating our responsibility is what got us into this mess in the first place…there’s a strong sense from the left side of just voting and thinking the problem is solved for four years—a sense that’s not shared on the right.

  142. 142
    Applejinx says:

    @gwangung: Yes, it is the definition of what we want politicians to do, and I’d have the people accusing me of CDS bear that in mind.

    Yes, it’s a blessing in a world where an old socialist damn near out-fundraises her and puts up a real challenge for the nomination. I just need to see more evidence that it’s working, but you know I am seeing that evidence bit by bit. I really like what she’s doing in healthcare with ‘aggressive small ball’. I’ll happily cosign that approach.

    I feel that as a lefty, I need to kick up a fuss and demand more, and NOT just express total support and go home. Sadly, that can be painted as CDS, but it doesn’t worry me to be accused of not trusting Clinton.

    I don’t, but that doesn’t mean she can’t be the best President. She’s just gotta be directed, and see a benefit to supporting your pet issues. And that can be done a variety of ways. None of them, NONE of them involve just celebrating her and trusting her direction. WE are supposed to supply the direction, no Clinton trust necessary.

  143. 143
    Brachiator says:

    @The Sheriff Endorses Baud 2016:

    The donor class will never allow the GOP to bring someone into the fold they can’t control. And they’re not controlling Trump.

    So what are they going to do to stop him?

    Consider your answer carefully. You just might win a prize if you come up with a winning solution, including your own Fox News show.

  144. 144
    Elizabelle says:

    @Jeffro: I found it interesting that when Jane Mayer’s Dark Money came out, heard a few stories about the ties of Daddy Fred Koch to Hitler and then …. crickets.

    Most interesting.

    Totes getting a copy, and making up a Cliff’s Notes for a relative who needs to know the stuff (but prob would not read it).

  145. 145
    J R in WV says:

    @rikyrah: I can’t believe I’m older than Old Ben!!

    Oh my FSM, that is depressing. At least I’m not mentally challenged by my age, yet!

  146. 146
    J R in WV says:

    @Iowa Old Lady:

    Samantha Bee wraps up her clever expose of Kasich with “These guys [ Trump, Cruz, Rubio, and a 4th I didn’t catch ] want to do horrible things, but John Kasich already does them.” He’s not a moderate!

  147. 147
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Applejinx: I said you have CDS because you’ve been calling Clinton a Republican and a wholly owned subsidiary of Wall Street for weeks, not because you failed to “express total support and go home.” Jesus. Persecution complex much? Say whatever you want — no one is demanding that you love, trust and support Hillary Clinton. But know that when you routinely traffic in falsehoods and exaggerations, it tends to color people’s perceptions of your subsequent utterances.

  148. 148
    liberal says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    …wholly owned subsidiary of Wall Street for weeks…

    Of course she’s a wholly owned subsidiary of WS. How the hell could the Clintons take that much money from WS and it not be true?

    Now, of course, I’ll support Clinton in the general, will give her money, etc—she’s a whore for Wall St, but she’ll be running against Cthulhu. But just because her opponent is Cthulhu doesn’t mean she’s not a whore for WS.

  149. 149
    liberal says:


    We keep forgetting that politicians are quite responsive to people who actually write letters and call them…

    LOL. Not really, given that famous political science study recent which confirmed the hypothesis that our government only listens to rich people.

  150. 150
    Marjowil says:

    @Germy: Nathan Thurm

  151. 151
    Bob In Portland says:

    Stories that Clinton flooded the Vegas caucuses with Harry Reid’s help. Apparently, Reid went to the casino owners and said, “Let my people go” to the caucuses. On the clock. So even this great victory is somewhat tainted by the uses of power by the wealthy.

    But as long as everybody is comfortable with it…

  152. 152
    wuzzat says:

    @Bob In Portland: Am I missing the part where casino workers are intrinsically more likely to vote for Clinton, or are we actually upset that people were allowed to take time off of work to vote now?

  153. 153
    PatrickG says:


    Do you think Obama is a wholly owned subsidiary of Wall Street?

    I read your sentence and immediately did a substitution, to wit:

    Of course she’s he’s a wholly owned subsidiary of WS. How the hell could the Clintons Obama take that much money from WS and it not be true?

    First Google Result for my casual search here. To quote:

    About a third of the money his top fundraisers have brought in this year has come from the financial sector, suggesting that strained relations with Wall Street have not hurt the president’s ability to attract donations there for his reelection campaign, according to data released Friday by the Center for Responsive Politics.

    The numbers represent a notable increase from 2008, when bundlers in the investment and banking arena accounted for about 20 percent of the total brought in by top fundraisers for Obama.

    I’m genuinely curious if you think Obama is as tainted as Clinton is by taking Wall Street money in such quantities in both 2008 and 2012. If so, that’s a consistent standard. If not, why not?

    @Bob In Portland:

    There’s a world of difference between helping people perform the act of voting (without losing their jobs and/or paycheck, at that!) and telling them how to vote. Now, I’m curious as to whether Reid’s Moses moment was selective, or whether the “go vote!” moment came with coercion by bosses, but there seems to be little data on that yet. Plenty of conjecture and anecdote, but not much meat to sink one’s teeth into.

    ETA: What wuzzat said, so much more succinctly. Basically, this claim is a veiled accusation of conspiracy, and I don’t see much there, there.

Comments are closed.