Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Han shot first.

Not all heroes wear capes.

The revolution will be supervised.

Verified, but limited!

Today in our ongoing national embarrassment…

Is it irresponsible to speculate? It is irresponsible not to.

Proof that we need a blogger ethics panel.

Shock troops for the Unitarian Jihad.

Our job is not to persuade Republicans but to defeat them.

Dinky Hocker Shoots Smack!

Mission Accomplished!

This blog is Obama’s Katrina.

Good luck with your asparagus.

Nevertheless, she persisted

We Survived Breitbartpocalypse!

This is a big f—–g deal.

This blog will pay for itself.

I personally stopped the public option…

I showered with Rahm and all I got was this shitty blog.

‘Forty-two’ said Deep Thought, with infinite majesty and calm.

Usually wrong but never in doubt.

We can agree to disagree, but I’m right.

Consistently wrong since 2002

Naturally gregarious and alpha

You are here: Home / Past Elections / Election 2016 / Friday Morning Open Thread: March Madness

Friday Morning Open Thread: March Madness

by | 122 Comments

This post is in: , ,

Ed Kilgore, at NYMag:

… As a starting point for the anti-Trump collective action cabal, tonight’s debate was probably about as good as it gets. For long, long minutes Rubio beat up on the Donald as a con man and Cruz savaged him as a crypto-Democrat, the two lines of attack regularly reinforced by the moderators and converging in the impression that the man’s a terrible gamble even for the people who are most attracted to him. From long experience during this campaign, it would be foolish to assume the debate damaged Trump’s standing significantly. But if it didn’t, perhaps the man is indeed bulletproof. He did seem uncharacteristically flustered at times.

It’s unlikely Rubio–who for the second debate in a row got into long insult-laden crosstalk exchanges with Trump–or Cruz helped themselves that much. But again, in the collective action scenario they’re like crime bosses who’ve agreed to rub out a common opponent while recognizing that they will have their own reckoning down the line. Meanwhile Kasich was either smart or lucky enough to get a bye into a later round, though if he loses Ohio he will be dumped from the convention cabal unceremoniously for failure to bring delegates to the table…

(Don’t know about Ohio, but as a former Michigander I would be very surprised if Kasich won in Michigan. Denizens of the two states loathe each other with a pure and impartial hatred — imagine the NY/NJ rivalry if neither state had a significant financial advantage over the other.)

Jamelle Bouie, at Slate — “Rubio and Cruz Just Undermined Every Legitimate Attack They Have Made Against Trump”:

… Earlier, I criticized Mitt Romney for making his moral argument against Trump subordinate to his electoral one—that the real estate mogul would lead the Republican Party to crushing defeat and place Hillary Clinton in the White House. At the same time, Romney’s speech—a forceful attack on Trump as a threat to democracy—was an unprecedented step, the closest thing we’ve seen to a complete disavowal of Trump. And in small ways, it filtered down to the Republican presidential candidates. Rubio, for instance, hammered Trump on his business record while Cruz went after him for supporting Democrats. Romney, it seems, had given new life to the anti-Trump effort, days after the demagogic reality TV star dominated Super Tuesday.

With those final answers, however, the effort fell flat. No, they weren’t the worst part of the debate—that goes to the brief exchange on lead poisoning in Flint, where Rubio praised Gov. Rick Snyder for his handling of the crisis, despite growing evidence of neglect and incompetence, with deadly consequences for the city’s residents—but they deflated Romney’s anti-Trump argument, revealing the extent to which it’s a hollow exercise and undermining every legitimate attack they made during the night.

As long as Rubio, Cruz, Kasich and the rest of the Republican Party are willing to support Trump as the nominee, it doesn’t matter what they say or how they insult him—Trump retains his stature as a legitimate figure in the Republican Party. Which, as he accumulates votes and delegates, makes him harder to stop…


***********
Apart from that unseemly image — brain bleach goes well with coffee, I hope — what’s on the agenda as we wrap up the week?

Reader Interactions

122Comments

  1. 1.

    Mustang Bobby

    That’s all well and good, but according to NPR last night, the Democrats are still in disarray and the Republicans will run the table.

    Oh where is my Serenity Prayer coffee mug now that I need it.

  4. 4.

    BruceFromOhio

    Trump adviser says if he comes to Cleveland w lead and establishment tries to deny him, his delegates ‘will burn the place down.’

    … oh do please try. I would *LOVE* to see CPD response. Oh, wait, they’re all white, so I guess it’s okay.

  5. 5.

    EconWatcher

    Many people are remarking on Trump’s comments about the size of his package. It may be a new low in the rhetoric, but more significantly to me, Rubio started it.

    The “respectable,” anointed, establishment candidate of one of the two major parties of the most powerful nation on earth tried to chip away at the lead of the frontrunner by sparking a debate about the size of his member. Really, have we sunk so low that even this has lost the power to shock?

    I live outside the U.S. I’m going long on red Maple Leaf badges and working on my fake Canadian accent. Those Americans have really lost it, eh?

  6. 6.

    FlyingToaster (Tablet)

    I just wonder how many of the GOP’s base saw that and went “ewwwwww”.

    Not nearly enough.

  7. 7.

    Patricia Kayden

    Of course Rubio, Kasich and Cruz will rally around Trump. All Republicans will. No surprise there.

  8. 8.

    Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)

    Frum has the best take – like Goldwater started this with his loss in 64 maybe Boy Blunder and the theft of 2k will be noted as the high tide mark.

    Also to from the Hoist by your own petard department:
    The GOP put a 50 cal through their foot when they insisted Drumpt publicly state he would support the GOP nominee. They do not dare to not change the rules and pretend they only are required of some of the candidates. This works in Drunp’s favor now & against the goopers forever.

  10. 10.

    Kay

    @EconWatcher:

    I don’t know if you’ve seen any of his speeches, but Rubio is the hip, young Republican. That’s his whole thing- the next generation of Reagan’s Revolution.

    Republican strategists must have believed dick jokes would appeal to the youngs. It’s in keeping with the absolute, utter contempt for their voters that informs every decision they make.

  12. 12.

    BillinGlendaleCA

    On Joe of the Morning, talking about Trump’s tax returns; Halperin said that the Mittster released all his tax returns. I seemed to recall that he only released 2 years of returns, I checked teh Google; Halperin pulled that out of his ass.

  13. 13.

    Baud

    @Kay: Trump’s dick measuring got Reddit excited. But the reaction in the comments is mostly the same as ours.

  14. 14.

    Cermet

    Looks like tRump took major hits and even if he wins out, this will bite into his support helping Hillary and and even Sanders if something breaks against Hillary. tRump is looking very much like the Chump he is.

  16. 16.

    Cermet

    @BruceFromOhio: Try that Amerikans lost it in 1980 when Raygun the brain dead actor was elected by union(!) demo-rat blue dogs; that shift has resulted in the disaster that we continue to reap today.

  17. 17.

    Splitting Image

    @dr. bloor:

    David Frum can fuck himself sideways with a rusty chainsaw.

    Let’s not be hasty.

    Dip the chainsaw in anthrax first.

  19. 19.

    debbie

    @BillinGlendaleCA:

    I remember it being a long, drawn out deal, and then Mitt releasing only a few returns. His complaint about Trump not releasing his tells you all you need to know about the GOP’s hypocrisy.

  20. 20.

    BretH

    The theme of this year’s Republican Convention with Trump as the nominee will be of course, “We Built This”.

  22. 22.

    Kay

    @Cermet:

    It seems unsolvable to me as far as the GOP base. The only thing worse than being taken in by a fraud is admitting you got taken in by a fraud. A huge group in the GOP base now have to admit that on some level, and, worse, they have to admit it as a result of the establishment telling them Trump is a fraud. That’s a hard pill for them to swallow.

  24. 24.

    JMG

    Like most people, I didn’t watch the debate, having better things to do, dinner at a nice restaurant with my son. But I know my fellow Americans, and the only thing that anyone will discuss about this debate is Trump’s penis.

  26. 26.

    Cermet

    @Kay: As someone who has fallen for a fraud big time (ex-girl friend) and still paying for it I understand that feeling only too well! LOL.

    AS for Dick, yes and no. The 1980 election occurred when the US was forced to start down sizing since the rest of the world had fully recovered from WW II. That was critical for how the direction of the country was set. Note that is when Roe vs. Wade became an issue despite having been a non-issue for religious leaders previously. That election was a watershed in many ways that Dick’s wasn’t.

  27. 27.

    debbie

    @Kay:

    The only thing worse than being taken in by a fraud is admitting you got taken in by a fraud.

    I don’t think the establishment ever got taken in by Trump. They found him amusing and thought he’d gin up excitement for the GOP. They didn’t really see the danger he presented to their orthodoxy until it was too late.

  30. 30.

    David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch

    This devastating ad (video) shows how the Dems will use Trump to take back the Senate.

  34. 34.

    lonesomerobot

    I honestly don’t understand why Drumpf even does the Republican debates anymore. He could just say, “You’ve seen me stand on a stage next to these losers like 20 times. I’m the winner. Who is going to beat me? I won. I will hold my own events from now on.” And the media will still cover him.

  35. 35.

    OzarkHillbilly

    @Kay: I kind of have to disagree. The reason they are now voting for Trump is the recognition that the GOP has been taking them for chumps for decades.

  37. 37.

    Baud

    This was mentioned here last night (WaPo):

    DETROIT — Fox News is not usually the destination of choice for Democratic candidates seeking to spread their message, but Bernie Sanders has agreed to participate in an hour-long town hall hosted by the network here on Monday.

    Anchor Bret Baier announced Thursday that the presidential hopeful would appear with him and said that Hillary Clinton had also been invited but declined because of “a scheduling conflict.”

    I’m trying to look at this objectively, but I don’t think I like this.

    I know there’s never any free time on the Baud! 2016! calendar for Fox News.

  38. 38.

    Frankensteinbeck

    @Mustang Bobby:
    Well, some of Sanders’ supporters said mean things on the internet. That obviously means the whole Democratic Party is in revolt, right? Sure the polls say the vast majority of both camps are delighted with the other candidate, but some Democrats on the internet said mean things about Obama before the midterms, and look how Romney won.

    @EconWatcher:
    Context is wildly distorting our perceptions. Candidates like Trump and Cruz only look electable compared to Jeb:(. These people are actually worse than Romney, who was staggeringly bad. Similarly, Rubio and Kasich look sane only because they’re standing next to a guy who thinks he’ll make Mexico pay to build a border wall, and a guy who thinks the pyramids were for grain storage.

    @BillinGlendaleCA:
    He released two years of partial returns.

  39. 39.

    sherparick

    @BillinGlendaleCA: ” Before the Storm,” “Nixonland,” and “The Invisible Bridge,” the first three volumes of Perlstein’s account of the rise and ascendancy of the Conservative Movement under Goldwater, Nixon, and Reagan, the biggest single factor being the movement of working and middle class white southerners (or whites with southern sensibilities on race) into the Republican Party.

  40. 40.

    Applejinx

    @Baud: He’s only going to give his stump speech again. Good for him.

    It’s possible they’ll give him an opportunity to scold them when they fish for anti-Hillary dirt. That, also, would be predictable and rather awesome. I think I do like this.

    Not the first time Bernie went into hostile territory and stuck respectfully to his beliefs. I’m reminded of the visit to that fundie college? What was it?

  42. 42.

    lonesomerobot

    @Baud: I understand the concerns, but I think from a standpoint of attracting votes it isn’t a horrible idea. There are still open Democratic primaries where Republicans and independents can vote, and if he is looking at a general election strategy, trying to woo R’s who will not vote for Drumpf is a decent idea.

    There’s enough anecdotal evidence to suggest there are Republicans that could vote for Sanders. For instance, Bernie Sanders got over 2000 Republican voters in the New Hampshire primary to write-in his name on the GOP ballot.

  44. 44.

    Cermet

    @sherparick: The shift by Northern demo-rats was the major blow since this meant the death of moderate thugs in the Northeast and Midwest. The South was a lost cause well before that. Notice that thugs gained real power that resulted in extensive local victories and real change to laws/regs during the 80’s and laid the foundation for their current power base throughout the non-east coast states.

  45. 45.

    Baud

    @lonesomerobot:

    Yeah, I tend to be more forgiving that most people here when it comes to politicians’ attempts to round up votes. But I also remember when it was vogue for liberals to criticize Democrats who appear on Fox. I guess that’s passé now.

  47. 47.

    lonesomerobot

    @Baud: I think right now, when the entire conservative universe looks like it is about to crack wide open, is the best time to drop a truth bomb right in their media HQ. I have no expectation that he would be there to pander to them. He’s just going to be relentlessly on message as always.

  49. 49.

    David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch

    WASHINGTON— Sen. John Cornyn has yet to throw his support behind any Republican presidential hopeful, but Monday Cornyn raised concerns about the impact front-runner Donald Trump could have down ballot.

    “We can’t have a nominee be an albatross around the down-ballot races,” Cornyn told CNN. “That’s a concern of mine.”

    oops

  50. 50.

    Applejinx

    @Baud: Yeah, but Bernie’s the same all over. The very idea that he’d do anything but bring his stump speech is ludicrous. And he’s very likely to say he thinks Hillary is better than any of their candidates and he in turn is better still, and to dump on Trump’s racism.

    That actually supports Clinton, as she’s running against racism and sexism more intensely than Bernie is: he’s the income inequality, anti-establishment guy, she’s positioning herself as pro-establishment, pro-rich, anti social injustice. The more they try to push Bernie off his stump speech, the better it’ll turn out for Clinton.

  52. 52.

    Chyron HR

    @lonesomerobot:

    Remember, kids, Democrats who live in red states* shouldn’t have any say in picking the Democratic party’s candidate, but Republicans should, because shut up, that’s why.

    * Except Oklahoma, because shut up, that’s why.

  54. 54.

    Frankensteinbeck

    @Cermet:

    that shift has resulted in the disaster that we continue to reap today.

    True dat. Didn’t he pass changes to stock rules that made vulture capitalism possible?

    @Kay: and @OzarkHillbilly:
    I think there’s both, because even GOP voters aren’t monolithic. The foundation of their party may be racism, but there are the hard racists who care about nothing but finally getting to flaunt their hate, I Got Mine Fuck Yous who indulge mild bigotries but mostly just want to make sure everyone below them stays below them, ‘respectable’ racists who figure blacks killed by cops must have had it coming, but reject open hate speech, people with just a tinge of this stuff who feel they resonate with the GOP more than Democrats…

    So, only the worst parts of the party are enthusiastic about Trump, and a lot of those feel betrayed because the rest of the party refused to openly crush minorities. A whole lot of others are going ‘I really don’t want to vote for this guy.’ I doubt the latter will rebel in the general, but I figure Republican turnout will suck, and what minorities the GOP has left (not a lot, but enough to be important in a harshly divided country) will desert permanently.

  56. 56.

    Applejinx

    @Chyron HR: Ya know, if Bernie can get a bunch of demented Republicans to ditch the Republican Party and pick him over Trump, there is NOTHING bad about that scenario.

    Unless you really want to maximize Republican turnout and proudly lose because you refused to let anybody you considered a ‘bro’ cast a Democratic vote.

    Bring ’em on. They will have to get up to speed as, especially with Bernie, they ain’t goddamn changing a note of his tune. I’m more comfortable with Rs crossing over for Bernie than I am with them crossing over for Clinton. She might start accommodating them even more than she is.

  59. 59.

    BillinGlendaleCA

    @Cermet: Both Nixon and Reagan found success due to the integration of minorities and Boomers into the economy. Abortion became an issue due to private(read segregated) schools not getting tax exemptions.

  63. 63.

    lonesomerobot

    @Baud: The rule for me has always been the same – I’m fine when Democrats go on Fox to tell the truth. I’m not when they go on to pander to the Fox audience.

  65. 65.

    BillinGlendaleCA

    @Baud: “The Invisible Bridge” was my teen years, “Nixonland” starts off with the Watts riots of 1965, which I remember watching on our old B/W TV machine. “Nixonland” is a very long, but good read.

    ETA: I’ll probably read “The Gathering Strom”, should be interesting since I don’t remember much from then. Though ol’ Barry’s son was my congresscritter growing up.

  68. 68.

    Baud

    @lonesomerobot:

    Was he on when he was campaigning? I think that’s different. And I think he was criticized for going on initially. That’s probably what I’m recalling.

  69. 69.

    OzarkHillbilly

    @Frankensteinbeck:

    I doubt the latter will rebel in the general, but I figure Republican turnout will suck,

    That is my take too. As to

    what minorities the GOP has left (not a lot, but enough to be important in a harshly divided country) will desert permanently

    My impression of minrity Republican voters has been that most of them are the ultimate IGMFY voter.

  72. 72.

    BillinGlendaleCA

    Joe of the Morning had this lady from the WSJ editorial board on; she was talking about getting rid of the progressive tax and replacing it with a VAT. Ratner said that would be regressive, she said it would not but be more fair since everyone would be taxed at the same rate.. Ratner explained that it would be regressive since that’s what regressive means.

    ETA: Joe was also doing his KO impression, it sounded more like Cronkite.

  74. 74.

    BillinGlendaleCA

    @Baud: It probably took me longer to read cause I got sidetracked looking for where the Nixon Store/Richfield station was in Whittier.

  75. 75.

    OzarkHillbilly

    @Applejinx:

    She might start accommodating them even more than she is.

    Yes, she is so accomadating to Repubs that they are running pro Hillary ads. Oh wait a minute, now I remember, they hate her even more than Obama and they want Sanders to win because they think he will be easier to beat.

  76. 76.

    BillinGlendaleCA

    @Baud: True. Ratner’s point was that a sales tax(or VAT) is regressive by definition, fair is subjective.

  78. 78.

    David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch

    WASHINGTON — Democrats on Thursday unleashed a furious assault on Senator Charles E. Grassley, the Iowa Republican and Judiciary Committee chairman who has become the face of his party’s refusal to hold a hearing on President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court.

    As Mr. Grassley listened to his critics in the Senate chamber, a potentially strong Democratic challenger unexpectedly stepped forward in Iowa to run against him. It was another sign of increasing pressure on Mr. Grassley, whose bid for a seventh term had been all but assured before the Supreme Court vacancy arose.

    On the Senate floor, several Democrats berated Mr. Grassley for a full hour as Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the minority leader, has done for much of the last two weeks. “This is obstruction and chaos,” Mr. Reid said.

    The criticism became so intense that the usually restrained Mr. Grassley took the highly unusual step of taking over as the presiding officer of the Senate to cut off the Democrats.

    “Give me a break,” Mr. Grassley said later. “We made a decision based on history and our intention to protect the ability of the American people to make their voices heard.”

    But Democrats also came at Republicans from a second front. They held a news conference featuring lawmakers from several minority groups to press their case that if the Republican front-runner for the party’s presidential nomination, Donald J. Trump, were elected, his nominee to the court would not be a strong defender of civil rights.

    The confluence of events was the most significant sign yet that Democrats see the court and Mr. Trump as potential twin liabilities for Republicans.

    While Republican senators weigh whether to support or fight the businessman’s campaign, most are still backing Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, in firmly refusing to consider a judicial nominee, even though a recent CNN poll that found that 66 percent of Americans believe the Senate should hold hearings on the vacancy.

    The White House on Thursday quietly laid the groundwork for Mr. Obama’s eventual nominee, reaching out to activists whose support the president will need as law enforcement officials scrubbed the records and backgrounds of his top choices, including several whose names were sent to the F.B.I. for vetting last week.

    Tina Tchen, chief of staff to Michelle Obama, the first lady, held a late-afternoon conference call with several hundred activists including Asian-American leaders, in which she laid out the president’s criteria for choosing a justice, according to two participants.

    While no names came up, several Asian-Americans were believed to be on Mr. Obama’s list of potential candidates, including appellate judges Sri Srinivasan, 48, who was born in India, and Jacqueline Nguyen, 51, who fled to the United States from Vietnam in 1975.

    Another judge drawing attention in recent days as a potential nominee is Ketanji Brown Jackson, a federal trial judge in Washington, who formerly served on the United States Sentencing Commission and is related by marriage to Speaker Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin. The White House is also vetting a federal appeals court judge from Iowa, Jane Kelly, 51, whom Mr. Grassley has effusively praised in the past.

    ***
    ***

    Mr. Grassley could have anticipated the fury in the Senate. It was less likely that he contemplated the prospect of facing someone like Ms. Judge, who has been a political fixture in Iowa for decades, serving in the State Senate, as secretary of agriculture — the first woman to hold that post — and then as lieutenant governor.

    She and her husband own a cow and calf farm in rural southern Iowa. Democrats had wooed her to challenge Mr. Grassley for some time, but she had demurred until now, because Mr. Grassley has been extremely popular in the state.

    Ms. Judge told The Des Moines Register last week that she was considering a Senate run; she faces three other Democrats in the primary in June.

  79. 79.

    Chyron HR

    @Applejinx:

    Oh, okay, I thought there was a double standard here, but it turns out it’s just good when Sanders does it but bad if Clinton does it. Carry on!

  81. 81.

    FlipYrWhig

    @Applejinx:

    Ya know, if Bernie can get a bunch of demented Republicans to ditch the Republican Party and pick him over Trump, there is NOTHING bad about that scenario.

    Ya know, if I can get all four original Beatles to play my birthday party, there is NOTHING bad about that scenario either.

  83. 83.

    David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch

    jobs increased by 242,000 in February with the unemployment rate at 4.9%

    Obama is obviously cooking the books.

    eta: thanks job killin Obamacare

  84. 84.

    FlipYrWhig

    @Chyron HR: See, Bernie appeals to Republicans by being Bernie, while Hillary would have to appeal to Republicans by being Hillary, and that’s far worse.

  87. 87.

    p.a.

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Ya know, if I can get all four original Beatles to play my birthday party, there is NOTHING bad about that scenario either.

    Don’t forget the pony! #gobigorgohome

  88. 88.

    BillinGlendaleCA

    @FlipYrWhig: Do get with the program, Hillary appeals to Republicans cause Hillary is a Republican(she was a Goldwater Girl, remember).

  92. 92.

    lonesomerobot

    The mocking of one side’s supporters by the other side sure is fun reading. I’ll bet it wins over people, too.

  93. 93.

    Cermet

    @BillinGlendaleCA: The wedge issue of Abortion was first and foremost championed by raygun and driven hard by his handlers to incite the christian right; these brain dead believers in the spaghetti monster took up the issue rapidly after that – private schooling had nothing to do with that. Since the bible as the word of dog … I mean god (damn, keeping making that mistake) clearly states that killing a fully developed fetus (even in the ninth month) is not just allowed but of no consequence – see a number of examples where woman who are pregnant are allowed to be executed – then ip so fac to, human’s killing an innocent fetus isn’t a crime under the bible nor improper as far as god is concerned. So, the whole issue is purely a straw man (or is that straw fetus?) used by the ruling elite to keep the Taliban … I mean christians, under the thumb of the rich and voting against real christian values.

  94. 94.

    Jeffro

    @BillinGlendaleCA:

    Ratner said that would be regressive, she said it would not but be more fair since everyone would be taxed at the same rate.. Ratner explained that it would be regressive since that’s what regressive means.

    “But…but…taxing everyone at the same rate…that’s something people at every income level should agree is fair, right?”

    And the GOP wonders why their stupid appeals for flat taxes, privatizing Social Security, and all sorts of economic “empowerment” don’t get them anywhere.

    Just once I wish one of these talking heads would break it down for the WSJ types: would you rather have 90% of $50k/year, or 60% of $200k/year?

  97. 97.

    lonesomerobot

    @VOR: Yea but even that seems like 15 debates ago now. And that was a specific grievance against Fox, well before he was this far out in front. He’s the frontrunner now, nobody’s beating him. He could do it and I don’t think it would matter.

  98. 98.

    lonesomerobot

    Anyone got odds on Jesse Ventura? He says he’ll run if Sanders doesn’t get the nomination.

  100. 100.

    OzarkHillbilly

    @lonesomerobot: Speaking only for myself, I wasn’t mocking. I was just pushing back on AJ’s continued characterization of Hillary as a sellout. Nothing could be further from the truth and I get tired of hearing it.

  101. 101.

    Kathleen

    @Mustang Bobby: National Republican Radio frequently makes me want. to drive my car off the road. Maybe they should offer Serenity Mug as subscriber premium during pledge drives.

  102. 102.

    EconWatcher

    @OzarkHillbilly:

    Well, AJ went too far in calling Hillary a corporate shill, but nothing could be further from the truth –that’s also pushing it, don’t you think? Wasn’t the $700k from Goldman Sachs for a couple speeches a bit much?

    Can you imagine Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders doing that? In their case, nothing could be further from the truth. But in Hillary’s? Not so much.

    And by the way, the charlatan Trump is going to latch onto that $700k and never let it go. And it’s going to leave a bigger mark than it has in the gentle Dem primaries.

  103. 103.

    geg6

    @Baud:

    Yeah, just another reason I’m not feeling the Bern. I don’t see any reason a “Democrat” should legitimize FOX. But then, he’s not one.

  104. 104.

    geg6

    she’s positioning herself as pro-establishment, pro-rich, anti social injustice

    This is such a big lie that I can’t even laugh at how stupid it is. Just the most braindead of Bernista comments ever. Jesus. You people lie as much as Trump.

  106. 106.

    Chyron HR

    @EconWatcher:

    And by the way, the charlatan Trump is going to latch onto that $700k and never let it go. And it’s going to leave a bigger mark than it has in the gentle Dem primaries.

    If only we had nominated Bernie, the Republican candidate would have stood aside and let him claim the office he rightly deserves. We were fools, fools I tell you. :^(

  107. 107.

    FlipYrWhig

    @EconWatcher:

    Wasn’t the $700k from Goldman Sachs for a couple speeches a bit much?

    She was giving speeches every two weeks or so for the same price. She gave them at Goldman Sachs events, at several bank/investment firm events, and at events organized by the American Camping Association and the National Deli-Dairy-Bakery Association. Are these events for access and favor-currying or are they ways to make employees and conference attendees feel important because they get to see a gen-yoo-wine newsmaker in person?

    Why it became THE GOLDMAN SACHS SPEECHES is because of Bernie Sanders’s meta-argument about the influence of the financial sector and a longstanding claim that Hillary Clinton is in bed with Wall Street, based on her campaign contributions _while running for Senate in the state that contains Wall Street_. The whole thing is an immense heap of bullshit and innuendo.

  111. 111.

    gwangung

    @FlipYrWhig:

    and a longstanding claim that Hillary Clinton is in bed with Wall Street, based on her campaign contributions

    Which are probably from rank and file employees, since that’s how most contributions databases aggregate their data.

    I really don’t consider that to be in bed with Wall Street, but it’s still invariably brought out as a cudgel.

  112. 112.

    lonesomerobot

    Anyone who actually examines Hillary Clinton’s record as Secretary of State could have plenty to attack her with in the general election. The observation that the primary has been “gentle” is not incorrect. Sanders can’t really go after Clinton on her foreign policy record as Secretary of State, because to do so is to attack the foreign policy record of President Obama. However, there are legitimate concerns there: Honduras, Libya, and Syria, specifically. The regime change thing just keeps coming up, and I’m not comfortable with that.

    *DISCLAIMER: Any statement made by the commenter known as “lonesomerobot” should be read with the foreknowledge that “lonesomerobot” will be voting for the Democratic nominee, regardless of who that happens to be. The intent of the comment is to make honest observations about political subjects, and not to bash any particular candidate or idea.

  113. 113.

    FlipYrWhig

    @gwangung: I’m guessing, actually, that it was probably rich social-liberal Democrats who work on Wall Street, because they certainly do exist. The cudgel comes from assuming that they’d be giving money so that Hillary Clinton does their fiendish bidding, rather than that they’d be giving money because they’re Democrats and want the Democrat to win.

    @lonesomerobot: Foreign policy is certainly a valid area of liberal-to-left critique of Hillary Clinton, and is based on actual things that actual Hillary Clinton did. The “corporate” and “Wall Street” crapola, which is based on guilt by association and bad-faith misreading, drives me batty.

  114. 114.

    Bill

    The Bernie vs Hillary sniping is starting to make the comments unreadable.

    Hillbots – You’re going to win. Take a goddamn breath. Not every criticism (and there are legitimate criticisms) of her warrants losing your damn mind. And all the polling data indicates the party – including Bernie supporters – are going to support her.

    Bernistas – It’s over. He has no path to the nomination now. Just stop with the conspiracy theories and attempts to tear down the best hope we have to keep an insane Republican out of the White House. I’m left of Hillary too, but for fuck’s sake, there is a world of difference between her and ANY Republican.

  116. 116.

    Steve in the ATL

    @Baud:

    Bernie has message discipline (some would say to a fault)

    Or, maybe he doesn’t have that many ideas?

  117. 117.

    lonesomerobot

    @Steve in the ATL: Oh, nonsense. The man turned a city around as Mayor, and has been a Congressman for 16 years and a Senator for almost 10. This drive-by snarking doesn’t really serve the debate. Both of the candidates are intelligent and qualified in their own way to be President.

    *DISCLAIMER: Any statement made by the commenter known as “lonesomerobot” should be read with the foreknowledge that “lonesomerobot” will be voting for the Democratic nominee, regardless of who that happens to be. The intent of the comment is to make honest observations about political subjects, and not to bash any particular candidate or idea.

  118. 118.

    FlipYrWhig

    @lonesomerobot: Burlington, Vermont must have been a frightful place before Bernie Sanders turned it around. It’s almost half the size of Appleton, Wisconsin!

  120. 120.

    Peale

    I read something over at Raq Story that was letters from Nominal democrats giving their reasons for voting for Trump. Some good, some just hogwash. Webb’s reasoning was kind of common. Let’s just throw caution to the wind. he’ll be a catatrophe which will be good for us. My favorite are those who think Trump might be Hitler who don’t think about how badly hitter worked out for Germans. Yeah, I know it worked out a lot worse for Poles, Jews, Greeks, Ukranians, and any number of people’s, but in the end, all of Germany was completely destroyed, it’s cities in ruins, its territory occupied, it’s people starving and 10% of its population dead. Now I don’t think Trump will lead there, but the idea that he’s somehow going to be super good trump and not the reckless shady trump seems less than a 50/50 proposition.

  121. 121.

    leeleeFL

    @dr. bloor: this squared! These people gave been screwing this country up for almost my entire lifetime. They need high colonics with battery acid!

  122. 122.

    tones

    Amazed that Frum said that, but of course in addition to being too little too late he is right – if the RWNJ’s had tolerated actual counting of the votes, none of this needed to happen.
    Of course he was gleeful about it at the time if I recall.

Comments are closed.