Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:31 PM May 2016

Rachel Maddow assumes Rush's role for the Dem Party: King Maker

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Omaha Steve (a host of the General Discussion forum).

There is so much good that will come of Bernie staying in, arguably the most important reason of all being exposing and educating Americans on how we select a candidate. Every state is different and many elections have had disputed results on the our side; we were thought of the pure party and above election shananagins. I can't wait until the California primary and hundreds of thousands discover they are left out of the process for mistakenly registering with the Independence Party. People didn't know so this is a learning experience. But they won't learn a damn thing if Bernie drops out.

Then you have myopic Rachel slamming Bernie for not bowing out. Rachel is of the elitist, well educated 10% class Thomas Frank is calling out in "Listen Liberal."



Please note: King Maker is sexist but Queen maker is more sexiest. I know the latter is true because I read it on DU.


http://bluenationreview.com/maddow-launches-epic-rant-against-bernies-radical-convention-strategy/

42 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Rachel Maddow assumes Rush's role for the Dem Party: King Maker (Original Post) WhaTHellsgoingonhere May 2016 OP
What a horrible thing to say about Rachel, sometimes I get so sick here on this board. Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #1
What are you even talking about? Wilms May 2016 #5
So she's exactly like Sanders? SunSeeker May 2016 #8
Do you haveanything to back that up?? Wilms May 2016 #10
Google "Bernie Sanders assets." SunSeeker May 2016 #16
Why don't you square that with some facts. Wilms May 2016 #24
What am I making up? SunSeeker May 2016 #26
Who said it's wrong? WHO said that puts him in the top 2 or 3%? Wilms May 2016 #27
I thought you were disputing he is a millionaire. SunSeeker May 2016 #30
SO WHAT if he is a millionaire? pangaia May 2016 #33
Oh! Vermont residents. Wilms May 2016 #39
Lmao!! WhaTHellsgoingonhere May 2016 #23
we are now against the well educated? La Lioness Priyanka May 2016 #2
You need to at least try to understand Thomas Frank's critique of the Democratic Party WhaTHellsgoingonhere May 2016 #25
This blog post belongs in GD-P Agnosticsherbet May 2016 #3
Lol you just lock everything you disagree with. Rachel is playing role of King Maker, primary... WhaTHellsgoingonhere May 2016 #11
Bullshit. Take the post where it belongs. Agnosticsherbet May 2016 #14
Lmao!!! WhaTHellsgoingonhere May 2016 #18
You're confusing "kingmaker" with "rational adult in the room." NuclearDem May 2016 #4
exactly themaguffin May 2016 #17
I support democrats on TV. NCTraveler May 2016 #6
I see her as more of an 2naSalit May 2016 #12
Many seem to not have patience for that aspect but she covers a bit of depth quickly. nt. NCTraveler May 2016 #15
She taught me all about Purple Drank. I just taught you more in my OP than any myopic Hillary backer WhaTHellsgoingonhere May 2016 #20
I think we could do a hell of a lot worse than Maddow. Her inflections give her away though YOHABLO May 2016 #34
From what I have seen,... NCTraveler May 2016 #41
Why do so many people think that California with 40 million people onecaliberal May 2016 #7
Why force Hillary to waste her money in the primary when she needs it for the general election? SunSeeker May 2016 #9
He wants an contested convention moonbabygo May 2016 #13
It is a bad thing. SunSeeker May 2016 #22
Hillary didn't drop out till june Egnever May 2016 #36
Rachel is not making anyone King or Queen. She is simply stating facts. SunSeeker May 2016 #19
I told you what he's doing. Rachel is merely and incessantly regurgitating cud she and only... WhaTHellsgoingonhere May 2016 #29
Maybe I gave you guys too much credit. I'm not privy to her inbox. Maybe WhaTHellsgoingonhere May 2016 #35
Fuzy math Egnever May 2016 #37
love bernie but agree with rachel spanone May 2016 #21
Oh for fucks sake, how many people can you fit under the bus? Firebrand Gary May 2016 #28
anyone who can do math. nt La Lioness Priyanka May 2016 #31
I don't throw people under the bus. I call them out. Big difference. MSNBC is to the Democratic WhaTHellsgoingonhere May 2016 #32
Editorials do not equate to king-makers and power-brokers. LanternWaste May 2016 #38
She's protects Hillary and only attacks Bernie. Do you even watch her? Rachel Maddow. She's on MSNBC WhaTHellsgoingonhere May 2016 #40
Locking after a review by forum hosts Omaha Steve May 2016 #42

Jackie Wilson Said

(4,176 posts)
1. What a horrible thing to say about Rachel, sometimes I get so sick here on this board.
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:33 PM
May 2016

Some folks dont deserve Rachel or Obama.

 

Wilms

(26,795 posts)
5. What are you even talking about?
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:39 PM
May 2016

OK. She's not part of the "10% class". More like the 2 or 3%.

And she waves her hands a lot.

SunSeeker

(51,367 posts)
8. So she's exactly like Sanders?
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:41 PM
May 2016
 

Wilms

(26,795 posts)
10. Do you haveanything to back that up??
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:44 PM
May 2016

SunSeeker

(51,367 posts)
16. Google "Bernie Sanders assets."
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:55 PM
May 2016

He is certainly a millionaire. He owns multiple valuable properties, as indicated by his real estate tax deductions (the reason he did not want to release his full 2014 tax return listing his deductions). Sanders is a hypocrite who is railing against "millionaires and billionaires" while trying to hide that he himself is a millionaire, going so far as to move all of his assets to his wife's name. http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/bernie-sanders-wife-accounts-for-reported-assets-120261

And as far as arm waiving:

 

Wilms

(26,795 posts)
24. Why don't you square that with some facts.
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:05 PM
May 2016

His income and his assets don't put him anywhere near that class.

You don't have to like him. But why you wanna make stuff up? Seems dumb.

SunSeeker

(51,367 posts)
26. What am I making up?
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:10 PM
May 2016
 

Wilms

(26,795 posts)
27. Who said it's wrong? WHO said that puts him in the top 2 or 3%?
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:12 PM
May 2016

I mean, other than you.

SunSeeker

(51,367 posts)
30. I thought you were disputing he is a millionaire.
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:26 PM
May 2016

So you now concede his is a millionaire (and you don't dispute he's a big hand-waiver) so that puts him in the same league you put Maddow in.

It appears you have now moved the goal posts. But regardless, now that you agree he is a millionaire, that almost certainly puts him in the top 2 or 3% in terms of Vermont residents. The top 5% of incomes in Vermont are those who make over $174K, which Sanders certainly does. http://www.leg.state.vt.us/jfo/issue_briefs_and_memos/Intro_to_ITEP_and_Pew_reports.pdf The OP mocked Rachel for being in the top 10%. Sanders is certainly in the top 10%, and in fact the top 5% in Vermont.

pangaia

(24,324 posts)
33. SO WHAT if he is a millionaire?
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:35 PM
May 2016

For anyone to have been in Congress for as long as he has and NOT be a millionaire would be pretty difficult.

And a millionaire ain't what it used to be..

 

Wilms

(26,795 posts)
39. Oh! Vermont residents.
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:52 PM
May 2016

So who moved the goal post? A Hillary supporter. Can you blame them? What else have they got. Spin. Weather-vaning. Goal post moving. Etc.

 

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)
23. Lmao!!
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:05 PM
May 2016

Wow!

She has no integrity. She's in Hillary's camp.

 

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)
2. we are now against the well educated?
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:36 PM
May 2016

Lol.

desperate times.

 

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)
25. You need to at least try to understand Thomas Frank's critique of the Democratic Party
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:08 PM
May 2016

my comment makes a shit ton of sense in that context. That's why I referenced him.

Gottit?

Agnosticsherbet

(11,619 posts)
3. This blog post belongs in GD-P
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:36 PM
May 2016

With other false opinion stories.

 

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)
11. Lol you just lock everything you disagree with. Rachel is playing role of King Maker, primary...
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:50 PM
May 2016

process is a disgrace, and the longer Bernie stays in, the more problems with the process get exposed.

(Obligatory sexism)

Agnosticsherbet

(11,619 posts)
14. Bullshit. Take the post where it belongs.
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:52 PM
May 2016
 

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)
18. Lmao!!!
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:58 PM
May 2016


You made my day!
 

NuclearDem

(16,184 posts)
4. You're confusing "kingmaker" with "rational adult in the room."
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:37 PM
May 2016

themaguffin

(3,805 posts)
17. exactly
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:57 PM
May 2016
 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
6. I support democrats on TV.
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:40 PM
May 2016

We need more of them. I have no interest in trashing Maddow for supporting democrats. The media tilts strong to the right. Any help we can get I will take. I'm not big on the format of her show, but I support her and cheer her on. She is an extremely intelligent and well thought out woman. My kind of person.

"but Queen maker is more sexiest."

2naSalit

(86,039 posts)
12. I see her as more of an
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:51 PM
May 2016

educator for those who have little info on how our government was set up to function and when she calls someone out, she usually gives a brief primer about why something is right or wrong before she tells us what the "t hing" is. With so many uniformed people in our country, it's quite appropriate they way she delivers her points.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
15. Many seem to not have patience for that aspect but she covers a bit of depth quickly. nt.
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:55 PM
May 2016
 

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)
20. She taught me all about Purple Drank. I just taught you more in my OP than any myopic Hillary backer
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:02 PM
May 2016

talking head.

 

YOHABLO

(7,358 posts)
34. I think we could do a hell of a lot worse than Maddow. Her inflections give her away though
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:38 PM
May 2016

as a HRC supporter. In a sense she seems impartial, but somehow I think the MSNBC group has rallied around Hillary way too much. I don't know what Maddow's salary is but it damn well beats her gig at Air America or a college professor job.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
41. From what I have seen,...
Wed May 4, 2016, 02:30 PM
May 2016

I'm more than willing to agree with your first two sentences. It's better than who most of the corporate media fawn over. I do get why it would be frustrating being a Sanders supporter full well knowing Maddows ideology is to the left of Clinton. But mine is as well and I support Clinton.

onecaliberal

(32,471 posts)
7. Why do so many people think that California with 40 million people
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:40 PM
May 2016

Should not have a say in this process. We are the BEST representation of this country with every demographic and age group. We have the population of several states, give up your own vote before you talk about ours being irrelevant. I know Hillary doesn't want to wait for California because she will lose the land of the true liberals.

SunSeeker

(51,367 posts)
9. Why force Hillary to waste her money in the primary when she needs it for the general election?
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:44 PM
May 2016
But thanks to Bernie Sanders... Democrats are going to spend another two months bickering, twiddling their bloody thumbs and showing Trump exactly how and where to strike in the general election. That’s bad for the party, bad for America and bad for the planet.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/bernie-sanders-over-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-us-elections-needs-to-stop-attacking-a7012796.html#
 

moonbabygo

(281 posts)
13. He wants an contested convention
Wed May 4, 2016, 12:51 PM
May 2016

at least he said it yesterday after his win in Indiana. This whole time I thought it would be the repugs, but they seem to be kissing and making up.

Looks like both parties will be morphing into something different. Which may not be a bad thing

SunSeeker

(51,367 posts)
22. It is a bad thing.
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:04 PM
May 2016

Sanders won Indiana by just 5 percentage points, in a open primary tailor made for him, after spending $1.8+ million in ads and Hillary did not spend a penny. He needed to win by a lot more.

Even after Sanders got +5 delegates vs. Hillary last night, in order to go into the convention with more pledged delegates (ignoring that Clinton will already have more total delegates to lock the nomination on the first ballot), Sanders would need to win the following contests by the vote margins indicated:

Guam: Sanders +43
West Virginia: Sanders +52
Kentucky: Sanders +35
Oregon: Sanders +57
Virgin Islands: Sanders +43
Puerto Rico: Sanders +17
California: Sanders +31
Montana: Sanders +62
New Jersey: Sanders +13
New Mexico: Sanders +18
South Dakota: Sanders +40
North Dakota: Sanders +67
District of Columbia: Tie

Sanders' IN win still puts him further behind pace than he was yesterday.

As Rachel Maddow explained, in 2008 Obama only had a 4% lead in pledged delegates, and needed SDs to get a majority, yet before the convention Hillary conceded even though she had the majority of popular votes. She did not contest the convention -- she conceded well before the convention and stood firmly in support of Obama at the convention, uniting Democrats.

Rachel went on to point out that Hillary is 11% ahead of Sanders in pledged delegates.

And of course, Hillary has millions more in popular votes than Sanders.

Yet Sanders insists on a divisive "contested convention" unless Hillary attains the majority of unpledged -- even though 15% of total delegates are SDs. The only way a Dem candidate could get a majority of pledged delegates is by having an utter blowout in the primary. Obama didn't have that. He needed SDs to get a majority of total delegates. Yet Hillary conceded. As she should have. As anyone in Hillary's position should have. Sanders is nowhere near in as strong a position as Hillary was in 2008, yet he won't concede before the convention.

 

Egnever

(21,506 posts)
36. Hillary didn't drop out till june
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:42 PM
May 2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2008#April_and_beyond

On the morning of June 5, Clinton posted on her website an open letter to her supporters, which she also sent by e-mail that day. It announced that on Saturday (June 7) Clinton would endorse Obama's candidacy.


Long after it became clear the math didn't work for her. By Hillary's standards he still has a month to go. Not to mention Hillary had no problem with all kinds of shenanigans trying to make Obama's nomination seem illegitimate.

She will live if Sanders stays in at least till June.

SunSeeker

(51,367 posts)
19. Rachel is not making anyone King or Queen. She is simply stating facts.
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:00 PM
May 2016

She said in 2008, Obama only had a 4% lead in pledged delegates, and needed SDs to get a majority, yet before the convenction Hillary conceded even though she had the majority of popular votes. She did not contest the convention -- she conceded well before the convention and stood firmly in support of Obama at the convention, uniting Democrats.

Rachel went on to point out that Hillary is 11% ahead of Sanders in pledged delegates.

And of course, Hillary has millions more in popular votes than Sanders.

Yet Sanders insists on a divisive contested convention unless Hillary attains the majority of unpledged -- even though 15% of total delegates are SDs. The only way a Dem candidate could get a majority of pledged delegates is by having an utter blowout in the primary. Obama didn't have that. He needed SDs to get a majority of total delegates. Yet Hillary conceded. As she should have. As anyone in Hillary's position should have. Sanders is nowhere near in as strong a position as Hillary was in 2008, yet he won't concede before the convention.

 

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)
29. I told you what he's doing. Rachel is merely and incessantly regurgitating cud she and only...
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:21 PM
May 2016

everyone in media has been ruminating on for months. She and the others are myopically focused on numbers.

Man, it's bigger than percentages, and if you didn't know that before, you just learned something new. That's more than you can say by watching Rachel. You can watch any talking head on any network spew out the exact same piece verbatim. She's even reading from the New York Times. How stupid is her audience that she believes they need to be told the math every day. The math hasn't changed for months. Months ago she was reading Nate Silver to you, and he told you Bernie's route was impossible. She treats you all like you have ADD.

 

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)
35. Maybe I gave you guys too much credit. I'm not privy to her inbox. Maybe
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:40 PM
May 2016

it's clear to her that her viewers don't understand probabilities and need reassurance daily.

 

Egnever

(21,506 posts)
37. Fuzy math
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:50 PM
May 2016

Hillary did not concede untill Obama passed the Delegate count needed to secure the nomination. She is still 180 delegates short.

She will likely get them but why should Sanders drop out any sooner than she did? Why shouldn't the rest of the country get a chance to weigh in?

spanone

(135,632 posts)
21. love bernie but agree with rachel
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:03 PM
May 2016

Firebrand Gary

(5,044 posts)
28. Oh for fucks sake, how many people can you fit under the bus?
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:13 PM
May 2016
 

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)
31. anyone who can do math. nt
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:30 PM
May 2016
 

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)
32. I don't throw people under the bus. I call them out. Big difference. MSNBC is to the Democratic
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:31 PM
May 2016

Party as Fox is to the Republican Party. Rachel is arguably top dog at MSNBC and has been in Hillary's camp, like Matthews, like Capehart. Biased ramblings not objective journalism.

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
38. Editorials do not equate to king-makers and power-brokers.
Wed May 4, 2016, 01:50 PM
May 2016

Editorials do not equate to king-makers and power-brokers. Two wholly separate concepts conflated for convenience. A logical fallacy not objective observations.

 

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)
40. She's protects Hillary and only attacks Bernie. Do you even watch her? Rachel Maddow. She's on MSNBC
Wed May 4, 2016, 02:00 PM
May 2016

Omaha Steve

(99,059 posts)
42. Locking after a review by forum hosts
Wed May 4, 2016, 03:23 PM
May 2016

Statement of Purpose

Discuss politics, issues, and current events. Posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports are restricted in this forum. Posts about the Democratic primaries, conspiracy theories and disruptive meta-discussion are forbidden.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Rachel Maddow assumes Rus...