HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Ohioblue22 » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Fri Apr 29, 2016, 02:08 PM
Number of posts: 1,430

Journal Archives

The percentage of Bernie's people that won't vote for her is statistically small and normal for

Every Election

Gotta love the Thom Hartmann program

He let's the right on to bash to democratic front runner then has trump spokes-people on to explain to us why trump isn't so bad when he trashes the judge.

Thanks Thom we wouldn't want to get the wrong impression on trump and who doesn't love the hillary trashing

Does anyone know if Randy Rhodes has started up her podcast yet

No, the system wasn’t rigged against him The system was rigged, for sure, but in his favor. The fir

No, the system wasn’t rigged against him

The system was rigged, for sure, but in his favor. The first two states? Two of the most unrepresentative states in the union, states that glossed over his failures in reaching communities of color. It’s a calendar that benefits white candidates and silences the issues that matter to the communities that drive the modern Democratic Party.

And how about them caucuses? Sanders won nine of 11, getting a significant percentage of his delegate haul from these undemocratic, exclusionary contests. In fact, those nine states are exactly half of his victory total. Take caucuses out, and Sanders is barely in the frame.

Now, there’s nothing wrong with winning caucuses as long as they exist! In fact, Barack Obama owes his presidency to them. But designing a system that prevents people from participating and eliminates the secret ballot is exactly what rigging the system looks like, and it wasn’t Clinton that benefited from that.


No, Sanders won’t do better than Clinton against Trump.

No, Sanders won’t do better than Clinton against Trump.

Current polling has Clinton’s negatives baked in. They are her floor. Current polling doesn’t have Sanders’ negatives baked in. They are his ceiling. And dear god, there is plenty in Sanders’ background to feed the Republican Noise Machine for the general election. And by the end of the cycle, his negatives would match those of Clinton’s.

If there’s one thing we’ve learned this primary cycle, it's that demographics are destiny. And it's the same case for the general election. The biggest predictor of how people will vote this year is to look at how they voted last presidential election, and those choices are heavily correlated to race, sex, and marital status.

In alternate universes—one in which Sanders wins the nomination, the other in which Clinton does—they both would end up roughly the same in November. Democrats won’t cross over to vote for Trump, and Republicans won’t cross over to vote for Sanders (and certainly not for Clinton). In the end, the final outcome will be determined by turnout, and given our opponent, turnout will hopefully be high. We’d have to fight for that equally hard, regardless of who was our nominee.


If you plan for a coup, you’ve already lost

If you plan for a coup, you’ve already lost

Let’s just take a moment to appreciate what Sanders is trying to accomplish here—he knows he’s lost the election. He’s all but acknowledged it. Which is why he’s now focused so heavily on getting the establishment superdelegates to overturn the election in his favor.

Like a despotic dictator, he is so sure of his supremacy that he sneers at the choices of his electorate and seeks to callously toss them aside. He dishonestly tells his supporters that there’s a conspiracy standing between him and victory.

Not only is this undemocratic, it’s outright delusional. These are the same superdelegates representing the same establishment he’s repeatedly bashed and even sued. These are the superdelegates he spent the first year of his campaign blasting as an affront to the democratic process and illegitimate. NOW, things are different. Having lost the election, he expects these supers to overturn the will of the electorate, including the heavy preferences of key growth party demographics like Latinos and African Americans, in order to hand the nomination to the loser of the contest.

There are 11 of them you can read the rest here

Eric schneiderman is investigating what ExxonMobil knew and when re: climate change, lamar

Smith on the science committee is trying to shut it down. Something that will happen if you let trump get elected

Thom Hartman made me lol today

During the opening monologue he said in reference to the brouhaha "I read several accounts and watch a couple of videos about what happened and let's just move on"

The Tom Hartman show: 'a safe place for the right to call in and trash the Democratic front runner' kkkarl rove sends his thanks

Trump winning means a Republican in the white house that means he can appoint heads to depts. That m

Originally posted in gd:p but locked as off-topic topic so I'm trying it here

Scotus: back to 5-4 decisions against you
The end of one person one vote
Fcc: good bye to net neutrality
Nrlb: cripple the cfpb ,
Sec: a con comissioner would give a green light to the banking shenanigans we love so much.
Depth of labor: crippling of the unions
Fda/usda: under con control rule food inspections became voluntary
Head of the fed: back to employee insecurity
Amtrak: no rail improvement
Post office: privatization of mail good bye postal union
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »