NBC/WallSt Poll: Hillary now only leading Bern by 2 points in Cali!

[Starbuck1975]

Digital cock or e-penis. lol

There is a penis in my computer? Shouldn't he have said iPenor?

 

[Starbuck1975]

You obviously mean McCain.

Yes, my mistake. The self-destructive Republican nominees tend to blur into one entity after a while.

You merely project motive on the basis of what you believe or more likely what you want others to believe.

Correct. Isn't that how opinions work? I project an opinion based on what I believe, and then you project an opinion based on what you believe, and then we disagree and then someone brings my ePenor or whatever into the conversation and then it just becomes awkward for everyone.

 

[DrPizza]

He had the momentum and was the best general election choice against Romney.

Wtf are you smoking? Hillary won 5 of the last 7 states. SHE's the one who had momentum. Like they said - Obama had the most votes and the most pledged delegates, that's why the super delegates switched.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Wtf are you smoking? Hillary won 5 of the last 7 states. SHE's the one who had momentum. Like they said - Obama had the most votes and the most pledged delegates, that's why the super delegates switched.

I'll clarify. To me, momentum is more than just who wins how many states and when. There is also the intangible aura or energy a candidate can generate. The cult of personality. Kennedy had it. Reagan had it. Bill Clinton had it. Obama had it. I hate to say it but Trump has it too. Neither Bush had it nor Carter nor Gore. Sanders definitely has it.

Hillary has an established base of supporters some by extension due to her husband. I don't think she had ever managed to claim momentum.

 

[chowderhead]

I'll clarify. To me, momentum is more than just who wins how many states and when. There is also the intangible aura or energy a candidate can generate. The cult of personality. Kennedy had it. Reagan had it. Bill Clinton had it. Obama had it. I hate to say it but Trump has it too. Neither Bush had it nor Carter nor Gore. Sanders definitely has it.

Hillary has an established base of supporters some by extension due to her husband. I don't think she had ever managed to claim momentum.

Momentum is completely overrated. The best predictor of the primary election results for the Democrats on who would win a state are 1) what is the minority percentage of the vote in a given state and whether the state holds a open or closed primary. The only anomaly was Michigan which was very hard to poll for various reasons.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yes, my mistake. The self-destructive Republican nominees tend to blur into one entity after a while.


Correct. Isn't that how opinions work? I project an opinion based on what I believe, and then you project an opinion based on what you believe, and then we disagree and then someone brings my ePenor or whatever into the conversation and then it just becomes awkward for everyone.

I pointed out a fact on which I base my opinion. Yours is based on... what?

 

[blankslate]

doesn't matter. Unless there is an unprecedented case of campaign implosion that would be more spectacular than all of the special effects from all the movies combined, Senator Clinton will be the nominee.

At that point we can hope that Trump's unexpected streak of defying all of his naysayers comes to an end... (or not if you vehemently disagree with my world views I guess)

Bernie Sanders isn't someone that corporations want as a president and as such in as much as they can influence the democratic party to keep him from being their nominee they will.


_____________

 

[Starbuck1975]

I pointed out a fact on which I base my opinion. Yours is based on... what?

The facts that challenge your facts. You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine. I don't think you are wrong any more than I think I am right. I get it. You like Clinton. That anyone admires her or her husband I find mind boggling. I am sure you would find my respect for Reagan equally confounding. At the end of the day does it really matter? She has her supporters. Trump has his. Sanders has his. It's been an odd election year. I hope Sanders overtakes Clinton for the nomination due to superdelegates or the email scandal sinking her. I would also accept a Biden/Warren ticket. Are any of those scenarios probable? Doubtful.

I don't expect you to understand or accept my preference because you are not me.

 

[Jhhnn]

The facts that challenge your facts. You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine. I don't think you are wrong any more than I think I am right. I get it. You like Clinton. That anyone admires her or her husband I find mind boggling. I am sure you would find my respect for Reagan equally confounding. At the end of the day does it really matter? She has her supporters. Trump has his. Sanders has his. It's been an odd election year. I hope Sanders overtakes Clinton for the nomination due to superdelegates or the email scandal sinking her. I would also accept a Biden/Warren ticket. Are any of those scenarios probable? Doubtful.

I don't expect you to understand or accept my preference because you are not me.

Sigh.

You alleged that the superdelegates went with Obama in 2008 because he had momentum rather than the obvious reason that he simply had more pledged delegates to make a pitch for Dems to pick Bernie instead of Hillary on the basis of momentum he doesn't have, then went on to claim that charisma is momentum. Add some fantasy scenarios to obfuscate, as well.

I'll make it simple- anybody who wants to stop Trump will get behind Hillary. People who go on about it are being mind fucked by the "can't trust Hillary" bullshit.

 

[feralkid]

The facts that challenge your facts. You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine. I don't think you are wrong any more than I think I am right. I get it. You like Clinton. That anyone admires her or her husband I find mind boggling. I am sure you would find my respect for Reagan equally confounding. At the end of the day does it really matter? She has her supporters. Trump has his. Sanders has his. It's been an odd election year. I hope Sanders overtakes Clinton for the nomination due to superdelegates or the email scandal sinking her. I would also accept a Biden/Warren ticket. Are any of those scenarios probable? Doubtful.

I don't expect you to understand or accept my preference because you are not me.

Very good Lewis; short but pointless.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Sigh.

You alleged that the superdelegates went with Obama in 2008 because he had momentum rather than the obvious reason that he simply had more pledged delegates to make a pitch for Dems to pick Bernie instead of Hillary on the basis of momentum he doesn't have, then went on to claim that charisma is momentum. Add some fantasy scenarios to obfuscate, as well.

I'll make it simple- anybody who wants to stop Trump will get behind Hillary. People who go on about it are being mind fucked by the "can't trust Hillary" bullshit.

Go back and read some of the communications Hillary sent out to the superdelegates in 2008 once the pendulum started to swing in Obama's favor. Clinton tried to make a compelling last stand around electability and experience. It was Obama's charisma and momentum that swayed the superdelegates because Clinton lost her narrative and voice. I find it ironic that in the end, Clinton injected polling and some subtle racial overtones to generate doubt for the superdelegates.

This time around she smartly brokered the superdelegates before her competition got their footing or took the field, and let's face it, Sanders has not done himself any favors thumbing at the establishment he now needs to win the nomination.

 

[fskimospy]

Go back and read some of the communications Hillary sent out to the superdelegates in 2008 once the pendulum started to swing in Obama's favor. Clinton tried to make a compelling last stand around electability and experience. It was Obama's charisma and momentum that swayed the superdelegates because Clinton lost her narrative and voice. I find it ironic that in the end, Clinton injected polling and some subtle racial overtones to generate doubt for the superdelegates.

This time around she smartly brokered the superdelegates before her competition got their footing or took the field, and let's face it, Sanders has not done himself any favors thumbing at the establishment he now needs to win the nomination.

Clinton tried to make similar arguments to what Sanders is making now, yes. The superdelegates went with the person with the most pledged delegates, just like they should. The only reason superdelegates should ever do otherwise is to prevent a Trump like figure from getting the nomination.

I still don't understand why you want the superdelegates to overturn the will of the voters. Even if you got what you want here, surely you see that as someone who seems somewhat against the establishment that superdelegates ARE the establishment. In the future they would be much more likely to take victories away from you than to give you new ones.

My suggestion is to graciously accept that he lost and move on from there. If he really is the future of the party then you've always got next time.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I still don't understand why you want the superdelegates to overturn the will of the voters. Even if you got what you want here, surely you see that as someone who seems somewhat against the establishment that superdelegates ARE the establishment. In the future they would be much more likely to take victories away from you than to give you new ones.

Because that very establishment paved the road for a presumptive nominee who right now is very vulnerable. The only compelling argument I hear for Clinton right now that I agree with is that she is not Trump. However, I think the email scandal does have legs, even if there is not a criminal indictment prior to the general election.

My prediction. Clinton claims the nomination and the Presidency. The next four years are partisan politics as usual. Clinton's Presidency has no tone, no message, no agenda, and instead gets mired in a wave of lawsuits, investigations and accusations. Maybe even a Nixon scenario. The fire that Sanders kindled burns out, his coalition of youth, enthusiasm and independents gets frustrated that the status quo prevails, and the nation does not advance.

The only positive outcome I see is that the Republicans, after Trump gets annihilated, learns their lesson, suppress the Tea Party and other extreme elements of its coalition, and Paul Ryan and the adults in the room lead the party to a more rational place, which I think benefits everyone.

More strongly than identify politics or progressive causes or other left leaning ideologies, I believe that what made America great is the strength of its middle class and the ideal of opportunity and upward mobility. Clinton and Trump spring from the very establishment that's crushed the middle class for the last thirty years. So forgive my lack of enthusiasm and desire for a political revolution. America is past due for a political realignment.

 

[fskimospy]

Because that very establishment paved the road for a presumptive nominee who right now is very vulnerable. The only compelling argument I hear for Clinton right now that I agree with is that she is not Trump. However, I think the email scandal does have legs, even if there is not a criminal indictment prior to the general election.

My prediction. Clinton claims the nomination and the Presidency. The next four years are partisan politics as usual. Clinton's Presidency has no tone, no message, no agenda, and instead gets mired in a wave of lawsuits, investigations and accusations. Maybe even a Nixon scenario. The fire that Sanders kindled burns out, his coalition of youth, enthusiasm and independents gets frustrated that the status quo prevails, and the nation does not advance.

The only positive outcome I see is that the Republicans, after Trump gets annihilated, learns their lesson, suppress the Tea Party and other extreme elements of its coalition, and Paul Ryan and the adults in the room lead the party to a more rational place, which I think benefits everyone.

More strongly than identify politics or progressive causes or other left leaning ideologies, I believe that what made America great is the strength of its middle class and the ideal of opportunity and upward mobility. Clinton and Trump spring from the very establishment that's crushed the middle class for the last thirty years. So forgive my lack of enthusiasm and desire for a political revolution. America is past due for a political realignment.

And what would you predict for a sanders presidency? I predict gridlock under Clinton, but that would be true under Sanders as well. The larger problem with Sanders is that he seems to rely on the same sort of magical thinking that Republicans do, like in his health care plan. I don't think we should follow republicans down the path of magical thinking like that.

 

[Jhhnn]

Go back and read some of the communications Hillary sent out to the superdelegates in 2008 once the pendulum started to swing in Obama's favor. Clinton tried to make a compelling last stand around electability and experience. It was Obama's charisma and momentum that swayed the superdelegates because Clinton lost her narrative and voice. I find it ironic that in the end, Clinton injected polling and some subtle racial overtones to generate doubt for the superdelegates.

This time around she smartly brokered the superdelegates before her competition got their footing or took the field, and let's face it, Sanders has not done himself any favors thumbing at the establishment he now needs to win the nomination.

So what? Clinton's entreaties fell on deaf ears in 2008 as will Bernie's in 2016. The notion that the supers will or should override the obvious will of democratic primary voters is a non-starter. If Bernie's more radical position can't win a majority of those voters then the assertion that he'd do better in the general election is nothing more than concern trolling and/or propaganda victims chanting the can't trust Hillary mantra.

It seems clear that Clinton's lead in 2016 will be much larger than Obama's in 2008 making superdelegate choices for Clinton much easier. To do otherwise would split the party & deny the democratic underpinnings of the process. Party leadership has no intention of doing anything quite that self defeating no matter how badly the opposition wishes they might.

 

[Jhhnn]

Because that very establishment paved the road for a presumptive nominee who right now is very vulnerable. The only compelling argument I hear for Clinton right now that I agree with is that she is not Trump. However, I think the email scandal does have legs, even if there is not a criminal indictment prior to the general election.

My prediction. Clinton claims the nomination and the Presidency. The next four years are partisan politics as usual. Clinton's Presidency has no tone, no message, no agenda, and instead gets mired in a wave of lawsuits, investigations and accusations. Maybe even a Nixon scenario. The fire that Sanders kindled burns out, his coalition of youth, enthusiasm and independents gets frustrated that the status quo prevails, and the nation does not advance.

So, Doom, gloom, negativity & ceaseless innuendo for the hopeless Democrats

The only positive outcome I see is that the Republicans, after Trump gets annihilated, learns their lesson, suppress the Tea Party and other extreme elements of its coalition, and Paul Ryan and the adults in the room lead the party to a more rational place, which I think benefits everyone.

But there's hope for the Republicans!

More strongly than identify politics or progressive causes or other left leaning ideologies, I believe that what made America great is the strength of its middle class and the ideal of opportunity and upward mobility. Clinton and Trump spring from the very establishment that's crushed the middle class for the last thirty years. So forgive my lack of enthusiasm and desire for a political revolution. America is past due for a political realignment.

And the inevitable false attributions & false equivalencies of trolling. You promote Bernie even as you deny the ideology he represents.

 

[Starbuck1975]

And the inevitable false attributions & false equivalencies of trolling. You promote Bernie even as you deny the ideology he represents.

See that is where you are wrong. Democrats have gotten so wrapped into identity politics and equally beholden to lobbyists as Republicans that they've forgotten what a true New Deal Democrat looks like.

 

[ivwshane]

See that is where you are wrong. Democrats have gotten so wrapped into identity politics and equally beholden to lobbyists as Republicans that they've forgotten what a true New Deal Democrat looks like.

Actually, it would appear to be quite the opposite, otherwise how would explain why an outsider like bernie would be so successful? How was the largest healthcare reform bill passed? How did we get wall street reform? How did we get the bureau of consumer protection? How was work rights for lgbt passed?

For Christ sake! Get the fuck out of whatever bubble you live in!

 

[chucky2]

^LOL even when Nickie isn't posting we can come here and get the laughs... 😀

 

[Jhhnn]

Actually, it would appear to be quite the opposite, otherwise how would explain why an outsider like bernie would so successful? How was the largest healthcare reform bill passed? How did we get wall street reform? How did we get the bureau of consumer protection? How was work rights for lgbt passed?

For Christ sake! Get the fuck out of whatever bubble you live in!

Thank you. It's just another manifestation of the general negativity & "can't trust Hillary" bubble that the right wing has been trying to wrap around the whole country.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Actually, it would appear to be quite the opposite, otherwise how would explain why an outsider like bernie would be so successful? How was the largest healthcare reform bill passed? How did we get wall street reform? How did we get the bureau of consumer protection? How was work rights for lgbt passed?

For Christ sake! Get the fuck out of whatever bubble you live in!

The New Deal was a broad coalition of voting blocks aligned to strengthening the working and middle class, primarily through investment in large scale infrastructure and urban projects. Eisenhower smartly continued those investments despite being a Republican.

Health care reform is arguably an extension of New Deal thinking. LGBT rights while important is more a social issue. Consumer rights and checks against Wall Street, while important, do not create jobs.

Obama is a bit of an anomaly, but the coalition he built aligns most closely to the one FDR built. The blunder Sanders made was to distance himself from Obama and allow Clinton to claim defender of Obama's legacy.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Thank you. It's just another manifestation of the general negativity & "can't trust Hillary" bubble that the right wing has been trying to wrap around the whole country.

Did you even read the IG report? Clinton dug this hole all by herself. This would be much easier if you just admitted that she made an error, initially lied about her intentions for doing so, and while what she did may not be illegal depending on the security classification implications, was still pretty irresponsible.

Having said that I have faith in the impartiality of the FBI investigation, and if they do not recommend charges, I will admit the error in my opinion.

 

[Jhhnn]

The New Deal was a broad coalition of voting blocks aligned to strengthening the working and middle class, primarily through investment in large scale infrastructure and urban projects. Eisenhower smartly continued those investments despite being a Republican.

Health care reform is arguably an extension of New Deal thinking. LGBT rights while important is more a social issue. Consumer rights and checks against Wall Street, while important, do not create jobs.

Obama is a bit of an anomaly, but the coalition he built aligns most closely to the one FDR built. The blunder Sanders made was to distance himself from Obama and allow Clinton to claim defender of Obama's legacy.

And? Is there some reason to think that Clinton won't attempt to preserve & expand on that legacy? Or that she would be incompetent to do so?

What makes you think that her coalition of mainstream Dems is somehow different from his?

 

[Jhhnn]

Did you even read the IG report? Clinton dug this hole all by herself. This would be much easier if you just admitted that she made an error, initially lied about her intentions for doing so, and while what she did may not be illegal depending on the security classification implications, was still pretty irresponsible.

Having said that I have faith in the impartiality of the FBI investigation, and if they do not recommend charges, I will admit the error in my opinion.

When cornered, be sure to apply false attribution & dwell upon a molehill represented to be a mountain, just the latest in a string of over wrought scandal mongering going back thru Ben-fucking-ghazi to Whitewater.

 

[Starbuck1975]

When cornered, be sure to apply false attribution & dwell upon a molehill represented to be a mountain, just the latest in a string of over wrought scandal mongering going back thru Ben-fucking-ghazi to Whitewater.

So your response is the vast right wing conspiracy.