I will keep doing, but not worth it! The 2016 Presidential Primary Voting Thread

you gotta hand it to paglia, she keeps getting the assignment, 20+ years since anybody took her seriously

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/tim-and-eric-mind-blown.gif

fwiw, Nixon was mistrusted for similar reasons as HRC, as someone who was so calculating and shifty that you knew he could not be trusted. but tbf, HRC is nowhere in Nixon's league when it comes to deeply shrewd calculation and insincerity.

Cruz is just a small-timer who has nowhere near the cunning of Nixon, despite his reputed braininess. Nixon was insecure enough to recalculate every move a hundred times beforehand until it was refined to an essence. Cruz is so arrogant he will just keep punching his ticket the same way with the same loonies and evangelicals and has showed no ability to succeed in his ambitions at a national level, other than getting tons of media attention for his failures.

would pay $$ to hear Ted Cruz discuss "Modern Family" like Dick did "All in the Family."

Or like Dan Quayle discussed Murphy Brown?

uh have you guys missed Cruz's pop culture refs/impersonations

I understand his "Princess Bride" mimicry is well-regarded but I have not been able to get drunk enough to experience it yet.

Not for lack of trying

Palin has made the biggest step forward in reshaping the persona of female authority since Madonna danced her dominatrix way through the shattered puritan barricades of the feminist establishment.

Ciccone/Gaga '16

"I don't think anyone can pretend to have any idea what would happen if it's Sanders vs. Cruz or Trump "

throw in Bloomberg for max crazee

don't forget jim gilmore

Why Do I Hate That Bernie Thing On My Facebook So Much? Why Am I Such A Jerk?

http://i.imgur.com/C12rBHR.png

Sanders v. Cruz would have a nice clarifying effect. A good test case of who is more deluded about where the country truly stands (see fantasies described upthread).

Not sanguine about using the nation as a laboratory though, as my kids will have to live in it

i saw maybe one establishment paper claiming hillary was leaving NH with more delegates but like 100 bernie fans on fb freaking out about how super delegates undermine American democracy

i think it's pretty clear who lady gaga should be sharing a ticket with though. U-S-A!

http://img.costumepedia.com/1/348/lady-gaga-wearing-an-american-flag-costume.jpg

le gagz may have fallen off a bit, sure, but i'm in.

super delegates are there to do exactly what people are complaining about them doing though. while it is very low on the list of things that need sharing on facebook, particularly by the shrill, it can't hurt to have more people grousing about them. doubt anything will ever happen to them until someone actually "steals" a nomination vs. the popular vote, but i mean, they're part of the party rules, they can be changed by means other than "start another party."

CHILL OUT
Michigan didn't just ban anal sex

etc

particularly by the shrill

hey i stopped calling her that 3 years ago

wait, Michigan banned anal sex?

no but it was a hot lubed rumor

first time this thread has gotten my attention all day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/you-could-go-to-prison-for-performing-oral-or-anal-sex-in-michigan_us_56b8fbc1e4b04f9b57dab07c

Heidi Cruz: Ted Running To ‘Show This Country The Face Of The God That We Serve’

https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/heidi-cruz-ted-running-to-show-this-country-the-face-of-the-god-that-we-serve

thirteen years since lawrence v. texas! god, where has the time gone.

http://alibertarianfuture.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Ted-Cruz-Doesnt-Deserve-Libertarian-Support.jpg

This Facial Expression Of The God that We Serve

i lol'd when samantha bee called cruz a "fish faced horseshit salesman"
that is not the face of the god i serve
#bowdownb4the1userve

did she say that? i didn't even catch it. god i love that show

http://theslot.jezebel.com/the-truth-behind-that-viral-story-about-michigan-making-1758085549

I've got a question about superdelegates and 1966-1976, actually. When Eugene McCarthy lost at the 1968 DNC to a guy who didn't contest in primaries, were superdelegates involved with that? Or was it other sorts of shenanigans?

Superdelegates hadn't been invented yet, but primaries weren't the main way of selecting delegates at that point.

Which is to say, delegates were mainly chosen at state conventions, by party insiders, machine bosses, influential local politicians, favorite-son candidates, etc. etc. Hence the smoke-filled-rooms and horse-trading at the conventions, and all the stuff you see in history where the convention would go to a fourth, fifth vote trying to get a majority, as factions cut deals behind the scenes to try and get so-and-so's stable of delegates Primaries were partially adopted in the Progressive Era but never really took hold as the main mechanism for choosing anybody until the 1968 contest struck people as a scandal since it became clear you could become the nominee while completely ignoring the comparatively few remaining primaries that other people were putting so much energy and time into.

There have been lots of tweaks to the primary systems by both parties since then, e.g. the addition of superdelegates and manipulation of the calendar to create a "Super Tuesday" that staves off McGoverns and Dukakises; this is why i can imagine that if we hit a "Sanders won the primaries but Hillary won on superdelegates" scenario, you'd see a successful call to scrap or rework the superdelegate system.

I wouldn't hold your breath for that though, not only because of all the reasons Sanders is super unlikely to reach that point; it's just experience. This is one of those "what if..." scenarios, like the brokered-convention thing, that comes up every so often because it's fascinating to geek out about for people interested in the process and the mechanics. In practice, primaries just tend not to be that close or go on that long, which reduces the likelihood of anything close to a tie: eventually all but one person quits and at least the last few primaries are freebies for the other person. It's possible that Citizens United, billionaire self-funded candidates, and maybe something like Sanders's crowdfund-oriented fundraising are changing those odds a bit, just as they lead to the large field of Republican candidates under no immediate financial pressure to quit after one or two states go really south.

oh and btw "Super Tuesday," I know, predates the DLC and Dukakis and all that, but (Wiki):

The phrase "Super Tuesday" was next used to describe the primary elections that took place on March 8, 1988, in the Southern states of Texas, Florida, Tennessee, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Kentucky, Alabama, and Georgia leading up to the 1988 November election. Southern Democrats came up with the idea of a regional primary in an effort to nominate a moderate candidate who would more closely represent their interests. (Their plan ultimately did not succeed as Dick Gephardt, Jesse Jackson, Al Gore, and Michael Dukakis split the Super Tuesday primaries, and Dukakis was subsequently nominated.) From 1996 to 2004, most of these Southern primaries were held the week after Super Tuesday, dubbed "Southern Tuesday" by news commentators.

In 1992, Super Tuesday was on March 10. After losing earlier primaries, Democrat Bill Clinton emerged as a candidate "back from the dead" when he convincingly won a number of Southern primaries on Super Tuesday. Clinton ultimately went on to win the Democratic nomination and the presidency.

Maybe one sign that the GOP was never all that serious about trying to rebrand and reorient after 2012 was that they basically let the states maintain the same primary calendar. You could imagine a party wanting to make sure that they had a hipper, minority-friendly, non-godawful candidate saying "well, maybe the Iowa Republican Party is not the best place to start this thing." I don't know where you would go, mind you, but certainly keeping Iowa and South Carolina in the opening salvo seems like a recipe for giving perceived momentum to the Cruzes and Santorums of the world, even before the specter of Trump troubled their minds.

Your word count today impresses me, Doctor.

Heidi Cruz: Ted Running To ‘Show This Country The Face Of The God That We Serve’
https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/heidi-cruz-ted-running-to-show-this-country-the-face-of-the-god-that-we-serve
― scott seward, Thursday, February 11, 2016 3:37 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

she slipped the surly bonds of cruz, to touch the face of god

Hard to keep track of these debates--another Democratic one tonight (which I'm sure has already been mentioned, but it's also hard to keep track of this thread). Debate--or "debate," if you'd prefer--not a town hall. So I think tonight might be, in Sanders' words, the beginning of the kitchen sink.

hahahah my posting density on ILX goes up in direct proportion to how much i actually am supposed to be writing something else

Cool, thanks, Dr.!

xp lol I think Karl said something very similar yesterday

these debates are so boring (and difficult to watch via Roku) I just don't give a shit anymore

The last Republican one was pretty lively. I just want theatrics, panic, nastiness, weirdness, etc. Now and again, you get lucky.

my posting density on ILX goes up in direct proportion to how much i actually am supposed to be writing something else

Quickly skimmed today's posts and couldn't see anything about this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-foundation-received-subpoena-from-state-department-investigators/2016/02/11/ca5125b2-cce4-11e5-88ff-e2d1b4289c2f_story.html

CNN panel seems to think it's legitimately worrisome for Clinton, based primarily on their aggressive attempt to shoot it down.

Clunky TV frame aside, I think this is pretty great.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XriXDtfqCg

The subpoena also asked for records related to Huma Abedin, a longtime Clinton aide who for six months in 2012 was employed simultaneously by the State Department, the foundation, Clinton’s personal office, and a private consulting firm with ties to the Clintons.

gah this is so sketchy

this kinda thing is why the whole "ive been vetted!" gambit is bullshit to me

this specific thing seems like another non-scandal to me, I mean who cares really but it does add to the general untrustworthy impression

i could see trump picking a woman to quell some of his misogyny. idk who it would be though

He's already said he's thinking of tapping his daughter.

A+

So not only is Clinton going to probably nominate a lot of "real winners" but anybody she tries to appoint is then going to get pilloried and filibustered until the sun burns out.
The first HC administration is going to be run by autopilot (acting) and nobody's going to be able to decide to do anything. Awesome.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyhfJTFJHu8&feature=youtu.be

pretty good ad!