Il Douché and His Discontents: The 2016 Primary Voting Thread, Part 4

for such a candidate, 35 percent of the vote still does not seem like it should be enough to win through to the nomination.

for such a pundit, the small space between the buttocks does not seem like it should be enough to admit the entire cranium through to the colon

there was some point maybe six years ago when online progressives were all VAN JONES VAN JONES and i figured he was some Occupy guy. Then i read a little bit of his spiel and discovered a boilerplate O-bot.

xp lol

Same reaction.

so why did Marquito win Minnesota idgi

Lesser of the three evils, maybe? Kinda surprised we didn't go for Kasich.

dll otm. I thought maybe the dude was making some esoteric point about the klan's philosophy of government but i guess he literally was just rehashing the old classic republican syllogism: democrats used to have a segregationist coalition in the south, democrats are progressives, therefore progressives are racists. They are such idiots.

May have been mentioned before, but the robust continuation of the Sanders campaign is good for democrats. They're not tearing into each other and progressives won't feel neglected so long as sanders keeps their favorite issues in the conversation. The worst thing would be for that race to stop and hillary is just waiting around, causing democrats to lose interest

really enjoying the folks who are blaming Obama for Trump over the last few days.

omg the sanders ppl i know are arguing that whole "well the black vote just went to clinton because of name recognition and the fact that bill is southern" shit gtfo

Heather Cox Richardson, a Boston College professor and the author of a new history of the Republican Party, predicts a violent rupture that cleaves the party in two: a hard-line conservatism, as embodied by Pat Buchanan, Newt Gingrich and Mr. Trump, and an old-fashioned strain of moderate Republicanism that recalls Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower and Nelson Rockefeller. “It is going to be really ugly,” she said.

this... seems p wrong? wtf NYT

Douthat is such a pedantic nerd

Sorry that was xpost to will

They're not tearing into each other

Bernie's not, but his internet supporters... eh

the trump phenomenon has nothing to do with hard-line conservatism

A Berniebro triumphantly sent me a link this morning that showed that Bernie's support from black voters increased with improved name recognition but when you looked at the chart he was at 80% name recognition and only 20% support so I don't know how much more support he can wring out of those last 20% who don't know him yet.

where are all these modern-day Republicans in the mold of Eisenhower, Rockefeller and Roosevelt. Paul Ryan? Mitch McConnell? Marco Rubio?

xp

ciderpress otm, isn't that abundantly obvious given Trump's numerous heterodox statements?

where are all these modern-day Republicans in the mold of Eisenhower, Rockefeller and Roosevelt.

They're all Democrats now.

OBAMA (in b4 morbz)

xp

good morning guys, did i miss any enlightening posts about berniebros we personally know or have seen online?

an old-fashioned strain of moderate Republicanism that recalls Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower and Nelson Rockefeller.

yeah honestly how many ppl like this are still GOP in 2016?

looks to me like basically the pro-entitlement, isolationist racists vs the rent-seeking plutocrats and the middle-managers who carry their water (also p racist afaict)

Liberal pundits are misinterpreting the Trump phenomenon all over the place. He doesn't fit their usual categories because in most elections the most dangerous candidate is also the most conservative one.

Teddy R's racism and Ike's bullying interventionism both seem alive and well if not "moderate"

Will otm

i just saw a 4-1/2 hr doc about the US and the Philippines (1900 and now) and Taft and Roosevelt were p close to genocial madmen.

*genocidal

BTW, what's up with the Oregon militia folks? I bet one of them would make a great VP candidate.

sure you've got your evangelicals, too. but at this point they more or less fall into the other two categories, partic the first.

you guys have to be praying for a Trump-Carson ticket i imagine

WWJD?

I thought it was gonna be Trump-Christie

Ugh, this person:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/dem-primaries/271327-clinton-to-voter-why-dont-you-go-run-for-something

haha, another funny wavering josh marshall thing which will be 1/10th prophetic no matter what happens:

No, There Won't Be a Contested Convention

Numerous Republicans and pundits are now predicting a contested GOP convention. Everybody was noting last night that ... well, sure Trump is winning most of the primaries but delegates are distributed on a proportional basis so "not Trump" has more delegates than "Trump." So open convention, baby!

No. In this election, certainly anything - truly anything - is possible. Despite my headline, I would not even say that a contested convention is impossible. But this 'contested convention' talk is just a compressed phase of denial, bargaining and anger as GOP stakeholders rush to make sense of what's happening to them.

...There are probably many Republicans who would say that both in principle and in the long term interests of the Republican party this would still be better a better outcome. That's a strong argument. But that's a separate point. A 'stealing' contested convention could happen. But it almost certainly cedes the election to the Democrats.

The best thing to come out of the republican race is 73% of new jersey agreeing that chris christie sucks

otoh the ppl who would try that thinks DT's nomination cedes the election.

no, Christie for atty general xxp

arguing that whole "well the black vote just went to clinton because of name recognition and the fact that bill is southern" shit gtfo

i'm not gonna be the one to ask "what WERE the other reasons?"

for brevity, i cut out many paragraphs of him explaining that there are also many other possibilities which he has considered, and they may be in fact be possible, but not likely, that is, if certain factors play out as expected, which, of course, can never be predicted with full certainty.

weren't Christie's NJ numbers about the same a year ago?

They dipped below 30 for the first time yesterday

i want to watch josh marshall conduct a groundhog day ceremony and explain to bewildered children and exasperated grandparents the 8 to 10 scenarios that could play out if (or when? no, if) the groundhog doesn't see its shadow

kinda wish hillary would stop calling black women "dear", altho i guess maybe she calls everyone left of her that.

ie everyone she's likely to meet that she doesn't work with

what happens if Ike sticks his head out of the burrow and sees Trump's shadow instead

kinda wish hillary would stop calling black women "dear", altho i guess maybe she calls everyone left of her that.

― denies the existence of dark matter (difficult listening hour),

she looks like a classic fag hag, pretty sure she called Eisenhower "dear" too

i'm not gonna be the one to ask "what WERE the other reasons?"

they thought she'd make a better president?

Ugh, this person:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/dem-primaries/271327-clinton-to-voter-why-dont-you-go-run-for-something

― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, March 2, 2016 12:27 PM (5 minutes ago)

confronting a major candidate is a disaster waiting to happen like 95% of the time. you're not going to be more prepared than they are, especially hillary of all people

did she call him "dear"?

Avatar
This comment was deleted.
Avatar
Goldwater was right Guest • 21 hours ago
She has a point though. If you want change run for office.
14 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
This comment was deleted.
Avatar
This comment was deleted.
Avatar
This comment was deleted.
Avatar
This comment was deleted.

the trump phenomenon has nothing to do with hard-line conservatism

This is partly true - the standard bearers of hardline purist conservativism are Buckleyite NRO types and George Will and shit, all of whom are appalled by gauche Le Trumpisme. However they historically counted on having millions of compliantly voting footsoldiers to keep their power. Part of their current meltdown is that they're up on their gleaming stallions, sabres in the air, saying "Let us ride, my jolly men, so that we may defeat the odious Foe!" Then they look back and see that their army is gone, mostly decamped for Trumptown.

Liberal pundits are misinterpreting the Trump phenomenon all over the place. He doesn't fit their usual categories because in most elections the most dangerous candidate is also the most conservative one.

This is true too. But none of those previous conservative boogeymen - Reagan, Buchanan, Gingrich, Santorum - could have gotten anywhere without a legion of compliant followers. Many of those followers are now lining up behind Trump. In prior years they were satisfied with a cup of koolaid; now they've all been handed a pint of Everclear and they're thrilled.

Liberal pundits may be misinterpreting the phenomenon candidate, but by and large it's still the same segment of the electorate. They're just more fed up and they're being reached and motivated differently.

i just saw a 4-1/2 hr doc about the US and the Philippines (1900 and now) and Taft and Roosevelt were p close to genocial madmen.

i just saw a 4-1/2 hr doc about the US and the Philippines (1900 and now) and Taft and Roosevelt were p close to genocial madmen.

What's this documentary called? I'm interested and "1900 and now Philippines" and variations isn't leading anywhere. thanks