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

I'm starting to get pulled into the Stone zone...

This is one of the last sites I would think to link to but the guy knows what he's talking about.

Though these “Trump” delegates will be bound by national and state rules to support Trump through the first ballot at the convention, they are free to vote against Trump’s interests on the adoption of Rules and the seating of delegates. It’s entirely plausible that a state could seat delegates pledged to support Donald Trump who have open affiliations with other candidates. In California, Cruz and Paulistas are signing up online via CA’s GOP website as Trump delegates.

Re: that logo - evidently someone at the RNC heard that the heart of rock and roll is still beating... in Cleveland.

Man, that convention is going to be amazeballs.

a state could seat delegates pledged to support Donald Trump who have open affiliations with other candidates. In California, Cruz and Paulistas are signing up online via CA’s GOP website as Trump delegates

Oh, the idea of a bunch of Cruz men elaborately plotting a dramatic second-ballot Trojan horse switcheroo is packed with dramatic potential.

They stay up the night before drinking Jack and Coke in their hotel rooms, pledging their loyalty to the cause, planning to save the Republic in a swift stroke like Brutus and Cassius of yore, congratulating themselves for their courage. They all go in to the convention in matching blazers. They have, like, secret hand signals or something. Then, due to a tragic miscalculation, Trump accidentally wins on the first ballot.

The confetti falls, the place goes insane, and all yr Cruzers are standing there looking like jackasses and wondering what went wrong. Later, five of them are found dead in their hotel rooms, clutching bottles of Jack and souvenir inflatable American-flag Stratocasters.

rolling stone, or at least its editor, endorses hillary: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/hillary-clinton-for-president-20160323

k3vin you are sooo last thursday with that link

meanwhile:

Mr. Kasich’s colleagues in Ohio and Washington do not share that worry. In interviews, they recall a three-decade career in government punctuated by scolding confrontations, intemperate critiques and undiplomatic remarks.

Today, as Mr. Kasich makes comity a centerpiece of his long-shot bid for the Republican nomination, they describe his candidacy as an exercise in remarkable self-restraint that has managed to keep his crankier instincts mostly out of sight.

The John Kasich of 2016 is a much mellower politician than the hard-charging congressman of the 1990s, who could be so difficult that House Speaker Newt Gingrich, never known for his diplomacy, offered Mr. Kasich firm advice about his tendency to bulldoze colleagues.

“I talked to him a lot about unlocking people rather than running them over,” Mr. Gingrich recalled, adding of his counsel, “I think some of that actually stuck.”

But not all of it. In Ohio, Mr. Kasich is known for flashes of impatience, anger and disdain. A police officer who pulled him over? An “idiot,” Mr. Kasich said (though he later apologized). Lobbyists? Farm animals with “their snouts in that trough,” in his words. Out-of-state rivals? “Wackadoodles.”

“We see a completely different side of him,” said Lou Gentile, a Democratic state senator. Mr. Gentile recalled Mr. Kasich pulling him aside after a news conference and unspooling a vigorous grievance about how Democrats had not supported a proposal he had championed.

“I literally said, ‘Governor, governor, can I please get a word in here?’ ” Mr. Gentile said.

Pennsylvania's primary is April 28th and the chatter is starting. The usual suspects are talking up Kasich, and doubling down on the Clinton hate.

I think Clinton will do well here. Closed primary and conservative Democratic Party.

I've never really encountered a berniebro. The biggest berniebro I know is some dorky dad on my facebook feed.

Clinton should do fine.

FiveThirtyEight demographic projection gives it 96/93 to Sanders. So she should be ok.

Alaska called for Sanders.

elementary school i'm in right now indistinguishable from (modestly attended) bernie rally

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbePWVrEzqs

compilation of creepy trump comments on women's skin (via buzzfeed andrew)

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/27/us/politics/donald-trump-transcript.html

i tried to read the entire transcript of his nyt foreign policy interview but it's quite a slog

TRUMP: First off, we’re so obsolete in cyber. We’re the ones that sort of were very much involved with the creation, but we’re so obsolete, we just seem to be toyed with by so many different countries, already. And we don’t know who’s doing what. We don’t know who’s got the power, who’s got that capability, some people say it’s China, some people say it’s Russia. But certainly cyber has to be a, you know, certainly cyber has to be in our thought process, very strongly in our thought process. Inconceivable that, inconceivable the power of cyber. But as you say, you can take out, you can take out, you can make countries nonfunctioning with a strong use of cyber. I don’t think we’re there. I don’t think we’re as advanced as other countries are, and I think you probably would agree with that. I don’t think we’re advanced, I think we’re going backwards in so many different ways.

I think what he doesn't get about cyber warfare is that you don't paint a flag on the side of your malware
he'll fix that, of course

There was a time, when I used IRC more frequently, when I too believed as fervently in the power of cyber.

This is pretty funny--watch the bottom of the screen.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2016/mar/26/live-results-alaska-hawaii-washington-caucuses

That's wonderful

Matt T isn't having it http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-young-people-are-right-about-hillary-clinton-20160325

🎥

compilation of creepy trump comments on women's skin (via buzzfeed andrew)

I like how Taibbi comes right up on the edge of saying people should stay home if Hillary gets the nomination but then chickens out and says "listen to the young people!" instead.

i dont get the "stay home" argument unless thats a euphemism for "vote jill stein"

taibbi has nothing new to say there. really generic and not interesting.

hillary clinton is not the same person as bill clinton and was not president in the 90s. sanders v trump general election polling is not a good indicator given that there really haven't been many attacks on sanders thus far. not the kind of stuff you'd get from the GOP, which would probably start off with scaring the hell out of people about socialism, nothing about whatever weird stuff he's said in interviews back in the day, etc.

this is a sincere question (and not a rhetorical or snarky one) because i have not followed hrc's campaign as closely as i have sanders', but what are some of the ways that she has indicated her administration will be different than bill's?

also, i don't doubt that attacks on sanders could be brutal, but would they be effective? i think any democrat running against trump wins. in terms of margin, i'm not confident which candidate would have an easier time (what states does sanders put into play that hrc doesn't, and vice versa?)

i think it's worthwhile to count bernie's ability to generate enthusiasm among the disaffected left and working class on economic issues. that is something hrc will have some difficulty replicating. but she'll do well to collect some nervous middle-right voters who can't stomach trump.

there isn't going to be like, an evidence-based answer for why hillary would be a stronger general election candidate than bernie -- just the usual conventional wisdom you can surmise. NB, i'm not necessarily saying the CW is wrong -- what daria says makes sense to me. all of the smart people say the polling -- the few percentage points bernie has over hillary in a potential matchup with trump or cruz -- means little this far out, which i can accept. i do think bernie could beat trump in a general, though, just that hillary would probably be more of a sure thing

of course, none of this matters as bernie is not winning the nomination

i guess the age-old question to all of our centrist friends, including many on this board, is that if this is "not the time" to be nominating a real lefty -- when s/he is going to likely be matched up against a republican nominee who no one likes, when, exactly, is the time? (the answer few will give, but the actual answer from their POV, is "never" -- fair enough.)

i don't think it's much of a stretch, or particularly unfair, to suggest there isn't much daylight between HRC's views and bill's. of course, those views are subject to the prevailing moods of the day, and since the democratic base seems a bit more energized and reliably liberal than it was in the 90s, maybe that's cause for some cautious optimism. still, only her most hardcore supporters -- the kind of weirdos you find on twitter -- would deny that she'll be quick to sell out anything the left cares about for the quickest buck. but so it goes

http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver/Breitbart/Big-Government/2014/Former-Presidents/bill-clinton-ronald-reagan-ap.jpg

i guess the age-old question to all of our centrist friends, including many on this board, is that if this is "not the time" to be nominating a real lefty -- when s/he is going to likely be matched up against a republican nominee who no one likes, when, exactly, is the time? (the answer few will give, but the actual answer from their POV, is "never" -- fair enough.)

otm

https://reaganlibrary.archives.gov/archives/photographs/large/C39197-14.jpg

Nancy knows whom to look at.

https://reaganlibrary.archives.gov/archives/photographs/large/C39192-6.jpg

https://reaganlibrary.archives.gov/archives/photographs/large/C13132-2A.jpg

HRC won't try to squeeze herself through any cracks of daylight on issues that concern the left. She's the sort who will want a nice large opening she can walk through without much chance of political discomfort.

On issues of war and 'national security', her instinct will always favor the conservative position, for the same reasons LBJ escalated Vietnam -- fear of being painted as "soft on our enemies". Any politician who looked at GHWB's poll numbers at the close of the Persian Gulf War (roughly 90% favorable) would have the same instinct, I'm sure.

Is there supposed to be something incriminating about those pics? That the clintons smiled and shook the reagans' hands at what appear to be formal events? What should they have done? Spit in Ronnie's eye?

that dude is lookin at HRC like she's a meal in that last pic

Bill's hair looks like it came off of a raccoon

haha i actually like that last picture of hillary, she's like "im sorry ron but my more interesting and cool friend just walked in and i want to talk to them now"

i put 200 in house money on bernie , jeez i hope i win . what were the odds back then like , i could make a sweet grand or something

i think it's worthwhile to count bernie's ability to generate enthusiasm among the disaffected left and working class on economic issues. that is something hrc will have some difficulty replicating. but she'll do well to collect some nervous middle-right voters who can't stomach trump.

― get a long, little doggy (m bison), Saturday, March 26, 2016 7:46 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

True, but I also think it's worthwhile to count clinton's ability to generate enthusiasm in areas where bernie is weak--African-American communities, moderates, Latinos (to a lesser extent). You could just as easily argue that's something Bernie will have some difficulty replicating. I like Bernie and the enthusiasm he's generated, but both candidates have constituencies where they're stronger than the other. It's not like clinton is winning due to the support of moderate republicans who can't stomach trump.

i guess the age-old question to all of our centrist friends, including many on this board, is that if this is "not the time" to be nominating a real lefty

1972

sorry, i cut off your whole question, 1972 was the year to nominate a real lefty. obviously this is a facetious answer, but i feel like this "real lefty" thing is a dumb litmus test that holds that there's literally no such thing as incremental change. I don't love Clinton, particularly on foreign policy. But I think it's dangerous to assume that obviously trump is going to lose, and that dems should nominate a candidate a far-left candidate.

anyway, i wish warren would have run, this was obviously her year in retrospect.

True, but I also think it's worthwhile to count clinton's ability to generate enthusiasm in areas where bernie is weak--African-American communities, moderates, Latinos (to a lesser extent). You could just as easily argue that's something Bernie will have some difficulty replicating. I like Bernie and the enthusiasm he's generated, but both candidates have constituencies where they're stronger than the other. It's not like clinton is winning due to the support of moderate republicans who can't stomach trump.

― intheblanks, Sunday, March 27, 2016 12:16 AM (24 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

hm, to me the constituencies where hrc is strong are those in which the democratic party has already done well with (namely the rank and file party members). sanders' ability to garner support from self-styled "independents" is intriguing.

haha i actually like that last picture of hillary, she's like "im sorry ron but my more interesting and cool friend just walked in and i want to talk to them now"

― get a long, little doggy (m bison), Sunday, March 27, 2016 12:04 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i think there is something really endearing about pictures of young hillary. i'm a bernie supporter, but i like hrc OK as a personality and political figure. my main issue with her is her hawkishness. bill always struck me as a creep/borderline sociopath, but i don't feel that way about her at all.

the word on her seems to be she is a cynic who will do whatever it takes for power. i don't think that's true. even her interventionist tendencies -- like her pushing to back up the rebels in libya -- seem to be borne of idealism if anything. she may claim kissinger as a friend but i don't think she is machiavellian and ruthless the way he was. she seems like someone who essentially believes in government as an instrument for positive change. she's spent her whole life learning the rules of the game to be able to play it effectively. her issue this election is that tons and tons of voters think the game is rigged and that her ability to win the support of elites makes her a pawn. i agree with bernie and the others who think she is too compromised to be effective, but i can understand why she doesn't feel that way. she thinks these are just the way things are done: this is the game, these are the rules

no the pic with Kissinger is the incriminating one.

If one identifies as a leftist who is only a registered Democrat to paticipate in meaningful elections (in my case NY primaries at the city and state level), obviously the Clintons and their entire epochal shift of their party to primarily serve the pro-conglomerate warmaking right makes one's skin crawl, and while my electoral role in November is utterly meaningless, I haven't and wouldn't vote for either cretin ever for anything, not in Ohio or Florida either. This sophistry about "a vote for/not for _____ is REALLY a vote for _____" is the worst cable-carnival garbage, go peddle it there.

but i can understand why she doesn't feel that way

You and I have no idea what she "feels" other than wanting to win an election, and it's 100% irrelevant.

armchair psychoanalysis of a person whose life has borne absolutely no resemblance to ours for 40 years, always a winner

i guess the age-old question to all of our centrist friends, including many on this board, is that if this is "not the time" to be nominating a real lefty

1972

yeah bcz Trump, Cruz or God knows who is in the same political catbird seat as a popular incumbent president

Every time I see Bernie and the bird--so perfect in the way it reinforces the idea of Sanders as kindly and wise--I get a vision of Clinton excoriating her staff behind closed doors: "Where's our bird? What the fuck am I paying you people for?"

Bill's hair looks like it came off of a raccoon

― Neanderthal, Saturday, March 26, 2016

John Updike: clinton's hair "closely modeled on the opossum fur of his beloved Arkansas" and appears to be "composed of an unidentifiable salt-and-pepper substance, like spill-proof carpeting."