- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 78,318
- Reaction score
- 16,139
Elections Democrat 2016 Primary Thread: V2 It's Still Hillary Edition
- Thread starter Lead
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2007
- Messages
- 5,826
- Reaction score
- 169
I was gonna post this in a new thread today. It's laughable people still think the media is being unbiased in their coverage of the Democratic primary.
This is the article that goes along with it.
https://theintercept.com/2016/02/25...ial-ties-to-her-campaign/?comments=1#comments
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 78,318
- Reaction score
- 16,139
And you know it wasn't just the booking agent who knew of these ties. The hosts themselves were fully aware and deliberately ignored the relationships.
I think its time Jack revealed his financial ties to the Clinton campaign.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2016
- Messages
- 34,001
- Reaction score
- 3
I will add this to this discussion:
The Exposure of the Vast Left-wing Establishment
02/26/2016 04:23 pm ET | Updated 3 hours ago
Ethan Miller via Getty Images
I have to admit that I have learned so much more about America and our political and social realities thanks to this election year and Bernie Sanders. It's almost like I am some teenager seeing things the way they are for the first time instead of a 55 year old man who should have known some of these realities a long time ago.
What my eyes have been opened to this election season in a way they have never been opened before is the depth of the truth in what Sanders says about our system being deeply rigged. Let's be clear, I am not saying as a black man originally from the South that I did not understand long ago that American society was definitely tilted in favor of whites, men, straights, the wealthy, the attractive and Christians for example. The reality of the privilege inherent to those groups has always been obvious. But I guess this year, as I have watched the way the entire system has piled on I have come to realize in a much deeper way that those in power, even those with a little bit of power, will do everything they can to maintain the system.
Of course we all know this was and is the reality when we are talking about the 1 percent who own and control mostly everything there is in our society. And we always knew the political ruling class would do what they could to stay on the side of power, including conspiring with the 1 percent when necessary, by taking their money and doing their bidding in order to curry favor. So there were no surprises there. But what jolted me the most from my previous misunderstanding about how powerful the whole system is and how wide it stretched was in not fully accepting the fact that even those on the Left could be part of that rigged system. Of course seeing it now it is obvious. Those in power, even when the power is on a side I support, will support actions that maintain power. The idea of an "establishment" in the women's movement, in the black and Hispanic communities, in the "liberal media," in the Left in general, is not one we typically think of. But that establishment is very real. And has it ever raised its ugly head during this primary season.
The Clinton campaign has pulled the lever unleashing, and maybe I should say, exposing, the depth of the Left Establishment in all its fury. First there was Clinton herself admonishing Sanders for daring to imply that she, a woman, was part of the establishment. Then there was the attack of the feminist icons to carry that mantle for her, Gloria Steinem and Madeline Albright. Once the primary race became more about race, when blacks and Hispanics were part of the conversation, Hilary's campaign has further unleashed a surrogate team of Latino and Black leaders to do their part in taking down Sanders. As with the feminist icons, the black surrogates have included many established black leaders such as Representatives John Lewis and Jim Clyburn.
By no means am I saying this surrogate game is not a standard part of politics. But what I am saying is that watching the lineup of these folks coming out for Clinton is like watching a who's who list of what makes up the establishment core of the Left. Sure these people, women and minorities that they are, have long battled the bigger establishment of power and money in our society. But let's not continue our naiveté by not realizing that all of them represent a different power structure, their own establishment. And be not mistaken, they will do whatever is necessary to remain a part of that power structure. Hillary Clinton is the next in line to the throne, at least so the Left Establishment has decided, and that includes the DNC. And those that want favor from her when and if she occupies the White House, again, are doing their part to make sure their position in the Left Establishment remains secure.
I can totally see why so many in that establishment are so caught off guard and so surprised by the sheer enthusiasm Sanders gets from young people, from young women, from even young blacks and Latinos. Young people are not as beholden to the old guard. They respect what they have done but young voters have made it clear they want to blow the system up. And to the horror of those in power, whether Left or Right, that includes them. It is why there was such outrage from the Left Establishment when Bernie called out the leaders of Planned Parenthood when they endorsed Mrs. Clinton. "So I have friends and supporters in the Human Rights [Campaign] Fund and Planned Parenthood," he said. "But you know what? Hillary Clinton has been around for a very, very long time. Some of these groups are, in fact, part of the establishment."
Despite the huffing and puffing from some feminists and the Clintons about his statement, Sanders was absolutely right. Planned Parenthood and any of those long-standing advocacy groups, including ones like the Congressional Black Caucus PAC, or other long time leaders, are indeed establishment. They may not like admitting it or accepting it. But at some point they have become a part of a system and structure of power. And they do not want to lose their place. Sanders threatens that place. So the establishment goes into survival mode. And watching it in action has not been pretty.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/earnest-harris/the-exposure-of-the-vast-_b_9329414.html?
The Exposure of the Vast Left-wing Establishment
02/26/2016 04:23 pm ET | Updated 3 hours ago
Ethan Miller via Getty Images
I have to admit that I have learned so much more about America and our political and social realities thanks to this election year and Bernie Sanders. It's almost like I am some teenager seeing things the way they are for the first time instead of a 55 year old man who should have known some of these realities a long time ago.
What my eyes have been opened to this election season in a way they have never been opened before is the depth of the truth in what Sanders says about our system being deeply rigged. Let's be clear, I am not saying as a black man originally from the South that I did not understand long ago that American society was definitely tilted in favor of whites, men, straights, the wealthy, the attractive and Christians for example. The reality of the privilege inherent to those groups has always been obvious. But I guess this year, as I have watched the way the entire system has piled on I have come to realize in a much deeper way that those in power, even those with a little bit of power, will do everything they can to maintain the system.
Of course we all know this was and is the reality when we are talking about the 1 percent who own and control mostly everything there is in our society. And we always knew the political ruling class would do what they could to stay on the side of power, including conspiring with the 1 percent when necessary, by taking their money and doing their bidding in order to curry favor. So there were no surprises there. But what jolted me the most from my previous misunderstanding about how powerful the whole system is and how wide it stretched was in not fully accepting the fact that even those on the Left could be part of that rigged system. Of course seeing it now it is obvious. Those in power, even when the power is on a side I support, will support actions that maintain power. The idea of an "establishment" in the women's movement, in the black and Hispanic communities, in the "liberal media," in the Left in general, is not one we typically think of. But that establishment is very real. And has it ever raised its ugly head during this primary season.
The Clinton campaign has pulled the lever unleashing, and maybe I should say, exposing, the depth of the Left Establishment in all its fury. First there was Clinton herself admonishing Sanders for daring to imply that she, a woman, was part of the establishment. Then there was the attack of the feminist icons to carry that mantle for her, Gloria Steinem and Madeline Albright. Once the primary race became more about race, when blacks and Hispanics were part of the conversation, Hilary's campaign has further unleashed a surrogate team of Latino and Black leaders to do their part in taking down Sanders. As with the feminist icons, the black surrogates have included many established black leaders such as Representatives John Lewis and Jim Clyburn.
By no means am I saying this surrogate game is not a standard part of politics. But what I am saying is that watching the lineup of these folks coming out for Clinton is like watching a who's who list of what makes up the establishment core of the Left. Sure these people, women and minorities that they are, have long battled the bigger establishment of power and money in our society. But let's not continue our naiveté by not realizing that all of them represent a different power structure, their own establishment. And be not mistaken, they will do whatever is necessary to remain a part of that power structure. Hillary Clinton is the next in line to the throne, at least so the Left Establishment has decided, and that includes the DNC. And those that want favor from her when and if she occupies the White House, again, are doing their part to make sure their position in the Left Establishment remains secure.
I can totally see why so many in that establishment are so caught off guard and so surprised by the sheer enthusiasm Sanders gets from young people, from young women, from even young blacks and Latinos. Young people are not as beholden to the old guard. They respect what they have done but young voters have made it clear they want to blow the system up. And to the horror of those in power, whether Left or Right, that includes them. It is why there was such outrage from the Left Establishment when Bernie called out the leaders of Planned Parenthood when they endorsed Mrs. Clinton. "So I have friends and supporters in the Human Rights [Campaign] Fund and Planned Parenthood," he said. "But you know what? Hillary Clinton has been around for a very, very long time. Some of these groups are, in fact, part of the establishment."
Despite the huffing and puffing from some feminists and the Clintons about his statement, Sanders was absolutely right. Planned Parenthood and any of those long-standing advocacy groups, including ones like the Congressional Black Caucus PAC, or other long time leaders, are indeed establishment. They may not like admitting it or accepting it. But at some point they have become a part of a system and structure of power. And they do not want to lose their place. Sanders threatens that place. So the establishment goes into survival mode. And watching it in action has not been pretty.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/earnest-harris/the-exposure-of-the-vast-_b_9329414.html?
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 78,318
- Reaction score
- 16,139
what's surprising is that he hadn't done so 6 months ago; Bob has been as vocal as anybody (except maybe Cornell) in his support of Bernie. I actually thought he already did do.
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
- Messages
- 46,265
- Reaction score
- 13,942
Maybe he heard someone say he hadn't yet and he was "wtf, you guys think I haven't yet?" And then formally announced it.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 78,318
- Reaction score
- 16,139
Like when you feel you said something clever and didn't get the recognition you expected so you repeat yourself.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 78,318
- Reaction score
- 16,139
Like when you feel you said something clever and didn't get the recognition you expected so you repeat yourself.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2005
- Messages
- 15,273
- Reaction score
- 3
Bernie's big mistake was running against Obama - he should have embraced the Obama years but stated there was much more yet to do to protect and build off the Obama legacy. Instead he calls for a Revolution and runs against all of Washington, which includes current President Obama with his 82% approval rating among Democrats.
But then again, I don't think he planned to do this well, he planned more to build a bit of a movement for progressive wing, but more to get the progressive message out to counter the rush to center for Clinton and then the conservative primary over coverage that would otherwise inundate the airwaves with GOP only talking points.
But then again, I don't think he planned to do this well, he planned more to build a bit of a movement for progressive wing, but more to get the progressive message out to counter the rush to center for Clinton and then the conservative primary over coverage that would otherwise inundate the airwaves with GOP only talking points.
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 19,007
- Reaction score
- 14,418
Name recognition is really the IT thing for Hillary.
Anecdote time: Last week at work we were talking about isidewith.com because one co-worker was still undecided (she's a religious nut so she was going Republican). My black co-worker who has a doctorate but doesn't follow politics terribly crazy took the quiz. Her top answer was Bernie.
Today she told me she's probably going Hillary. Couldn't give a concrete answer why, just said it just "feels right." A couple of weeks prior when we talked elections she couldn't remember Bernie's name. He was "Umm, that one guy"
I really think this is the biggest issue. Bernie just doesn't have the same recognition as Hillary. And being an old white guy he's not nearly as likely to stick in the average voter's mind when they do hear about him.
A 60-year-old Bernie would have this in the bag.
Anecdote time: Last week at work we were talking about isidewith.com because one co-worker was still undecided (she's a religious nut so she was going Republican). My black co-worker who has a doctorate but doesn't follow politics terribly crazy took the quiz. Her top answer was Bernie.
Today she told me she's probably going Hillary. Couldn't give a concrete answer why, just said it just "feels right." A couple of weeks prior when we talked elections she couldn't remember Bernie's name. He was "Umm, that one guy"
I really think this is the biggest issue. Bernie just doesn't have the same recognition as Hillary. And being an old white guy he's not nearly as likely to stick in the average voter's mind when they do hear about him.
A 60-year-old Bernie would have this in the bag.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2009
- Messages
- 26,061
- Reaction score
- 9,794
Show her a speech of his. It's electrifying to hear him speak. He took Oklahoma too!
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2012
- Messages
- 27,102
- Reaction score
- 32,025
Hillary Clinton’s Got This
Good explanation on why even though Sanders won quite a few States yesterday, it is all for naught.
Basically, for those of you who do not want to read it, she is ahead by about 200 delegates (not counting superdelegates, as they would not matter until the end) and since the Dem primary has no winner take all states, Bernie has a near impossible task to make up the difference.
Hillary's state wins were practically blow outs (Mass not included) whereas Bernie's best performance was Minnesota (not counting Vermont due to tiny delegate count). Hillary got more delegates in that loss than Sanders got in all but one of his wins. So while Sanders can stay on, and win little states here and there (Maine, maybe Alaska and Hawaii) he struggles mightily in more diverse states.
Also, the biggest telling point was that, despite the debate about where Nevada hispanics went, Hillary solidly won the Hispanic vote this time.
And now with the next big date set for the 15th, where another 600 or so delegates are decided, with all of those states pointing heavily towards Clinton, Sanders is unfortunately going to see his path disappear.
Good explanation on why even though Sanders won quite a few States yesterday, it is all for naught.
Basically, for those of you who do not want to read it, she is ahead by about 200 delegates (not counting superdelegates, as they would not matter until the end) and since the Dem primary has no winner take all states, Bernie has a near impossible task to make up the difference.
Hillary's state wins were practically blow outs (Mass not included) whereas Bernie's best performance was Minnesota (not counting Vermont due to tiny delegate count). Hillary got more delegates in that loss than Sanders got in all but one of his wins. So while Sanders can stay on, and win little states here and there (Maine, maybe Alaska and Hawaii) he struggles mightily in more diverse states.
Also, the biggest telling point was that, despite the debate about where Nevada hispanics went, Hillary solidly won the Hispanic vote this time.
And now with the next big date set for the 15th, where another 600 or so delegates are decided, with all of those states pointing heavily towards Clinton, Sanders is unfortunately going to see his path disappear.
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
- Messages
- 46,265
- Reaction score
- 13,942
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
- Messages
- 46,265
- Reaction score
- 13,942
Nope. Party decides on all of it for various reasons. Population isn't the sole factor or possibly not a factor at all.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2009
- Messages
- 11,393
- Reaction score
- 0
Thanks for the answer lead. The whole thing seems bizarre. And if I was running a party, I would just heavily weight delegate counts to swing states and give next to nothing to states that won't go your way anyway. Are you saying, if the party wanted to, they could do this?
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
- Messages
- 46,265
- Reaction score
- 13,942
That is one of the factors I believe plays into it, yes. I can't explain each states allocation but it's really up to the party. People forget these elections are just a political party picking their candidate. It really isn't necessary to even be "fair" or democratic as it's whatever the party decides to make the rules into. The parties use to just pick their candidate before and not have primaries at all. It was usually enough support from the establishment or a brokered convention to pick the candidate.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2011
- Messages
- 62,203
- Reaction score
- 131,770
So, against all odds, Bernie won Michigan, but Hillary got the majority of the delegates.
I wonder how Bernie feels about the socialist principles on display in the Democrat Nomination race, with the delegates being spread around.
I wonder how Bernie feels about the socialist principles on display in the Democrat Nomination race, with the delegates being spread around.
Latest posts
-
French wrestling was really ahead of it's time in the 50's- Latest: Sir Elzio Dennick
-
