Maybe get a source other than the Clinton Campaign.

Post #407,888 by mmoffitt 2/2/16 4:40:41 PM 2/2/16 4:40:41 PM Reply	Maybe get a source other than the Clinton Campaign. Warren has not endorsed Clinton. And please, endorsements? How much do you think sitting Senators want to piss off the DNC? “I'm a progressive, but I'm a progressive who likes to get things done,” Hillary Clinton said at the first Democratic debate, in response to a question from moderator Anderson Cooper about whether she defines herself as a moderate or a progressive. The implication was that progressive Bernie Sanders is too far to the left to accomplish anything—all of his ideas are pie-in-the-sky. You have to be able to find the bipartisan, “warm, purple space” as Clinton said earlier this year, to get anything done. Slate's Jamelle Bouie was super-impressed by this rationale, saying Clinton has “skilled use of bureaucratic power.” The problem with this narrative is that it is completely false. Not only has Sanders gotten a lot more things done than Clinton did in her own short legislative career, he's actually one of the most effective members of Congress, passing bills, both big and small, that have reshaped American policy on key issues like poverty, the environment and health care. http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-gets-it-done-sanders-record-pushing-through-major-reforms-will-surprise-you If Bernie wins, the general's a crapshoot. If Hillary wins, count on four (at least) years of YAN Republican Asshat. Hillary cannot carry a single state in what we commonly refer to as "Jesusland" and you need at least a state or two in "Jesusland" to win the White House. At best, Hillary's results will mirror Gore's.
Post #407,891 by Another Scott 2/2/16 6:45:57 PM 2/2/16 6:45:57 PM Reply	We'll see. Maybe HRC is very popular with the people who elect democratic presidents these days - women. Do you really think that Sen. Mark Warner (who is worth ~$250,000,000) cares what Hillary and the DNC think? Maybe Senators endorse her because they think that she's the best candidate this time around? If HRC wins the nomination, I expect her to carry Obama's 2008 states and more. If she's running against Trump or Cruz or Rubio I expect that she'll do very, very well indeed. White men likely aren't going to decide the election this time. We'll see soon enough. Cheers, Scott.
Post #407,893 by boxley 2/2/16 10:12:52 PM 2/2/16 10:12:52 PM Reply	the bern takes 78% of 18-34 yo hillary has a lock on the ovr 50 crowd, depends who shows up always look out for number one and don't step in number two
Post #407,896 by mmoffitt 2/2/16 10:34:53 PM 2/2/16 10:47:32 PM Reply	If they think she's the best candidate, they need (at least) psychotherapy. More likely, heavy psychoactive medications. I've lived in the belly of the beast since 1986. The abject hatred of HRC in Jesusland is immeasurable. (Mind, I'm not saying all of it is justified - in fact, what the Jesusland inhabitants complain most vociferously about is almost always the result of laughably wrong-headed thinking). There is absolutely no way, no way on Earth that a Clinton ever wins Indiana. Obama did - once - when he was able to con the youth vote into believing he was Bernie Sanders. It took them four years to figure out that he was Bill/Hillary Clinton and then Obama lost Indiana in 2012. Bill didn't win Indiana either time. His wife won't win it either. But Bernie has a shot. But all the "we can't do what every other nation has done" crowd who constantly chants "Yeah. I hate Corporate control of my life but that's the way it is and always will be" will likely, once again, nominate a Republican to fill the Presidential Democratic ticket. In short, you're probably right. You win. Consequently, we all lose. The irony, of course, is that I am fortunate to have my family income well above median. In fact, while I'm well below the 1%, I'm sufficiently above the 90th percentile to make Republican policies good for me. They absolutely suck for my kids, who are both in their 20's and like most people in their 20's and 30's have realized that whether its HRC or a Republican it doesn't make much difference to their future. So my politics are actually bad for my own pocketbook. If I'd be more like you, if I'd embrace the "Well, we are an oligarchy and there's nothing we can do about it, so we should elect the Asshat serf of the ruling class who won't actually waterboard us" attitude then I'd probably hold my nose, vote for the Wicked Witch of Wall Street (like I did for her husband) and watch her lose my state by (at least) 10 percentage points. I should be more "Me! Me! Me!" focused and not give a tinkers damn what happens to my progeny, but I can't. If either HRC (at best an Eisenhour Republican) wins or Trump or whomever wins, Republicans win and because I have in my life not made enough money (or better, earned enough non-earned income) to insure that my kids won't ever have to work (iow, I have not earned enough to enter HRC's true constituent class), my kids are going to be screwed. I should just accept that, right? I mean, after all, I'll be dead when they are ultimately homeless, right? Edit: One more thing. If you think representative democracy is a good idea, then you must realize that it is far too late to settle for HRC. On the Democratic side of the aisle, we've been "settling" for at least 40 years. That's enough. Edited by mmoffitt Feb. 2, 2016, 10:47:32 PM EST Expand All History
Post #407,898 by Another Scott 2/3/16 12:07:43 AM 2/3/16 12:07:43 AM Reply	Where you stand depends on where you sit. Yeah, if you're stuck with a bunch of people who think that Rush is Right and who only elect people with an (R) behind their name, then it's an uphill climb. She doesn't have to win IN to win the White House. ;-) Martin Longman at WaMo: Just as a thought experiment, if Nevada is safe for the Democrats, then the following is the bare minimum way that the Republicans can win the White House. If they hold all Romney’s states and also win Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Iowa, that gets them to a 269-269 tie, and the Republican-controlled House of Representatives could potentially decide the election in the GOP nominee’s favor. Things would be a little more solid if the GOP could flip Colorado, New Hampshire or, especially, Virginia. One thing to consider, too, is the importance of Florida. If the Democrats hold Florida in the above scenario, they win 298-240. Let me paint this as clearly as possible. If the Republicans hold Romney states and cannot flip Florida, the Democrats can lose Virginia, New Hampshire, Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Colorado and still win 272-266. In that kind of scenario, the Republicans would have to find one more state. New Mexico would suffice, but that won’t happen if the Republicans can’t fix their image with Latinos in a big hurry. The next most obvious opportunities would Pennsylvania and Michigan. But, you get the idea. The Republicans absolutely have to win Florida. And to win Florida, they’ll have a little steeper climb than they had the last two times around. That's why they're desperate to have JEB? or Rubio win. Of course, both are hated in Florida, so it's not clear that either one of them will help. But seemingly nobody else will, either. Your cynicism (at least in the stuff you post here) is a bit of a downer. Cheer up. :-) Watch a few more of her videos. You might come to like her and convince your friends, also too. :-D Cheers, Scott. (Who doesn't know who he'll vote for by the time March 1 rolls around...)

Welcome to IWETHEY!