Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Conspire to Tell the Truth
Yup, conspiracy theory 101. Hat please, tin foil stock at an all time high.
**********************************
Conspire to Tell the Truth
by Milt Shook
No matter how desperate you feel, the answer is no, Charles Koch did NOT “endorse” Hillary Clinton. He simply noted two things that most of us have known all along. One is that Hillary Clinton was the likely winner of the Democratic nomination. Despite “the media” desperately hoping for and trying to create a horse race on the Democratic side, it has never really been that close. Sorry, but it’s true. He is also acknowledging that the current GOP presidential race is nothing short of pathetic, with nothing to offer for anyone, and that would include the Kochs.
snip//
some of my favorites:
•The Exit Polls – This one is one of the best ever because is assumes a couple of things that are ridiculous. One; there isn’t a single exit poll out there. Quite literally, just about every news organization does its own exit polling, so there are hundreds of these polls available, including many that you will never see. Campaigns and parties also do their own exit polling, none of which you will ever see. Also, exit polls have significant biases. HUGE biases, in fact. I know some of you imagine that pollsters stand outside precincts and ask questions of everyone as they emerge, but they don’t. They use “tried and true” polling methods (that was sarcasm), so they pick and choose respondents based on who they imagine is a “typical voter.” They pretty much always over sample young voters, who actually rarely vote. In other words, folks, the real reason vote counts don’t match exit polls is not likely because Democrats cheated in Hillary’s favor. More likely, it’s because the exit pollsters over sampled young voters, which is a tendency. As I have said repeatedly, every year progressives count on young voters to put their favorites over the top, and every year, they let us down. It’s been that way since 1972, which was the first election in which 18-20-year-olds could vote and it will likely always be that way.
•Closed Primaries – This is another interesting one, especially since all primaries were closed until the last 10-15 years. For example, there was a lot of bitching about New York, and there will likely be a lot of bitching about today’s primaries, since most of those are closed, but in reality, this is the Democratic Party choosing its candidate, which means it’s not actually an “election” in the strictest sense. In my opinion, all primaries should be closed because the other party shouldn’t be able to screw with the Democratic selection process. Should the system be as draconian as New York’s, where party changes must be done six months early? No, but closed primaries are a great idea. Every state in which I registered to vote has been closed at the time, and right there on the registration form, it told me I could not participate in a primary if I registered Independent, so don’t act like nobody knew. And let’s be real; you don’t get to complain about closed primaries at the same time you accept the caucus process, which is seriously un-democratic.
•Democrats control the voting process and cheat – This is another chestnut. What makes it exceptionally curious is that it’s often perpetrated by the same people who complain because taxpayers have to pay for primaries that they, as registered “independents” can’t vote in. Make up your mind. On the one hand, some of you claim that the DNC is in the bag for Hillary and is working against Bernie and yet, when he wins caucuses, which are easily the best opportunity possible for the DNC to organize in Hillary’s favor, you take those wins and even brag about them. No one is cheating against Bernie; he’s losing because he’s getting far fewer votes. She has received more than 57% of all votes cast, while he’s just about 41%. He’s only won a couple of primaries outside of his home states of Vermont and New Hampshire; almost every delegate he has is from a caucus. Bernie’s winning caucuses for the same reason he draws larger crowds; his followers are like Deadheads, who used to follow the Grateful Dead around everywhere to see as many concerts as possible. They are loyal as hell and, in their self-administered bubble, they seem like a larger number of people than they are, whereas, in the grand scheme of things, most concertgoers see other bands. By every metric, Bernie is losing. He’s never polled closer than about 8-10 points in national polling averages. He has received nearly 3 million fewer votes. He would now need to get 75% or more of the vote in all remaining states to match Clinton in pledged delegates, and unless he beats her in votes and pledged delegates, his dream of getting super delegates to move to support him will remain a fantasy. He’s losing because the democratic process doesn’t favor him. It’s really that simple.
•“Red States” Don’t Count – This one is my least favorite, for a number of reasons, primarily because it’s insulting. Do you know why Hillary Clinton won states in the South? It’s because there are a lot of Democrats in those states, most of whom are People of Color, women and the elderly, all of whom make up the Democratic base and who prefer her. Therefore, when Bernie Stans and even Bernie himself dismiss “the Confederacy,” there is no way to take the insult out of that. There are a lot of blue people in some red states, and they deserve as much say in the nominating process as anyone. Not only that, but most of the red states Hillary won are very possible for Democrats to win in the fall, with just a little effort. North Carolina is actually purple, and Louisiana seems to be fed up with Republicans running their state into the ground and are increasingly turning to Democrats to save them. Texas is actually very close to turning blue, and it’s estimated that they will be permanently blue within the next 10-15 years, thanks to their burgeoning Latino population. You know, it’s funny; California used to be reddish, electing Republicans to statewide offices for years and the main reason they are now solidly Blue is because of the increasingly large and active Latino population. Likewise, New Mexico is increasingly purple and Arizona is on the verge. And yet, to listen to some “progressive political junkies,” Texas and the rest of the South is a lost cause. Meanwhile, they don’t seem to have a problem with the red states Bernie won, like Utah, Kansas and Nebraska, all of which are roughly 100% white and about 65-70% Republican.
http://pleasecutthecrap.com/conspire-to-tell-the-truth/#more-4828
•The Exit Polls – This one is one of the best ever because is assumes a couple of things that are ridiculous. One; there isn’t a single exit poll out there. Quite literally, just about every news organization does its own exit polling, so there are hundreds of these polls available, including many that you will never see. Campaigns and parties also do their own exit polling, none of which you will ever see. Also, exit polls have significant biases. HUGE biases, in fact. I know some of you imagine that pollsters stand outside precincts and ask questions of everyone as they emerge, but they don’t. They use “tried and true” polling methods (that was sarcasm), so they pick and choose respondents based on who they imagine is a “typical voter.” They pretty much always over sample young voters, who actually rarely vote. In other words, folks, the real reason vote counts don’t match exit polls is not likely because Democrats cheated in Hillary’s favor. More likely, it’s because the exit pollsters over sampled young voters, which is a tendency. As I have said repeatedly, every year progressives count on young voters to put their favorites over the top, and every year, they let us down. It’s been that way since 1972, which was the first election in which 18-20-year-olds could vote and it will likely always be that way.
•Closed Primaries – This is another interesting one, especially since all primaries were closed until the last 10-15 years. For example, there was a lot of bitching about New York, and there will likely be a lot of bitching about today’s primaries, since most of those are closed, but in reality, this is the Democratic Party choosing its candidate, which means it’s not actually an “election” in the strictest sense. In my opinion, all primaries should be closed because the other party shouldn’t be able to screw with the Democratic selection process. Should the system be as draconian as New York’s, where party changes must be done six months early? No, but closed primaries are a great idea. Every state in which I registered to vote has been closed at the time, and right there on the registration form, it told me I could not participate in a primary if I registered Independent, so don’t act like nobody knew. And let’s be real; you don’t get to complain about closed primaries at the same time you accept the caucus process, which is seriously un-democratic.
•Democrats control the voting process and cheat – This is another chestnut. What makes it exceptionally curious is that it’s often perpetrated by the same people who complain because taxpayers have to pay for primaries that they, as registered “independents” can’t vote in. Make up your mind. On the one hand, some of you claim that the DNC is in the bag for Hillary and is working against Bernie and yet, when he wins caucuses, which are easily the best opportunity possible for the DNC to organize in Hillary’s favor, you take those wins and even brag about them. No one is cheating against Bernie; he’s losing because he’s getting far fewer votes. She has received more than 57% of all votes cast, while he’s just about 41%. He’s only won a couple of primaries outside of his home states of Vermont and New Hampshire; almost every delegate he has is from a caucus. Bernie’s winning caucuses for the same reason he draws larger crowds; his followers are like Deadheads, who used to follow the Grateful Dead around everywhere to see as many concerts as possible. They are loyal as hell and, in their self-administered bubble, they seem like a larger number of people than they are, whereas, in the grand scheme of things, most concertgoers see other bands. By every metric, Bernie is losing. He’s never polled closer than about 8-10 points in national polling averages. He has received nearly 3 million fewer votes. He would now need to get 75% or more of the vote in all remaining states to match Clinton in pledged delegates, and unless he beats her in votes and pledged delegates, his dream of getting super delegates to move to support him will remain a fantasy. He’s losing because the democratic process doesn’t favor him. It’s really that simple.
•“Red States” Don’t Count – This one is my least favorite, for a number of reasons, primarily because it’s insulting. Do you know why Hillary Clinton won states in the South? It’s because there are a lot of Democrats in those states, most of whom are People of Color, women and the elderly, all of whom make up the Democratic base and who prefer her. Therefore, when Bernie Stans and even Bernie himself dismiss “the Confederacy,” there is no way to take the insult out of that. There are a lot of blue people in some red states, and they deserve as much say in the nominating process as anyone. Not only that, but most of the red states Hillary won are very possible for Democrats to win in the fall, with just a little effort. North Carolina is actually purple, and Louisiana seems to be fed up with Republicans running their state into the ground and are increasingly turning to Democrats to save them. Texas is actually very close to turning blue, and it’s estimated that they will be permanently blue within the next 10-15 years, thanks to their burgeoning Latino population. You know, it’s funny; California used to be reddish, electing Republicans to statewide offices for years and the main reason they are now solidly Blue is because of the increasingly large and active Latino population. Likewise, New Mexico is increasingly purple and Arizona is on the verge. And yet, to listen to some “progressive political junkies,” Texas and the rest of the South is a lost cause. Meanwhile, they don’t seem to have a problem with the red states Bernie won, like Utah, Kansas and Nebraska, all of which are roughly 100% white and about 65-70% Republican.
http://pleasecutthecrap.com/conspire-to-tell-the-truth/#more-4828
13 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
There are a lot of blue people in some red states, and they deserve as much say in the nominating process as anyone. Not only that, but most of the red states Hillary won are very possible for Democrats to win in the fall, with just a little effort. North Carolina is actually purple, and Louisiana seems to be fed up with Republicans running their state into the ground and are increasingly turning to Democrats to save them. Texas is actually very close to turning blue, and it’s estimated that they will be permanently blue within the next 10-15 years, thanks to their burgeoning Latino population. You know, it’s funny; California used to be reddish, electing Republicans to statewide offices for years and the main reason they are now solidly Blue is because of the increasingly large and active Latino population. Likewise, New Mexico is increasingly purple and Arizona is on the verge. And yet, to listen to some “progressive political junkies,” Texas and the rest of the South is a lost cause. Meanwhile, they don’t seem to have a problem with the red states Bernie won, like Utah, Kansas and Nebraska, all of which are roughly 100% white and about 65-70% Republican.
Wonderful article and so on point. Thank you for sharing it, sheshe!
Thank you for posting!
