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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 06:59 PM Feb 2016

With Antonin Scalia's death, God rest his soul, this is no longer fun and games.

This nomination race just turned extremely serious. the Republicans in the Senate will never let President Obama name Scalia's successor. The two oldest Justices still on the Court are progressives. Both have had health issues in the past and no one knows how long they will last. A Democrat must win the general election. The direction of the Supreme Court for the next twenty years hangs in the balance.

We can no longer count on improbable dreams coming true. We can no longer wish for on a socialist Revolution. We must win the Presidential election.

113 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
With Antonin Scalia's death, God rest his soul, this is no longer fun and games. (Original Post) CajunBlazer Feb 2016 OP
Yes, this is as serious as it gets. MoonRiver Feb 2016 #1
Yes, sir! Wilms Feb 2016 #2
Good thing both candidates can kick the Republican butts in the General. Sanders in particular LostOne4Ever Feb 2016 #3
Sure, what ever you say.... CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #8
:D LostOne4Ever Feb 2016 #10
And Mondale was polling even with Reagan at this point and then lost by 18 points. stevenleser Feb 2016 #19
So what you are saying, is that no one can predict who is and who isn't electable :D nt LostOne4Ever Feb 2016 #24
Nope. Generally, far right and far left nominees lose by 15+ points. That's easy to predict. nt stevenleser Feb 2016 #25
So again, both democrats can kick Trump or Cruz butt!!! The future is looking bright :D nt LostOne4Ever Feb 2016 #28
Nope. Trump and Cruz are both much closer to the mainstream of their parties than Sanders. stevenleser Feb 2016 #30
Which is why the polls show Sanders beating both of them? Right ;D LostOne4Ever Feb 2016 #36
At least read the previous post before you reply CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #42
I did. :D nt LostOne4Ever Feb 2016 #44
Okay, then do you have a comprehension problem CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #76
I'm smart enough to know that different conversations can have the same answer :) LostOne4Ever Feb 2016 #85
Mondale wasn't far left by ANY stretch Art_from_Ark Feb 2016 #98
But that's before Trump starts smearing Bernie. Chemisse Feb 2016 #66
+1 bvf Feb 2016 #83
Bullshit. We have never been playing "fun and games" and you know it. ret5hd Feb 2016 #4
At best you're trying to win a pyrrhic victory... CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #18
Lotsa people saying' different. ret5hd Feb 2016 #20
i agree that winning is imperative restorefreedom Feb 2016 #5
For now maybe, after they Swift Boat him, no way! CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #21
um, bernie has no skeletons restorefreedom Feb 2016 #27
Maybe you should contact your candidate and ask her campaign to stop Cassiopeia Feb 2016 #33
She's going easy on Bernie, wait until the Repugs get a hold of him CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #47
Using republicans behavior as a measuring stick for Hillary's behavior pangaia Feb 2016 #67
You're exactly right! CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #93
I ain't worried at all. pangaia Feb 2016 #94
Of course, CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #97
Here's a heart for you. pangaia Feb 2016 #100
Poor Bernie? Kentonio Feb 2016 #101
In case you haven't notice, Bernie isn't Superman CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #102
He won't react in the way you appear to think he will Kentonio Feb 2016 #104
Bernie is inconsequential Senator from a tiny state with a tiny population CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #107
If he tapped out all his donors.. Kentonio Feb 2016 #108
LOL!!! Dreaming again! CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #111
Math fail.. Kentonio Feb 2016 #112
There is a battalion of skeletons in the Clintons' collective closet of corruption. hifiguy Feb 2016 #89
Really? CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #96
And you don't remember Bernie honeymooning in Russia at the height of the Cold War, either Art_from_Ark Feb 2016 #99
Oh, there are many other incidents we could discuss.... CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #103
Yeah, we could discuss Ronald Reagan's visit to Russia the same year Bernie went Art_from_Ark Feb 2016 #109
Yep, but was Reagan on his honeymoon? Or we could discuss Benie's vists to CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #113
You mean after Hillary swiftboats him? pangaia Feb 2016 #65
I not once seen or heard Hillary bring up Benie's "sensitive issues" CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #105
Nothing has changed... choie Feb 2016 #6
I don't have to scare them, there're not stupid CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #23
They're not stupid, but people that use the "Boo" card R. Daneel Olivaw Feb 2016 #45
Sounds to me like you want Hillary. CaliforniaPeggy Feb 2016 #7
Idalist usually get run over by reality CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #26
So do partisan hacks that play the "Boo" card. R. Daneel Olivaw Feb 2016 #49
You've been treating the primaries as "fun and games?" ScreamingMeemie Feb 2016 #9
SO Bernie getting swiftboated by the Clinton cabal was fun&games for you? Ferd Berfel Feb 2016 #11
I will vote for the Dem nominee in the general, grntuscarora Feb 2016 #12
Citizens United / money in politics is now the top issue. Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #13
Wow, that's narrow minded CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #51
Even a moderate judge would uphold Roe v Wade. Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #57
Don't you understand that the next President might replace... CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #71
Of course I understand that, which is why I can't support Hillary. Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #82
THAT issue affects everything else. pangaia Feb 2016 #68
So because Scalia is dead, we're back to "no we can't"? Avalux Feb 2016 #14
^^^THIS^^^ hifiguy Feb 2016 #88
it was always this and the candidate who does better in the GE is Bernie karynnj Feb 2016 #15
He has two choices: CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #39
I think at any point, a true progressive would not have been likely karynnj Feb 2016 #61
This has always been the case, and for every election morningfog Feb 2016 #16
It hasn't even been an hour and you're already politicizing this. JackBeck Feb 2016 #17
Heya Mister! Puglover Feb 2016 #37
I know you're biting your tongue as hard as I am at the moment. JackBeck Feb 2016 #40
Yeah but I am looking out Puglover Feb 2016 #48
Ha, I've seen the picture and you more than deserve your slice of paradise. n/t JackBeck Feb 2016 #53
I hate you. Do you also have unicorns in this paradise? R. Daneel Olivaw Feb 2016 #55
The internet is kinda slow. Puglover Feb 2016 #60
Ha! I knew your paradise was a lie! R. Daneel Olivaw Feb 2016 #63
I guess we won't be hearing the "dime's worth of difference" nonsense. MH1 Feb 2016 #22
Lol. TransitJohn Feb 2016 #29
We can not risk Clinton in the GE. Cassiopeia Feb 2016 #31
Now that McConnell said he'll block Obama, it's going to be 4-4 until the Senate changes WhaTHellsgoingonhere Feb 2016 #41
She's electoral poison in the general. hifiguy Feb 2016 #75
Even if she won Cassiopeia Feb 2016 #86
As sure as eggs is eggs. hifiguy Feb 2016 #87
Some people are just happy with endless and pointless war that Cassiopeia Feb 2016 #91
It's never been fun and games cali Feb 2016 #32
It was never fun and games. Broward Feb 2016 #34
Thanks for the 10 lbs of concern R. Daneel Olivaw Feb 2016 #35
It won't be Obama's appointment. McConnell just blocked it WhaTHellsgoingonhere Feb 2016 #38
I agree. Vote Bernie for the win! PowerToThePeople Feb 2016 #43
would have recced if you weren't shitting on our candidates joshcryer Feb 2016 #46
Yep. Maybe we better nominate the person who is inspiring young people, not the one Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #50
"We can no longer count on improbable dreams coming true.."!!! pangaia Feb 2016 #52
+infinity! nt LostOne4Ever Feb 2016 #54
Dare the Rethugs to hold up Obama's nominee. Watch the turnout increase TENFOLD!! Liberal_Stalwart71 Feb 2016 #56
It is pretty clear to me that we don't need a corporate ass kissing R. Daneel Olivaw Feb 2016 #58
Why is the bench so loaded now? Ask Hillary's friend David artislife Feb 2016 #59
Looks like DU's "never ever happening" crowd is now telling Obama what he can't ever accomplish too. PoliticAverse Feb 2016 #62
GOP will not let it happen. They control the senate. nt oasis Feb 2016 #69
Not me, I was just passing on the Republican message to the dreamers.... CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #74
It has never been fun and games Armstead Feb 2016 #64
First of all: Stop. The talking points are so thick people can barely breath in here. Joe the Revelator Feb 2016 #70
You lost your entire argument with that last stupid ass paragraph. NT nc4bo Feb 2016 #72
NO WE CAN'T! NO WE CAN'T! NO WE CAN'T! Odin2005 Feb 2016 #73
Still hiding from reality? CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #106
You are right. Hillary must drop out now for the good of the party. Live and Learn Feb 2016 #77
So don't take a chance on Clinton NowSam Feb 2016 #78
Yup. And I trust HRH about as far as I can hifiguy Feb 2016 #90
Thank you for stepping up and saying what I left out. NowSam Feb 2016 #92
How can we do any worse than Scalia? whatchamacallit Feb 2016 #79
Which is why with all the Clinton baggage, Hillary should withdrawal from the race. n/t Skwmom Feb 2016 #80
It never was fun and games for me. bettyellen Feb 2016 #81
I never thought it was fun and games. redwitch Feb 2016 #84
Excellent argument for Sanders over Clinton... JackRiddler Feb 2016 #95
You are correct... retaining the White House is absolutely critical. DCBob Feb 2016 #110

MoonRiver

(36,926 posts)
1. Yes, this is as serious as it gets.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:02 PM
Feb 2016

I do think Obama should take the Senate Rethugs on, and nominate a well qualified liberal to replace Scalia.

LostOne4Ever

(9,406 posts)
3. Good thing both candidates can kick the Republican butts in the General. Sanders in particular
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:02 PM
Feb 2016

Last edited Sat Feb 13, 2016, 11:53 PM - Edit history (1)

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]I guess you will have to take your avatar's advice and endure that fact.[/font]

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
19. And Mondale was polling even with Reagan at this point and then lost by 18 points.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:09 PM
Feb 2016

GE polls at this point mean nothing.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
30. Nope. Trump and Cruz are both much closer to the mainstream of their parties than Sanders.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:17 PM
Feb 2016

Heck, Trump's economic plan was praised by Krugman.

LostOne4Ever

(9,406 posts)
36. Which is why the polls show Sanders beating both of them? Right ;D
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:22 PM
Feb 2016

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]It shows that Bernie is closer to the American Mainstream than EITHER of them.[/font]

PS: @Nope. Trump and Cruz are both much closer to the mainstream of their parties than Sanders.

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
76. Okay, then do you have a comprehension problem
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 08:49 PM
Feb 2016

or just do you believe that repeating the same thing again and again without any rational behind it somehow makes it true?

LostOne4Ever

(9,406 posts)
85. I'm smart enough to know that different conversations can have the same answer :)
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:26 PM
Feb 2016

Last edited Sat Feb 13, 2016, 11:51 PM - Edit history (1)

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]For instance both 64/16 and 2+2 equal 4.

But 64/16 is not the same operation as 2+2. One is division, the other is addition.

In this case my previous mention showed that Sanders is electable. My second mention of the polls shows that Sanders is closer to where the mainstream of American than either Trump or Cruz.

Different questions, same answer. And his reply has no bearing on the fact that as of now Sanders is closer to the mainstream than either Cruz or Trump.[/font]

Art_from_Ark

(27,247 posts)
98. Mondale wasn't far left by ANY stretch
Sun Feb 14, 2016, 03:10 AM
Feb 2016

Unless taking the then revolutionary step of having the first woman running mate of a major party? can be considered "far left"

?Note-- Angela Davis was Gus Hall's running mate on the Communist Party ticket in both 1980 and 1984.

Chemisse

(30,878 posts)
66. But that's before Trump starts smearing Bernie.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:48 PM
Feb 2016

I am worried that Bernie is vulnerable, and it may be that a lot of people don't know his plans for increasing benefits/raising taxes.

ret5hd

(20,850 posts)
4. Bullshit. We have never been playing "fun and games" and you know it.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:02 PM
Feb 2016

We are doing nothing less than fighting for the soul of the country.

So, that said, piss on ya".

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
18. At best you're trying to win a pyrrhic victory...
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:08 PM
Feb 2016

This country will not elect a socialist President. This is a wake up call for the Republicans as well. With the Supreme Court clearly at stake, the Tea Partiers will come to their senses and turn to an "electable candidate". And so will the Democrats. Hide and watch.

restorefreedom

(12,655 posts)
5. i agree that winning is imperative
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:02 PM
Feb 2016

which is why we need bernie more than ever. he beats repubs in head to head match ups better than hillary, and the last thing we need is a vacancy on scotus while the repubs are starting impeachment hearings.

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
21. For now maybe, after they Swift Boat him, no way!
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:13 PM
Feb 2016

The skeletons in Bernie's closet are on display. Everyone knows that if he wins the nomination that media and the Republican Swift Boat agents will have a field day.

Cassiopeia

(2,603 posts)
33. Maybe you should contact your candidate and ask her campaign to stop
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:19 PM
Feb 2016

using those kind of attacks then?

pangaia

(24,324 posts)
67. Using republicans behavior as a measuring stick for Hillary's behavior
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:51 PM
Feb 2016

is like using Congo health care as a measuring stick for American health care.


CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
93. You're exactly right!
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:43 PM
Feb 2016

So far Bernie has been only lightly scratch by Hillary, the actual slicing and dicing comes in the general election battle. You really want to do subject poor Bernie to that.

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
97. Of course,
Sun Feb 14, 2016, 01:51 AM
Feb 2016

It must be bliss to care only about your ideals without once considering the consequences to everyone else of your dream chasing.

 

Kentonio

(4,377 posts)
101. Poor Bernie?
Mon Feb 15, 2016, 04:03 PM
Feb 2016

Wow, you really don't know him at all, do you..

He's a fighter who has spent his entire career standing up for what he believes is right, often in the face of massive opposition from both major parties.

Poor Bernie? He'll be relishing this fight.

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
102. In case you haven't notice, Bernie isn't Superman
Mon Feb 15, 2016, 05:36 PM
Feb 2016

John Kerry was a Vietnam War hero who was awarded three Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star bravery for rescuing a Special Services solder under fire, and a Silver Star (one of the military's highest awards for bravery) for charging directly into Vietcong ambush to prevent a rocket attack on his Navy Swift Boats.

The Republican dirty tricks machine used affidavits by other members of his military unit who had no special knowledge of the circumstances and a hastily written book, "Unfit for Command" to not only destroy Kerry's military record in the eyes of the public, but also to successfully paint him as unfit to be Commander in Chief. The "Swift Boating" of John Kerry in large part cost him the Presidency. The fact that each and every allegation made against Kerry was later proved to be false offers little consolation.

If the Republican dirty tricks machine can turn a war hero's military record against him, I can only imagine what they will do with the ammunition Bernie has already handed them.

Multiple reliable publications have all ready published numerous stories about Bernie past that can and will be used against him. I am not going to list them here because on the surface they appear to be so damning to your candidate that I would risk a hide if I listed them. Yes, I am sure that Bernie can and will offer reasonable explanations for each and every charge, but only a few million people will ever hear those explanations Meanwhile, conservative PAC's such as those run by Carl Rove and the Koch brothers will pour tens, maybe hundreds of millions of dollars in to ads, robo calls, and flyers smearing Bernie. And oh, count on someone writing a book.

I can already guess at your reply. Yes, Hillary has her own weaknesses which the Republicans are sure to try to attack. Hopefully by the general election the truth about her emails will be published for all to see and she can finely put those issues behind her. On the other hand, Bernie will never be able to fully escape documented incidents from his past.

 

Kentonio

(4,377 posts)
104. He won't react in the way you appear to think he will
Mon Feb 15, 2016, 05:44 PM
Feb 2016

He's been very gentle with Hillary, but against the Republicans you'll see Bernie in full on prize fighter mode. If you want to see what that's like, go watch some of his house and committee performances.

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
107. Bernie is inconsequential Senator from a tiny state with a tiny population
Mon Feb 15, 2016, 06:11 PM
Feb 2016

He has no PAC's, no outside money. Up until now he has relied on small contributions from people like you. Sooner or later those contributors are going to be tapped out or they will reach the legal limit of what they can contribute to his campaign as individuals.

I heard Bernie brag about collecting over two million dollars lately. In future numerous Republican PAC's with no ties to any candidate will devote hundreds of millions of dollars to attack him without mercy using the ammunition he has already handed them . Establishment Democrats will find it very difficult to come to his aid because he is not one them, never was, never will be. Thousands of Republican ads will paint him as disloyal to his country and he won't have the money to respond. Bernie will be David alright, but with no sling shot.

Bernie won't have a chance - he has already provided them with far too much munition for their dirty tricky campaign and they will use that ammunition to destroy him. They are the past masters of evil.

Bernie would lose the nomination by a landslide and would take all hopes of capturing the Senate and securing the Supreme Court with him. That's the disastrous scenario which people like me are trying to avoid.

 

Kentonio

(4,377 posts)
108. If he tapped out all his donors..
Mon Feb 15, 2016, 06:21 PM
Feb 2016

He'd have a war chest of 4.5 BILLION dollars. You really don't understand what you're facing. He raised $6m in just a couple of days after NH.

There isnt a single Republican in the race who Sanders OR Hillary wouldn't beat comfortably. I'm damned if I'll support the lesser option because of this wretched fear mongering.

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
111. LOL!!! Dreaming again!
Mon Feb 15, 2016, 07:47 PM
Feb 2016

An individual can give a maximum of $2,700 to a campaign. The average campaign contribution to Bernie is $27. Do you think that any of his average campaign contributors are going to contribute 1,000 times to Bernie campaign between now and election day?

Some rich liberals may already contributed a good deal already (and the average is still $27 meaning that some contributions were extremely small), but the average contributor would have to contribute almost every 4 days from now until election day to give $2,700 before Nov 8th. The vast majority of people are not going to contribute $2,700 to a single campaign and most will contribute nowhere near that.

But when I refer to "tapping out", I mean that a donor has given all he/she can afford to give, which in most case will be a lot less than $2,700. Many of Bernie's supporters are young people with little money. Some will give till it hurts - maybe a few hundred dollars - but most will need most of their available funds for tuition, books, dates, booze, new iPhones, new shoes, etc. - or in other cases mortgages, electric bills, groceries, diapers, etc.

However, Koch Brothers each have net worth of $41.1 billion. They could drop a Billion each into PACs and never miss the money. And they are not alone by no means. They are one tenth of 1% that Bernie has be blasting. With control of the Supreme Court up for grabs for the next 20 years in this election, don't think for a moment that they won't spend the money, not to promote the Republican candidate, but to destroy Bernie.

It may speak to his integrity, but when Bernie swore off PAC's he unilaterally disarmed. You never, never bring only a knife to a gun fight - that's just stupid. That's why both Obama or Clinton set up Super PACs even while they tried to eliminate the entire concept. Bernie is bringing a pen knife to gun fight and his opponents are going to be bring tanks.

On top of that Sander with his past Socialist proclivities has handed his opponents all of the stories necessary to destroy him with very little money, but they will still use a lot, they can afford it.

So tell me again how Super Candidate Bernie, that ferocious little man, is going overcome all obstacles and become President of the United States and implement every social program known to man within his first year in office. But fair warning, I won't be reading your new post this time around.

 

Kentonio

(4,377 posts)
112. Math fail..
Mon Feb 15, 2016, 07:51 PM
Feb 2016

That would be 100 donations not 1000. Then again given that Bernie doesnt need $4.5 billion, it really doesnt matter anyway. He certainly has enough support though to ensure funding will not be an issue.

As for whether you'll read my post or not, it doesnt concern me in the slightest. If you want to post (inaccurate information) and run, that is your perogative.

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
89. There is a battalion of skeletons in the Clintons' collective closet of corruption.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:33 PM
Feb 2016

None in Bernie's.

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
96. Really?
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 10:45 PM
Feb 2016

I don't remember Hillary and Bill honeymooning in the Soviet Union at the height of the cold war. I don't remember any of Hillary's friends telling the press that she read the writings of Lenin and Trotsky when she was young.

I don't remember Hillary taking trips to Cuba during the height of the cold war and praising Fidel Castro. Nor do I remember her visiting the Nicaragua, meeting with Daniel Ortega, and lavishing praise one the Sandinista government. Nor did she display a Soviet flag in her office.
Nor did she have a portrait of Eugene V. Debs, a socialist leader who supported the Soviet take over of Russia early on, hanging in her Senate office.

Now all of the true stories of Bernie past are documented in sane publications like Politico. We are not even getting into the probable lies and fabrications which others have alleged and which the Swift Boaters certainly use without any concern for the truth.

All of this these accounts be explained rationally in one way or another to knowledgeable people like you and I. For instance, Bernie says that he got married day before he and his wife traveled to the USSR as part of a Burlington, Vermont delegation to cement his city's relationships with two Soviet sister cities. He has called it "a very strange honeymoon". The Soviet flag in his mayor's office in Burlington was to commemorate the relationship with those two Russian cities. Debs pretty quickly disavowed the Soviet revolutions once their brutality was made clear. I am sure all the other stories can be explained rationally as well.

But by the time the Repug's Swift Boat team finishes airing thousands of commercials packed with half truths all across the country backed by tens of millions of dollars of Koch money, John Kerry's wounds suffered at the hands of the Swift Boaters will look like scratches. At minimum far too many people will end up believing that Bernie was a communist sympathizer at best, the truth be damned.

It won't be fair; I would find such attacks absolutely repugnant - but politics is, as always has been, a very dirty game - and the GOP dirty tricks squad has raised the stakes to another level. I don't believe Bernie will be able survive.

Art_from_Ark

(27,247 posts)
99. And you don't remember Bernie honeymooning in Russia at the height of the Cold War, either
Sun Feb 14, 2016, 04:20 AM
Feb 2016

Bernie was visiting Burlington's sister city there in 1988, as a representative of his city, just before the collapse of the Soviet bloc, NOT "during the height of the Cold War"

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
113. Yep, but was Reagan on his honeymoon? Or we could discuss Benie's vists to
Mon Feb 15, 2016, 08:00 PM
Feb 2016

Cuba and Nicaragua and his praise of Castro, Danial Ortega, and the Sandinistas, but why stop there.....

Then after we discuss the many documented events and facts the Republicans will have not trouble digging up, we could figure out what lies the Republican dirty tricks machine will just make up. And we could talk about the book about Sanders which will find it's way into publication to much media attention just in time for the general election

Had they stuck to just verifiable facts when they Swift Boated John Kerry, he would been the chief resident in the White House the next November.

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
105. I not once seen or heard Hillary bring up Benie's "sensitive issues"
Mon Feb 15, 2016, 05:47 PM
Feb 2016

and I doubt seriously that she will. Neither will the Republicans waste time and money publicizing them until and unless Bernie becomes a real threat because it it obvious that they want him to win the nomination. Why else would Carl Rove's PAC spend $1.5 million in NH right before the primary trying destroy Hillary using Bernie's talking points. (Do you believe that the GOP would ever accuse Hillary of being to close to Wall Street in the general election - LOL!!!)

However, if Bernie by some miracle wins the nomination, the Republican dirty tricks machine will be primed with tens, may hundreds of millions of PAC dollars and ready to take Bernie apart at the seams. It will be brutal!

CaliforniaPeggy

(150,714 posts)
7. Sounds to me like you want Hillary.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:04 PM
Feb 2016

That doesn't work for me. I'm pro Sanders. None of the no we can't stuff for me.

grntuscarora

(1,249 posts)
12. I will vote for the Dem nominee in the general,
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:07 PM
Feb 2016

and work my ass off in the primary for the candidate I choose.

I make no other promises.

 

Motown_Johnny

(22,308 posts)
13. Citizens United / money in politics is now the top issue.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:07 PM
Feb 2016

That is Bernie's issue and it hurts Hillary.


Lifting the ban on lobbyist money will also get more press now.



Some of us knew all along that this was not fun and games. I don't trust Hillary to nominate someone who will be serious about getting corporate money out of politics.



CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
51. Wow, that's narrow minded
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:29 PM
Feb 2016

Last edited Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:59 PM - Edit history (1)

I guess all of the issues that will come before the court, like a replay of Roe vs. Wade, will pale in comparison. More evidence of a one issue candidate.

 

Motown_Johnny

(22,308 posts)
57. Even a moderate judge would uphold Roe v Wade.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:34 PM
Feb 2016


The conservatives are still screaming about it, but it is established law bordering on settled law.


Citizens United is the one still open to interpretation. This needs to be the focus.




CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
71. Don't you understand that the next President might replace...
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 08:09 PM
Feb 2016

...up to three more Justices on the court. Don't you understand there are other more important issues that will come before the court that Citizens United.

PAC's were alive and well in the last two Presidential elections and Obama still got elected twice.
The only reason that we lost the Senate is because the election deck was stacked against us, but it won't be this time around. The House is going to stay in Republican hands until 2022, at least, due to Gerrymandering, not Citizens United.

Citizens united is a transitivity, but it is not the most important case to come before the Court just because Bernie said it was. Remember when we got George W. Bush complements of the Court. Do you understand the damage that man did to this country. And the biggest reason why the Republicans want control of the court is to overthrow Roe vs. Wade. You want Citizens United overturned, you better nominate the right Democrat.

 

Motown_Johnny

(22,308 posts)
82. Of course I understand that, which is why I can't support Hillary.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:14 PM
Feb 2016

She isn't liberal enough to trust with SCOTUS appointments. I also don't trust her to be popular enough to hold the White House in 2020. Even if she does win this year the (R)s could have a huge 2020 running against her and that is the census year that we need (D)s in office in swing states.


Hillary's numbers always go down, just ask Lawrence O'Donnell. Her favorable numbers already suck. If you honestly do care about gerrymandered districts then you should be supporting Bernie.







Edit to add: The Citizens United decision was released in 2010, so it was not alive and well during the last two presidential elections. Please try to get some basic facts straight.













Avalux

(35,015 posts)
14. So because Scalia is dead, we're back to "no we can't"?
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:07 PM
Feb 2016

Scalia's death is another reason reason why it's even more critical to nominate Sanders. He's the only Dem who can win the presidency and appoint a progressive SC justice, provided Obama can't get one through.

karynnj

(59,654 posts)
15. it was always this and the candidate who does better in the GE is Bernie
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:08 PM
Feb 2016

Not to mention, Obama likely will nominate someone as noncontrversial and as obviously qualified as possible and it is possible that he/she will be confirmed. I don't think a position on the court has stayed unfilled for more than a year.

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
39. He has two choices:
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:22 PM
Feb 2016

If he wants a chance that his nominee will be confirmed he can nominate someone the Republicans think they can live with for the next 20 years. If that person is confirmed, Supreme Court decision become a crap shoot.

Or he can nominate a true progressive that they will not confirm. If he nominates yet another, they will not confirm.

karynnj

(59,654 posts)
61. I think at any point, a true progressive would not have been likely
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:41 PM
Feb 2016

I think Obama will pick someone who is seen as an outstanding jurist, who has a strong record. To put it in Republican terms, a Roberts, not an Alito.

I think the Supreme Court having only 8 judges for over a year will be seen as a real problem. (That estimate comes from the fact that a new President will require significant time before making a nomination. If it is a Republican, consider they could not even seriously vet anyone before taking office.)

I think Obama will make a list and meet with Grassley, chair of the Judicial committee and McConnell.

JackBeck

(12,359 posts)
17. It hasn't even been an hour and you're already politicizing this.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:08 PM
Feb 2016

You're showing not only that you're crass, but extremely immature.

JackBeck

(12,359 posts)
40. I know you're biting your tongue as hard as I am at the moment.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:24 PM
Feb 2016

If there were any folks who should be screaming "Bye, Scalia!" at the moment it would be you and I.



But to try and bring the primaries into this as quickly as they did is reprehensible.

Puglover

(16,380 posts)
48. Yeah but I am looking out
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:27 PM
Feb 2016

my window at the sun setting behind a 17k foot extinct volcano and watching the hummingbirds grab their last slurp of the day.

It's 70 and lovely so frankly all the bullshit seems a long way away.

But thank god for the "adults" to tell us how serious things are.

MH1

(17,901 posts)
22. I guess we won't be hearing the "dime's worth of difference" nonsense.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:14 PM
Feb 2016

Oh wait, of course we will.

But anyone who thinks their less preferred Dem candidate would be not worth voting for, or whom voting for would somehow sully said voter's purist soul, is a f*cking moron.

Not that Scalia's death actually makes any substantive difference. It was a fact before. Maybe it is just a more visible fact to some now.

TransitJohn

(6,933 posts)
29. Lol.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:16 PM
Feb 2016

I swear, Hillary supporters will turn anything into a chance to argue for conservatism/regressivism.

 

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)
41. Now that McConnell said he'll block Obama, it's going to be 4-4 until the Senate changes
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:24 PM
Feb 2016

The tie breaker is the lower court IIRC

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
75. She's electoral poison in the general.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 08:47 PM
Feb 2016

HRH at the top of the ticket is worth 2-3 million votes nationally. REPUBLICANS motivated to come out and vote against her. Why don't people understand this??

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
87. As sure as eggs is eggs.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:30 PM
Feb 2016

Four years of nothing but impeachment and investigations. Dead on Day One.

Cassiopeia

(2,603 posts)
91. Some people are just happy with endless and pointless war that
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:36 PM
Feb 2016

leads to nowhere.

Her supporters have been fighting this one for quite some time. I imagine if Hillary pulled off 8 years in the WH, yet accomplished nothing because she was always hamstrung by investigations, they would call it a victory.

Stalemates are pointless.

 

R. Daneel Olivaw

(12,606 posts)
35. Thanks for the 10 lbs of concern
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:21 PM
Feb 2016

in the 5 lb bag.

Hillary will be the worst nominee if she becomes the Dem pick.

besides the inevitable investigations into everything Clinton, whe will she have time to nominate?

The GOP will be the GOP as they are now and after the election.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
50. Yep. Maybe we better nominate the person who is inspiring young people, not the one
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:29 PM
Feb 2016

Who is phoning it in with a craptastic, superficial politics-as-usual campaign.

pangaia

(24,324 posts)
52. "We can no longer count on improbable dreams coming true.."!!!
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:30 PM
Feb 2016

YES YES YES !! I agree 1000%


BERNIE FOR PRESIDENT!!!!!!

 

R. Daneel Olivaw

(12,606 posts)
58. It is pretty clear to me that we don't need a corporate ass kissing
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:35 PM
Feb 2016

politician in the WH, so Sanders will be the better choice.

 

artislife

(9,497 posts)
59. Why is the bench so loaded now? Ask Hillary's friend David
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:36 PM
Feb 2016
http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,167355,00.html

Brock confesses in a Talk magazine excerpt of his new book, Blinded by the Right, that he had printed "virtually every derogatory and often contradictory allegation" he could to make Hill seem "a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty." If that was all Brock did, we might have nothing more than another sin committed on behalf of the vast right-wing conspiracy. But Brock, who has forged a second career as a recovering conservative, makes one admission that implicates Thomas. Brock says he used information that came indirectly from Thomas to force a retraction from a woman named Kaye Savage, who had come forward in support of Hill. Brock threatened to publicize vicious charges made by her ex-husband in a sealed child-custody dispute.


She is really good at taking advice from Conservative douchebags.

Don't tell me he has changed. I have been paying attention to his smears this campaign.

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
74. Not me, I was just passing on the Republican message to the dreamers....
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 08:46 PM
Feb 2016

Last edited Sat Feb 13, 2016, 10:52 PM - Edit history (1)

... who obviously haven't been paying attention.

Just like I have been trying to pass on the reality that the "revolution" isn't going to happen to those allergic to reality.

 

Joe the Revelator

(14,915 posts)
70. First of all: Stop. The talking points are so thick people can barely breath in here.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 08:01 PM
Feb 2016

Second of all, if you want to win, Hillary is proving as we speak that she's not the one to do it. She can't even beat a socialist.

NowSam

(1,252 posts)
92. Thank you for stepping up and saying what I left out.
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:39 PM
Feb 2016

Seems like the trust issue - which is very very real if you believe the pollsters - and that should, I believe eliminate any chance of HRC ever sitting on the bench.

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
95. Excellent argument for Sanders over Clinton...
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 10:13 PM
Feb 2016

since she is a highly unpopular and untrusted politician who might actually lose the election even to a Trump.

Thanks!

DCBob

(24,689 posts)
110. You are correct... retaining the White House is absolutely critical.
Mon Feb 15, 2016, 07:31 PM
Feb 2016

We cannot risk putting up a weak, untested, inexperienced candidate like Bernie Sanders. We need a strong, battle-tested candidate who can win like Hillary Clinton or we risk losing it all.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»With Antonin Scalia's dea...