All the obsessive anti-Hillary posts in the universe won't save Bernie Sanders from defeat.

[RBInMaine]

Last edited Thu Feb 25, 2016, 01:06 AM - Edit history (1)

Hillary will crush Sanders to pieces in SC on Saturday by 20-30 points. She will then win most of the states on Super Tuesday. She will then be too far ahead for him to catch and with too much momentum. GAME OVER!

Bernie's a good man with good intentions but the fundamentals just aren't there for him.

And understand this too:

* The email thing is a load of crap. Nothing illegal or not allowed. Also done by Colin Powell and the staff of Condolizza Rice. She has released 50,000 emails. Nothing will come of it.

* The "distrust" shit is just that, a bunch of shit. When this email crap is played night and day by corporate media what does anyone expect? Manufactured crap is all it is to get headlines. She has been disgustingly attacked for decades and is still standing. Piss on all that nonsense.

* The Trumpet is an entirely unqualified whackjob who has alienated every group except his low-information angry, mostly old, white minions. A person can't win the presidency without African Americans and Hispanics, and he will get VERY FEW of either in the general election. Hillary and her team will beat him to a bloody pulp. This nutjob IS going to be their nominee, but he sure as hell isn't going to be president.

* Hillary is the most qualified on either side, and she is ONE TOUGH GRANDMOTHER who will tear The Trumpet a new asshole.

[VulgarPoet]

1. And then waste a couple thousand more American lives on her next interventionist effort. n/t

[RBInMaine]

6. Pure hyperbole. Try again.

[roguevalley]

78. I'm glad you have this sorted out. After all, think of the time it will

save the FBI. Flame bait posts are so helpful to HRC's cause.

[cherokeeprogressive]

3. We know this.

[CentralMass]

4. It's time for our daily taunting.

[mak3cats]

13. LMAO!! The only thing I can say with a French accent...

...is "Now, go away! Or I shall taunt you a second time!"

[ornotna]

5. Speaking of obsessive anti posting

You must be building up some impressive calluses by now.

[beam me up scottie]

11. LOL! No kidding!

[hobbit709]

7. And all of the obsessive Bernie slams won't make Clinton any more honest.

[Snarkoleptic]

16. Perhaps it's time for a stoning!

Jehovah, Jehovah, Jehova!

[840high]

57. or make the FBI to go away

[Kall]

8. Well aren't we all lucky to have you.

Have fun defending the Bosnian sniper war hero if your totally honest candidate who is just misunderstood and just has loads of nonsense thrown at her by Republicans, which you seem to think is entirely responsible for her dishonesty ratings, is ever actually subjected to the scrutiny of a competitive general election and made to answer for her misspeaking bombs.

The Republicans would have a field day with Hillary, because she does this to herself.

[morningfog]

9. Re: the private server. The FBI, the State IG and a federal judge

Realize there are serious questions.

This is not nothing. And it ties directly to the not trustworthy issue.

[Barack_America]

24. And horrible fucking judgement...

...over and over again.

[workinclasszero]

10. +100

I like the way you think!

[Glamrock]

12. And understand this....

* The email thing is hurting her and will continue to do so. While serious political junkies may know it's b.s., the average voter doesn't. It is/will only add to the perception that she is corrupt.

* While she may still be standing, the "distrust" shit will kill her in the general. She is untrusted by the majority of voters. Look at her favorability numbers. They are awful.

[Lucinda]

15. Funny how she keeps racking up votes with those unfavorables. People may answer a poll that way

but they want her to be president. I'm sure there is a nice dissertation in all that for someone. She will be fine in the GE.

[Glamrock]

17. Racking up votes?

She's tied with a 74 year old Jewish socialist that she had a 30+ point lead over only a few months ago. Her numbers are still dropping in state after state after state. I don't see any evidence of the 'unfavorables' flocking to her campaign. But, okay. The truth for everyone will be revealed in November.

[Lucinda]

19. Every front runners numbers change as each state comes into play.

It's the way it works.

And she isnt tied with Bernie. She is ahead. 52/51 with SC and Super Tuesday within the week.

[Glamrock]

22. Yes, true

But the point is, people who don't trust her aren't voting for her....
That may change if she secures the nomination, but we'll have to see in november...

[BlueCaliDem]

45. The distrust issue is a Republican meme, well-funded and pounded on by U.S. Media. If she really has

an issue with distrust, Bernie should be beating her in diverse States where PoC are the most distrustful of politicians. I guess they're not buying the media-hype like you since Bernie is failing to convince them to support him.

[tex-wyo-dem]

67. The RW may have been opportunistic and pounded away...

At the meme.

But meme or not, her distrust issues are very real among a big segment of voters...voters she will need to beat a trump or Rubio or whoever the rethugs end up with.

And that distrust is not unfounded and can be backed up with verifiable flip flops, obfuscations, half-truths and outright lies.

[roguevalley]

79. the distruct issue is the consequences of her actions. She's such a

sad sack, she ruined her own chances. RELEASE THE SPEECHES. I heard she gushed over the banksters like a happy-happy general manager.

[BlueCaliDem]

83. Not may have. Have.

And yes, there is a distrust issue among a SEGMENT OF VOTERS but those are pretty much the same as the ones who distrust President Obama, and nobody really cares outside of their echo-chamber.

Like I said, if it were an issue, she would've been beaten by Bernie Sanders in Iowa and Nevada, and she will be trounced in South Carolina and other Southern States. Polls are showing she's trouncing Bernie in all the delegate-rich States come Super Tuesday. This tells me that PoC aren't buying that trumped-up "distrust" issue.

And that distrust is not unfounded and can be backed up with verifiable flip flops, obfuscations, half-truths and outright lies.

I can point out flip-flops, obfuscations, half-truths and outright lies in any and all politicians - yes, including Bernie Sanders. So that doesn't tell me much and it doesn't mean much.

[Glamrock]

71. You are missing the point

A large part of the electorate buys the media-hype. It's not about me or Bernie. It's about whether or not she is trusted or not....
http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/02/23/gallup-word-most-associated-with-hillary-clinton-is-dishonest-n2123754

[BlueCaliDem]

85. Your link underscores and proves my point. Townhall.com? A RW-site? Really?

Citing Gallup - a pro-Republican pollsters?? That's your proof?

I have NO doubt Republicans and Tea Partiers are distrustful of Hillary Clinton. But Democrats who are PoC aren't. In fact, the always-wrong RW fear her, hence the millions spent by American Crossroads, ESA Fund, a conservative Super PAC, and Future 45 (another dark money RW super pac) had doled out to undermine her in these primaries now. And they are failing.

[Glamrock]

99. I apologize

Perhaps you could link some polls that show she has a net positive favorability rating with the electorate?

[BlueCaliDem]

101. Again, commercial polls are bought and paid for and this is Hillary Clinton we're discussing.

Hillary Clinton is hated among the RW and their money-masters who dole out millions to ensure she never gets into the White House. You will NOT find a single poll favoring her, but that's okay. Polls are useless when it comes to that.

Case in point, we couldn't find a single poll with positive favorable ratings for President Obama when he was running for re-election - yet he won with over 51% of the popular vote, so did they matter?

If I were you, I'd take commercial polls with a pound of salt. The only polls that matter are campaign internals, and I don't have access to them.

[Glamrock]

110. Except that

Obama did have positive favorability ratings in '08.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/obama_favorableunfavorable-643.html
Don't know if this is a site you trust or not....

P.s. What is you confidence about super Tuesday based on? I'f commercial polls are meaningless, that is.

[BlueCaliDem]

113. Except that...it was '08 when nobody knew him. It stands to reason he'd have pos.favorabilities.

And that's why he won with 53% (52.9%).

Still, after we knew him after four years, his favorability ratings were upside down...and yet he still won with 51% (51.1%) of the vote. His "favorability" percentages made zero difference to PoC who were the ones to push him over into a win.

P.s. What is you confidence about super Tuesday based on? I'f commercial polls are meaningless, that is.

Not confidence. Hope - and looking at Sanders' lack of confidence that he'll win in South Carolina and Arkansas since his campaign HQ has not renewed the lease, asked for the security deposit back, and all but pulled out of the State that Bill Clinton was once governor and Hillary once first lady of.

Also (per 2/25/2016), Predictwise: Democrats to win: 61% > Republicans: 39%

For nomination: Hillary: 90% > Bernie Sanders: 10%

Predictwise is where people bet on the winners with money so they're a little more careful.

[Glamrock]

115. My bad

I don't know why I linked to '08. But here's Obama's favorability ratings for the entire '12 election year:

Politico/GWU/Battleground 11/4 - 11/5 50 48 +2
Gallup 11/1 - 11/4 55 42 +13
CNN/Opinion Research 11/2 - 11/4 52 46 +6
Monmouth/SurveyUSA/Braun 11/1 - 11/4 47 44 +3
ABC News/Wash Post 10/30 - 11/2 54 45 +9
Politico/GWU/Battleground 10/29 - 11/1 51 45 +6
FOX News 10/28 - 10/30 52 46 +6
CBS News/NY Times 10/25 - 10/28 46 46 Tie
NPR 10/23 - 10/25 51 48 +3
Politico/GWU/Battleground 10/22 - 10/25 51 46 +5
Associated Press/GfK 10/19 - 10/23 51 45 +6
ABC News/Wash Post 10/18 - 10/21 52 46 +6
Monmouth/SurveyUSA/Braun 10/18 - 10/21 45 45 Tie
CBS News 10/17 - 10/20 47 42 +5
Politico/GWU/Battleground 10/15 - 10/18 52 45 +7
USA Today/Gallup 10/10 - 10/11 51 48 +3
Politico/GWU/Battleground 10/7 - 10/11 53 45 +8
Monmouth/SurveyUSA/Braun 10/8 - 10/10 46 45 +1
FOX News 10/7 - 10/9 51 45 +6
Pew Research 10/4 - 10/7 49 48 +1
ABC News/Wash Post 10/4 - 10/7 55 44 +11
Politico/GWU/Battleground 10/1 - 10/4 52 45 +7
CNN/Opinion Research 9/28 - 9/30 52 48 +4
Quinnipiac 9/25 - 9/30 50 47 +3
USA Today/Gallup 9/24 - 9/27 55 44 +11
Politico/GWU/Battleground 9/24 - 9/27 50 47 +3
FOX News 9/24 - 9/26 51 45 +6
Bloomberg 9/21 - 9/24 52 44 +8
Politico/GWU/Battleground 9/16 - 9/20 53 45 +8
Associated Press/GfK 9/13 - 9/17 52 45 +7
Monmouth/SurveyUSA/Braun 9/13 - 9/16 46 43 +3
Reason-Rupe/PSRAI 9/13 - 9/17 52 45 +7
Pew Research/PSRAI 9/12 - 9/16 55 42 +13
CBS News/NY Times 9/8 - 9/12 44 44 Tie
FOX News 9/9 - 9/11 53 43 +10
CNN/Opinion Research 9/7 - 9/9 57 42 +15
ABC News/Wash Post 9/5 - 9/9 52 45 +7
CNN/Opinion Research 8/31 - 9/3 51 48 +3
ABC News/Wash Post 8/29 - 9/2 47 49 -2
CBS News 8/22 - 8/26 41 44 -3
ABC News/Wash Post 8/22 - 8/26 50 47 +3
CNN/Opinion Research 8/22 - 8/23 52 47 +5
USA Today/Gallup 8/20 - 8/22 53 46 +7
FOX News 8/19 - 8/21 51 46 +5
Resurgent Republic (R) 8/16 - 8/22 48 49 -1
Associated Press/GfK 8/16 - 8/20 53 44 +9
Monmouth/SurveyUSA/Braun 8/15 - 8/19 45 43 +2
LA Times/USC 8/13 - 8/19 53 45 +8
CNN/Opinion Research 8/7 - 8/8 54 44 +10
Politico/GWU/Battleground 8/5 - 8/9 50 47 +3
FOX News 8/5 - 8/7 54 42 +12
ABC News/Wash Post 8/1 - 8/5 49 47 +2
Pew Research 7/16 - 7/26 50 45 +5
USA Today/Gallup 7/19 - 7/22 53 45 +8
FOX News 7/15 - 7/17 52 46 +6
CBS News/NY Times 7/11 - 7/16 36 48 -12
Gallup 7/9 - 7/12 54 43 +11
McClatchy/Marist 7/9 - 7/11 49 46 +3
Quinnipiac 7/1 - 7/8 45 48 -3
CNN/Opinion Research 6/28 - 7/1 54 45 +9
Newsweek/Daily Beast 6/28 - 6/28 51 47 +4
Bloomberg 6/15 - 6/18 55 42 +13
Pew Research 6/7 - 6/17 50 48 +2
Monmouth/SurveyUSA/Braun 6/4 - 6/6 45 43 +2
FOX News 6/3 - 6/5 54 42 +12
Gallup 6/1 - 6/4 52 43 +9
CNN/Opinion Research 5/29 - 5/31 56 42 +14
ABC News/Wash Post 5/23 - 5/27 49 48 +1
FOX News 5/13 - 5/15 52 44 +8
USA Today/Gallup 5/10 - 5/13 52 46 +6
Associated Press/GfK 5/3 - 5/7 58 38 +20
Resurgent Republic (R) 4/30 - 5/3 50 45 +5
FOX News 4/22 - 4/24 50 48 +2
CBS News/NY Times 4/13 - 4/17 42 45 -3
CNN/Opinion Research 4/13 - 4/15 56 42 +14
Quinnipiac 4/11 - 4/17 45 49 -4
ABC News/Wash Post 4/11 - 4/15 56 40 +16
CNN/Opinion Research 3/24 - 3/25 56 42 +14
ABC News/Wash Post 3/21 - 3/25 53 43 +10
McClatchy/Marist 3/20 - 3/22 50 46 +4
FOX News 3/10 - 3/12 50 47 +3
Bloomberg 3/8 - 3/11 52 45 +7
CBS News/NY Times 3/7 - 3/11 41 41 Tie
Pew Research 3/7 - 3/11 56 41 +15
ABC News/Wash Post 2/22 - 2/26 51 45 +6
Politico/GWU/Battleground 2/19 - 2/22 54 42 +12
Associated Press/GfK 2/16 - 2/20 57 42 +15
USA Today/Gallup 2/16 - 2/19 50 48 +2
Quinnipiac 2/14 - 2/20 47 48 -1
CNN/Opinion Research 2/10 - 2/13 53 45 +8
CBS News/NY Times 2/8 - 2/13 45 41 +4
Pew Research 2/8 - 2/12 54 42 +12
ABC News/Wash Post 1/18 - 1/22 53 43 +10
CBS News/NY Times 1/12 - 1/17 38 45 -7
Pew Research 1/11 - 1/16 51 45 +6
FOX News 1/12 - 1/14 51 46 +5
CNN/Opinion Research 1/11 - 1/12 49 49 Tie

As you can see, Obama had positive favorability in 83 of 97 polls. So, your assertion that Obama won in spite of no positive favorability ratings is mistaken. No offense. His favorability ratings going back to at least '07 can be found at:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_favorableunfavorable-643.html

For comparison, here is Hillary's favorability ratings going back to January '15.

Economist 1/15 - 1/19 38 56 -18
ABC/WP 1/6 - 1/10 48 49 -1
Economist 12/30 - 1/6 41 54 -13
Economist 12/18 - 12/21 44 51 -7
Quinnipiac 12/16 - 12/20 43 51 -8
PPP (D) 12/16 - 12/17 38 55 -17
Economist 12/4 - 12/9 44 50 -6
AP-GfK 12/3 - 12/7 44 46 -2
Quinnipiac 11/23 - 11/30 44 51 -7
Economist 11/19 - 11/23 44 51 -7
ABC/WP 11/4 - 11/8 46 51 -5
Economist 11/5 - 11/9 41 52 -11
Economist 10/23 - 10/27 42 51 -9
AP-GfK 10/15 - 10/19 41 48 -7
Monmouth 10/15 - 10/18 41 48 -7
Economist 10/8 - 10/12 43 49 -6
ABC/WP 10/7 - 10/11 47 49 -2
FOX News 9/20 - 9/22 38 56 -18
Bloomberg 9/18 - 9/21 38 54 -16
Quinnipiac 9/17 - 9/21 41 55 -14
Economist 9/11 - 9/15 42 52 -10
Economist 8/28 - 9/1 41 52 -11
ABC/WP 8/26 - 8/30 45 53 -8
Economist 8/14 - 8/18 43 51 -8
Economist 7/18 - 7/20 45 47 -2
AP-GfK 7/9 - 7/13 39 49 -10
ABC/WP 7/8 - 7/12 52 45 +7
Economist 7/4 - 7/6 45 50 -5
Economist 6/27 - 6/29 46 51 -5
Economist 6/20 - 6/22 46 50 -4
Monmouth 6/11 - 6/14 41 44 -3
Economist 6/13 - 6/15 46 49 -3
Economist 6/6 - 6/8 45 50 -5
Economist 5/30 - 6/1 47 49 -2
Economist 5/23 - 5/25 47 47 Tie
Quinnipiac 5/19 - 5/26 45 47 -2
Economist 5/16 - 5/18 47 47 Tie
Pew 5/12 - 5/18 49 47 +2
FOX News 5/9 - 5/12 45 49 -4
Gallup 5/6 - 5/10 50 46 +4
CBS/NYT 4/30 - 5/3 35 36 -1
Economist 4/25 - 4/27 46 50 -4
AP-GfK 4/23 - 4/27 46 41 +5
Economist 4/18 - 4/20 46 48 -2
Quinnipiac 4/16 - 4/21 46 47 -1
Rasmussen 4/13 - 4/14 47 47 Tie
Economist 4/11 - 4/13 51 45 +6
Bloomberg 4/6 - 4/8 48 44 +4
Economist 4/4 - 4/6 44 52 -8
Gallup 4/3 - 4/4 48 42 +6
FOX News 3/29 - 3/31 47 50 -3
PPP (D) 3/26 - 3/31 41 53 -12
Economist 3/28 - 3/30 50 47 +3
ABC/WP 3/26 - 3/29 49 47 +2
CBS News 3/21 - 3/24 26 37 -11
Economist 3/21 - 3/23 49 43 +6
Rasmussen 3/16 - 3/17 48 49 -1
Economist 3/14 - 3/16 47 48 -1
CNN/ORC 3/13 - 3/15 53 44 +9
Gallup 3/2 - 3/4 50 39 +11
Economist 2/28 - 3/2 52 44 +8
Quinnipiac 2/26 - 3/2 48 45 +3
Economist 2/21 - 2/23 48 46 +2
PPP (D) 2/20 - 2/22 45 47 -2
Economist 2/14 - 2/16 48 45 +3
Economist 2/7 - 2/9 50 46 +4
Economist 1/31 - 2/2 47 45 +2
Economist 1/24 - 1/26 48 45 +3
Economist 1/17 - 1/19 47 45 +2
Economist 1/10 - 1/12 48 45 +3
Economist 1/3 - 1/5 46 46 Tie

71 polls, 21 favorable. While you may have no use for scientific polls, as a citizen who doesn't want a Republican president....these numbers scare the shit out of me. And, while I realize this is purely anecdotal, I'm having to beg Democratic voters in my area to vote for her should she win the nomination. The only reason she stands a chance in this election, is the Republican candidates are so, so bad. I say that based on the above cited numbers. I'm not smearing her. You can't convince me she's electable with those numbers.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Hope this clears up your misperception regarding Obama's favorability ratings though. Nice chat.


Almost forgot:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/clinton_favorableunfavorable-1131.html#polls

Peace

[BlueCaliDem]

119. Hm. I guess it depends what pollsters you want to look at and what polls you find credible.

Pollingreport.com shows plenty of unfavorable ratings. PLENTY. But it depends when you ask. The overall narrative of U.S. Media is that President Obama was polling negatively - his unfavorable numbers were constantly beating his favorable numbers.

http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_fav.htm

But the closer he got to election day, the more the numbers jumped in his favor.

Fivethirtyeight reports:

There is a small but reasonably persistent gap between President Obama’s net approval ratings and his head-to-head polls against Mitt Romney. Whereas Mr. Obama’s approval ratings have been almost exactly breaking even for most of the past few months — in fact, they’re very slightly underwater now according to the Real Clear Politics average — he has more often than not enjoyed a slight lead in head-to-head polls against Mr. Romney.

Like I said, commercial polls don't mean squat and you can put as much or as little confidence in them, depending on one's bias. Fact remains, President Obama won his re-election with 51.1% of the popular vote despite the media narrative that he was in trouble.

[artislife]

51. Beware of March and all the states

that actually vote for the Democrat in the GE.

[Lucinda]

52. She will do just fine.

[artislife]

54. Okie Dokie

[ellennelle]

77. graicous

52/51 is a tie at this stage of the game, GF.

stop kidding yourself; it makes you look daft.

[Lucinda]

81. No, it isnt. She could be ahead by one on the last day, and it will be a win.

Math is math.

[Kentonio]

91. She has the support of half the Democratic party.

Where does she gets the additional votes to win the general exactly?

[Beowulf]

108. +1

Interesting no one wants to deal with that question. I think we are in a situation where the person who can win the nomination can't win the general, and the person who could win the general can't win the nomination.

[fun n serious]

18. You know the e-mails are BS but you want to smear her over it anyway? nt

[Lucinda]

20. Oooh. I missed that. Nice catch!

[Glamrock]

72. How did I smear her?

[ellennelle]

73. no, not that quite

it's more that she is already slimed, rightly or wrongly, and it's not going away before the convention. after all, there are 2 different cases.

i wish she did not carry all this shit baggage, but the fact is, she does. however, it got there - how much was her doing, bad judgment, victim of the vast RW conspiracy, whatever - it is in fact there, following her around like a pigpen cloud.

and there is something else we all need to be aware of. yes, it's horrifying that the RW has done this to her, but they have, and the worst outcome of it is the fact that there is an entire generation - 25 years - of uneducated, lo-info, vulnerable minds out there that have come to hate her as much as they hate nonwhite folk.

i don't know if you've ever encountered that misogyny up close and personal, but it's as scary as racism. and just as real.

i'm not saying we should avoid the misogyny just because it's there, any more than we might have avoided obama's race, god forbid. but obama was squeaky clean. hillary, sadly, is not.

as unfortunate as it is, hillary is a very tainted candidate, which is why i always was stunned the party was so on board. but then, it's the DLC/3rd way, so there is that establishment agenda.

so add that one to the mix; this is so definitely NOT an establishment year.

this is so not hillary's year. sadly.

[Barack_America]

23. I don't know that it's BS.

I think it's ridiculous that my work emails over comparatively nothing are on lock-down due to HIPAA, while Hillary is free to discuss matters of national security over freaking gmail?!?!

[Lucinda]

27. Nothing was classified info at the time. n/t

[Barack_America]

32. I don't care. Don't carry out the official business of the United States...

...on gmail. It's absurd that anyone would ever find that acceptable.

Patient privacy federal laws prevent me from sending a single work-related email by gmail, and yet here is our SOS discussing potentially classified issues on a public server.

My jaw dropped at the sheer stupidity of Hillary using gmail when I first heard of the "scandal", and nothing has since convinced me otherwise.

[Lucinda]

35. Gmail? n/t

[Barack_America]

37. I am not a tech person.

Unsecured email, your gmails, hot mails, yahoo mails, emails associated with other organizations. All "gmails" to me. Unsecured, non-government email. Content not stored at a government site. I'm sorry, but it blows my mind.

[Lucinda]

41. Ah ok...They did have a private server, and the only thing that

may have passed through outside servers is due to the email of someone sending or receiving, as far as I know.

If you haven't been through any of the emails, and you find some spare time, I highly recommend it. They really are interesting, well some are downright boring, but does give you a sense of how things worked, and it might put your mind at ease a little. There is some redacted stuff, but Hillary has been asking for a lot of that to be opened up.

[Kentonio]

92. Hillary was Secretary of State. If there was information there that should have been classified.

The onus was on her to classify it, not just claim it wasn't classified at the time. She was one of the highest ranking members of government.

[JudyM]

14. Hillary? Is that you?

[Avalux]

21. Distrust is a bunch of shit? Manufactured crap?

All a person has to do is watch the treasure trove of video of Hillary herself to know she's a liar.

I am seriously beginning to wonder about people who continue to not only think Hillary's behavior is acceptable, but also insist that she's being unfairly attacked.

[asuhornets]

25. PREACH!!!!!

[MaggieD]

26. I said this back in the summer

Nothing anyone posts here will impact the election one bit. Not a thing. I guess they just want to vent against democrats, but it serves no real purpose. I remember the days when people in politics took this place seriously. No more.

I'm really looking forward to the upcoming races. She is going to win big.

[JonLeibowitz]

28. It's a discussion board. People discuss the candidates. It's really not complicated.

[MaggieD]

29. There is no "discussion" going on here

Hasn't been for a very long time.

[hobbit709]

30. Never mind. Time will tell.

[JonLeibowitz]

31. I appreciate the discussion that I and other voters with Democratic values have here.

So count me down for a +1 for discussion.

[BlueCaliDem]

47. Exactly! It's becoming an anti-Hillary echo-chamber infiltrated by

trolls posing as something else. But they actually believe we don't see it.

[ellennelle]

69. i take serious umbrage with that accusation

fwiw, i am nothing close to a troll. have been a bernie supporter for over a decade, following his brave speeches on the house and senate floors, and his consistent and committed positions as presented every friday on the thom hartmann show.

have followed hillary for years, even defended her repeatedly. tired of defending her. i'll go with the guy with no baggage and no flip flops.

but don't apologize for the accusation unless you really feel it.

[BlueCaliDem]

87. If the shoe doesn't fit, why take umbrage? Did I mention you specifically?

No. So let it go.

i'll go with the guy with no baggage and no flip flops.

Good luck finding him, because if by that remark you mean Bernie Sanders, I suggest you read up on his past at Shakesville dot com. It's eyeopening.

[still_one]

105. Thank you Maggie

[Autumn]

33. All the obsessive anti-Bernie posts in the universe won't get Hillary in the White House either. nt

[BlueCaliDem]

49. You're right. Her strength of character and the support of people who actually know her, will.

I always look to the friends and allies of a politician to decide the character of that person since I don't know that person personally.

[Autumn]

50. Good luck with all that, you'll need it. nt

[BlueCaliDem]

53. My candidate isn't bowing out of Arkansas and ignoring South Carolina, so why again do I need good

luck?

[Autumn]

55. You'll need all the luck you can get. nt

[ellennelle]

68. lucky for you

hillary has no plans to ever show her face in VT, as far as i know.

and by the results, she might have done as well to have stayed out of NH.

i'll stop there; hate to keep punching when someone's already down.

[ellennelle]

66. me too!

so mark penn and kissinger and blankfein and that ilk? you're ok with these guys?

[Politicalboi]

34. Yeah right

I'll wait for the e-mail scandal. Clinton's never let us down on scandal All the delegates won't be able to put Hillary Dumpty back together again

[aikoaiko]

36. Maybe not, but this is what Democratic Underground is for.

[Jarqui]

38. This is not true:

* The email thing is a load of crap. Nothing illegal or not allowed. Also done by Colin Powell and the staff of Condolizza Rice. She has released 50,000 emails. Nothing will come of it.

On the surface, it might not look like it but they are very different situations.

Just for starters: storing classified material in your home without authorization is against the law. See the laws they convicted General Petraeus for.

There are many prongs to this investigation.

They have declarations from CIA investigators that information that was classified at the time of transmission was done on her server. There is no debate on that. That's the evidence reported by the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community. And it was basically corroborated by the State Department in their press conference on Feb 4th or 5th.

They have subpoenaed the Clinton Foundation trying to find out why it got $5+ million each from Saudi Arabia and Boeing while Hillary's state department was putting together a big sale of Boeing F-15s to Saudi Arabia. They are looking at several occurrences like that involving Clinton Foundation donors. I don't care who is secretary of state. If you see something like this, you have to investigate it.

Against the spirit of the judge's orders, Hillary had 31,000 emails deleted from her server as "personal". The FBI was able to recover many of them (if not all). If Hillary deleted any to hide something, she might have an obstruction of justice problem.

This is not a trumped up Benghazi. They have irrefutable evidence. They have good cause for these investigations. There are several lines of attack - any one of which could end her campaign.

You cannot dismiss this one.

[Matariki]

43. Thank you Jarqui

The mad scramble to paint this as simply a 'right wing' effort is both laughable and deeply troubling.

[Matariki]

39. LOL Sanders has the lead in National polls

His numbers are rising. Clinton's are plummeting.

You're so cute when you're desperate

[oasis]

40. The pains some posters have taken to dig up the negatives

on Hillary would lead one to believe Bernie's success isn't their primary motivation.

[Matariki]

42. We don't want to be saddled with a candidate that will LOSE

Because you can be sure the Republicans will dig all this up.

It's called vetting.

[oasis]

44. Vetting?

Like the GOP would use the crime bill and the "welfare to work caused black poverty" argument against Hillary in the debates. And don't forget the super predator, "bring them to heel" bullcrap.

[Fumesucker]

48. Trump would

And a ton of other baggage that Bernie has been entirely too concerned with the future of the country to use against Hillary.

Trump on the other hand has no such qualms.

[oasis]

56. Yup, Trump will be taking Hillary to task on mass incarceration and

welfare reform.

[Fumesucker]

46. Mirror, mirror on the wall

Who is the most obsessive of us all?

[bunnies]

118. ^^^^^^^^

Perfect.

[Warren DeMontague]

58. Then you should be posting less ALL CAPS threads and sippin' more mai tais, my friend.

I mean, it sounds like you've got everything all figured out.



Nothin' left to do but smile, smile, smile, amirte?

[MisterP]

60. we don't trust her because she makes opposite speeches in the same week, depending on

audience, because she's got a hundred mil from Wall Street (or Wall Street plus the other corporations tromping on our necks), because she's a neoliberal economic grease fire, because she's a warmonger (what was Honduras's crime? too much democracy?), is dropping every ball after every skid's been greased for her by her DNC flunkies, still pretends anyone was chanting "English Only" a few days back, has taken positions to Trump's right (to be fair, it depends on what DAY OF THE WEEK we're talking about), because she's the goddamn cancer that's turned this party into a sick joke that says Social Security is what's wrecking the budget and sided against all but 4 Congress Dems to force the TPP, and that's lost buttloads of Senators, Reps, and Governors, AND sends out its flacks whose one clinching argument is that Trump's name sounds like a brass instrument?

[HERVEPA]

61. Your taunting is so endearing

[AgingAmerican]

62. Hillary will lose the general election

Not only is Clinton deeply unpopular among the electorate, but becomes increasingly unpopular the more the public is exposed to her during this campaign:

[SoLeftIAmRight]

63. Want to put some Money where your mouth is?

...

[ellennelle]

64. whoa

you do realize your language has sunk to trump's repulsive hostile level, right?

i do not agree she is the most qualified; your opinion does not equal fact.

and while i agree that the email crap is likely indeed crap, she is nonetheless now swimming in it. this is not what we need for the dems going forward. esp. given there is another case she's dragging around.

as for the distrust shit, a lot of that is shit, but there is so much, and so much that has just been bad judgment on her part, i'm sorry to say it's a bit overwhelming. so much so, again, just not good for the party, or the country.

glad you feel bernie is a good man with good intentions; those for me ARE the fundamentals. i'm going with the good guy.

[Betty Karlson]

65. You wish.

All the obsessive fawning over Clinton won't save her from herself and from the righteous indignation of Millennials and everyone else fed up with the status quo she is happily trying to preserve.

[Alfresco]

70. Truth!

[riversedge]

74. :-) Well said.

[californiabernin]

75. She isnt the most qualified

Her foreign policy is a failure, for starters. There is good reason for people to mistrust her and it isnt because of the right wing its because of her.

If she get the nomination, in all liklihood Trump will win the presidency. People do not want more of the same, and they will vote to send a message.

There is no entusiasm for Hillary .

[Semtex]

76. Ignorance is bliss. Let's keep the status quo because change is just too hard!

[NanceGreggs]

80. Be gentle, RB ...

There are still some here who haven't figured that out yet.

[JDPriestly]

82. The total number of votes to be cast in the Democratic convention is 3,283.

California has 352 of those votes and will not vote until June 7. I am in California and expect my state to vote solidly for Bernie Sanders.

Oregon has 45 delegates and does not vote until May 17.

Washington state has 77 delegates and does not vote until February 26.

The West Coast states vote late and are very, very liberal. The outcome for Sanders in these states is likely to be very good.

With 3,283 delegates at the convention, it will take 1,642 to win.

474 delegates will not be chosen until quite late. Bernie has 51 delegates at this point.

The game is not over. It is far too soon to claim that Hillary will win the nomination.

And if she does, she will have to win the general election without my vote. A lot of Democrats will vote for Democrats for every office except president. I do not consider Hillary Clinton to be a Democrat. I do not trust her. I will not vote for her although I will vote, I assure you, for every other Democrat on my ballot.

I encourage others to join me in that pledge. It is time to change the country starting with the Democratic Party. My grandmother used to say about the Republican Party that she did not leave it. It left her. When I think about Hillary as president, I understand what she met. Hillary could not represent me as chief dog-catcher.

[MaggieD]

86. That's incorrect

That's seems like the republican numbers.

In order to win the Democratic nomination, a candidate must win 2,383 delegates at the national convention (this total is current as of February 24, 2016). Currently, there are expected to be 4,765 delegates at the Democratic National Convention.[7]

There are two basic types of Democratic convention delegates: pledged and unpledged. A candidate is eligible to win a share of the pledged delegates at stake in a state if he or she receives at least 15 percent of votes cast in a primary or the preferences expressed in a caucus, either in a congressional district or statewide. Individuals who are pledged delegates are "pledged" to support the candidate to whom they are allocated. There are expected to be approximately 4,051 pledged delegates at the 2016 convention. There are three categories of pledged delegates: congressional district delegates, at-large delegates and pledged party leader and elected officials (PLEO delegates).[7]

https://ballotpedia.org/2016_presidential_nominations:_calendar_and_delegate_rules

[Live and Learn]

84. And, all the anti-Sanders posts in the Univers won't save Hillary Clinton from defeat.

She will never be President.

[redstateblues]

103. Hillary has a much better chance than Bernie

The last Democrat to run on raising taxes on the middle class was Walter Mondale. He won one state. His home state MN

[Live and Learn]

104. Nope, Hillary has zero chance. nt

[Beacool]

121. In that case, neither will Sanders.

[TheFarS1de]

88. You can tell she cares ...

[Number23]

89. You nailed it. K&R

[betsuni]

90. K&R

[djean111]

93. Are you apoplectic because Bernie still has supporters here?

or is your keyboard stuck on "outrage" because no one will obey you?

If Hillary is such a lock, I would think you could, you know, relax. It seems to me like you have been hurling this rant for a year or so, and, really, you are getting no results. I read these for their entertainment value.

[madville]

94. The Justice Department is all that can save him now

A Hillary indictment is really his only chance of getting the nomination.

Just from the information released so far it's apparent that laws were broken. Classified information was being taken from secure government systems and recreated on her personal email system, big time problem mainly for her aides. The fact that they keep repeating none of it was marked classified means nothing as far as legality is concerned.

I'm more interested in what will come of the investigation into the pay-to-play incidents concerning donations to the Clinton Foundation coinciding with a State Department approval of weapons deals, Huma was mainly involved in all of that through her three different jobs at the time.

[Alfresco]

95. And its still true this morning.

[pdsimdars]

96. Clinton smears

Her campaign has been smearing Bernie since it began. Her surrogates come out each week with some new distortion of his record. Bernie just keeps talking about the issues.
Clinton has to smear and distort Bernie's record. . .all the supporters of Bernie have to do is to show videos of Hillary herself. Her speech and actions condemn herself without any help from anyone else. She's her own worst enemy.
All the old videos of Bernie are the same, . . he got it right on the issues when it mattered. And she generally got it wrong

[SwampG8r]

97. Ashley williams disagrees

[Adrahil]

98. You think it's bad now, wait until Wednesday.

The anger and frustration will be LEGENDARY.

Prepare for accusations of being a sell-out, DINO, a Turd-Wayer, Republican-lite, etc. etc.


But yeah, the math is about to get ugly for the Sandernistas.

[peggysue2]

114. Wait Until Wednesday

Agreed. All the howling, all the blocking of member voices won't change the reality on the ground. Hillary is on her way to win the nomination because the numbers support her, as do the voters and office holders of the Democratic Party. The screaming, the vitriol, the hatefulness won't alter the end result. I saw this happen in 2008. This time, however, the tide is with Hillary Clinton.

Wishful thinking and magic numbers won't change the outcome. Neither will the gnashing of teeth and baseless accusations.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

100. What is you said is empirically obvious and demonstrably true.

[Mike Nelson]

102. I try not to let...

...the Hillary hate ruin my admiration for Bernie's fine ideals. As far as issues and what she'd like to do as President, Hillary is the most honest person running for the job.

[Katashi_itto]

106. Meth is a terrible thing.

[Gothmog]

107. The free market system agrees with your analysis

The predictive markets which are based on the free market system agrees with your analysis. If anyone really believes this analysis, then go make some money by opening an Irish brokerage account You would get great odds on this belief and can make some money http://predictwise.com/politics/2016-president-winner Clinton's odds of being the Democratic nominee has shot up 6 or 7 points since Nevada and the odds of the Democratic candidate (i.e. Clinton) winning the general election has gone up also.

I was close to buying an option when Clinton was only at 80% probability of being the nominee a couple of weeks ago (i.e., before the Nevada caucus results). With Clinton being at 90% chance of being the nominee, the pricing is not attractive to me but would be attractive if you really believe that Sanders will be the nominee.

The people who making the market are no doubt factoring in super delegates and all of the states where Sanders is projected to lose by double digit margins.

[Cobalt Violet]

109. she needs to withdraw from the race immediately.

For the good of the country we need someone electable in the general not just primaries.

[rhett o rick]

111. It's sad that some think she is qualified because she is tough.

She has been tough but never on the side of the People. She is tough on drug crimes incl marijuana, she was tough on Iraq and other foreign policy. She was tough on same-sex marriage until she wasn't.

She isn't tough on Wall Street as they loot our resources.

We need to change the system and be tough on the super-wealthy 1% that is creating massive poverty.

[MellowDem]

112. And Hillary winning won't make her any less of a moderate conservative...

Or the Democratic Party any less beholden to corporate cash.

[NaturalHigh]

116. True, but there will be a ton of sore loser "the voters are stupid" posts...

after she clinches the nomination. The usual malcontents will talk up a big game about how they won't vote for her in the general election.

[hifiguy]

117. This must be today's Official Talking/Spamming point.

[Alfresco]

120. And it's still true this afternoon.

[Alfresco]

122. And true today as well.

[Lizzie Poppet]

123. Perhaps. Feel free to continue gloating in November...

...when Hillary gets destroyed by whoever the GOP ends up nominating.