There are so many things to discuss now that we have the results from New Hampshire, but I’m exhausted and I’ll have to write about this all tomorrow for the Washington Monthly. One thing I’m not happy about is how many more people chose to vote in the Republican primary than the Democratic primary. I expect a party that’s been locked out of the White House to be more energized at this point in the campaign, but the difference is large and disturbing.
Obviously, Sanders absolutely crushed Clinton tonight, exceeding the expected margins in all but one poll that I noticed. He could hardly have done better and his performance in the first two contests has exceeded all reasonable expectations. As I’ve said all along, he absolutely needed to do this to have any chance. Well, he did it. Now he has a chance.
But, to be frank with you, he’s still behind the eight ball. If you include the superdelegates, who can of course change their commitments at any time, Clinton is now ahead with a 394-42 delegate lead. And the contest heads to Nevada and South Carolina where Clinton has so far held big leads with the Latino and black voters who were mostly absent in Iowa and New Hampshire. Even with his big win tonight, Sanders probably only picked up a small handful of net delegates. He has a long way to go to get close to knocking Clinton off.
Still, as I said, he has so far done exactly what he needed to do.
If you want to know why you read this blog, it’s because I told you forever ago that Kasich was going to be the guy, not Rubio, who would challenge Jeb Bush for Establishment support. I doubted myself for a while, but I shouldn’t have. Now I have been totally vindicated.
I also began telling you a while ago that Jeb wasn’t dead and that he had a chance to revitalize himself in New Hampshire. I don’t know if he’ll wind up in third, fourth, or fifth place tonight (with 82% of the vote counted, he’s tucked in fourth between Cruz and Rubio). I guess it doesn’t matter too much, but it would help him to finish ahead of Rubio in the top four, and it would be very helpful to finish third behind Kasich.
Ultimately, Kasich’s success comes at Jeb’s expense, and Jeb’s decent performance undermines Kasich’s ability to fully capitalize on his “victory” tonight. Only one of them can go forward for any distance, and Kasich needs to raise a ton of money very fast. With Rubio badly wounded, the Establishment could give Kasich the money he needs, but Jeb’s still lingering around and that’s a problem.
The primary schedule is also really tough for Kasich. He’d love to head right now to the Midwest or to have more primaries in the Northeast or Mid-Atlantic. But he’s gotta go compete in South Carolina where his brand of politics sells worse than cat shit.
This is all the more reason why he’ll need a lot of money, because he isn’t going to be winning anything anytime soon.
I don’t really have anything to say about Trump except that I never discounted his chances and I consistently told you that his many gaffes would not hurt him.
My heart was warmed to see that Jim Gilmore got more votes than Rick Santorum, and Ben Carson’s performance was spectacularly pathetic. I guess New Englanders don’t agree that the pyramids were made to store grain.
Carly Fiorina never lived up to the expectations of the executives at Fox News. Do you remember how hard they tried to sell her at the first debate?
Al Giordano told me the other day that Chris Christie was doomed because everyone who wants a NY/NJ tough guy was already on the Trump Train. I hadn’t thought about it that way, but he’s right. Also, Christie never should have closed down the George Washington Bridge. That was a fatal error and he’s gotten what he deserved for having done it.
I guess the Clintons will retool now. I hope they take some of my advice.
Despite all the tactical worldliness of how to get to the White House, etc. I still think that Donald Trump winning anything at all is terrifying.
I mean, it serves us right, on both sides, for treating our citizens with such contempt and feeding them such elaborate, scientifically-perfect bullshit for so many decades…selling them cable TV and Vegas vacations and microwave food and lottery tickets and McDonalds dinners and crummy “Infotainment” shows and a broken, hollowed-out society with a veneer of celebrity glitz. This is the end result.
Luckily the other end result is Bernie Sanders, whom I may not support for president but who stands there representing the other America by default — the Pete Seger America, the Aaron Copland America, the Eugene Debs America…my America.
So the battle lines are drawn. It’s too bad these long-dead-zombies like Jeb and Rubio are staggering around, confusing everything with their irrelevance. If they had any decency or honor they’d join the real fight, on either side, and at least go down standing for something besides boardroom mediocrity — Eliot’s “Hollow Men.”
If any of the non-Trump GOP candidates were to make it to the White House with a GOP congress the result would be unthinkably catastrophic. God only knows what the end result of a Trump presidency would be but I would absolutely take my chances with that. It might in the end create a backlash that would result in a progressive Congress – or not – but nothing could be worse than Cruz, Rubio, Bush, Christie or even Kasich with a GOP congress and SCOTUS.
With huge reluctance, I’m starting to lean in the direction that IF (please NO!!!) we “had to” have a GOP Pres, Trump may actually be “better” than the other choices available. Please no. Oh please no. Oh no no no…
But as completely unacceptable and horrendous as Trump is, I kind of feel that it might wake us chumps up.
I hope this is not the outcome, however, with every fiber of my being. Much as I dislike Clinton, she is preferable, even tho she’s in the pay of Wall St and MIC. ugh.
No! That argument always fails. Yes, Bush led to Obama, but he ruined the world as much as any single US President can ruin the world (which is a lot).
We don’t have a ton of choices. I’ve voted for quite a few misleadingly called “third” party candidates. I live in a Deep Blue state that will go for whichever of the D pols does get the nod, so my vote is pretty irrelevant.
But do I think Clinton would be “better” than Trump? Yes, I have to – with deep reluctance – state that I do believe that Clinton would be better than Trump.
That’s how I see it. The Green Party really needs to do better homework to be viewed as more of a competitive party. I’ve worked with them in the past. Unfortunately, they don’t do enough in between POTUS elections to stir the populace. It’s unfortunate, but there you have it.
Yeah, you said Kasich would survive but …
Where is his gain in support going to come from? For all intents and purposes Kasich, Jeb, Christie and Rubio have essentially the same followers, with Rubio possibly having some Cuban support that Kasich couldn’t touch. Call it 44% in NH. Which is more or less friendly country for “sane” Republicans. I don’t think he’s got the $$ to stay in for the duration.
I don’t see Jeb dropping out. I see him as being in it to get Trump now. I doubt he’ll do any good, but …
Rubio has to stay in. He can’t do anything else. Literally. He has no job, Fox doesn’t want him, his efficacy as a lobbyist is practically nil and he has no fervent support.
Trump, Carson and Cruz supporters wouldn’t support Kasich in a primary on a dare. In the General election they’ll vote for him if they vote.
South:
Everything in the South is religion and/or dumbass. Florida will be tough on Kasich with Jeb and Rubio both hoping against hope they can last out. There won’t be much left over for Johnny.
Mountain West:
MO, KS, OK look much more like the south than they used to. Don’t look for much for Kasich here. Forget ID, CO, MT and the Dakotas. Virulent anti-immigrant sentiment in the R parties here. Kasich goes over like a lead balloon. NM and AZ maybe some daylight.
West Coast:
The R’s in CA are just as crazy as anywhere else. Maybe even worse because they feel embattled. OR, WA and AK are western extensions of ID for the the Republicans. No help there.
Midwest:
Maybe Kasich can sweep the Midwest. He’ll have to. But if Iowa is any bellweather … he won’t.
Agree — a weak 2nd place finish in NH isn’t going to do much for Kaisich. He needed a strong first place to have a chance to move into the top tier. Still more votes to be counted, but not looking as if he’ll do any better in NH than Paul did in 2012 when he came in second. Added to that, Paul was a close third in Iowa (Kaisich was near an asterisk) and he had a loyal following (and more money) scattered throughout many states.
Bush and Rubio won’t even do as well as Huntsman. They soldier on because they have plenty of money.
March 16th is the deadline for rationality in the GOP. Four states – winner take all – Fl, MI, OH and MO, go on that date.
The states on Super Tuesday are proportional representation with thresholds of 15 or 20% (with some exceptions) – so you could lose those states and not be destroyed in the delegate race.
But if you lose all 4 on the 16th you are going to have a real problem stopping Trump or Cruz.
Number of votes don’t matter?
Obama total from Iowa and NH was 195 thousand. With 11% of precincts still to report, Sanders total is 223 thousand.
Sanders vote total is 140,234. The Democratic total is 233,889.
The Republican total was 269,645. If that doesn’t scare you, I don’t know what will.
For the record, the 2008 turnouts were 287,342 for the Democrats and 238,979 for the Republicans.
Is that number the number of registered Democrats voting or the number of people who voted in the Democratic primary?
Total voters in the primary. I don’t think the distinction is as important as others do, though.
Yes, let’s all clutch out pearls because
And a direct comparison between Sanders and Obama is impossible at this stage because Edwards was still pulling about 17% of the Democratic electorate, with Richardson pulling in another 5%.
Dammit, Santorum has pulled in front of Gilmore!
Funny. (more humor please)
And the contest heads to Nevada and South Carolina where Clinton has so far held big leads with the Latino and black voters who were mostly absent in Iowa and New Hampshire.
How do we know this is the case anymore? When were the most recent polls for either? Did you see Twitter tonight? Camp Clinton is already shitting their pants over Nevada, trying to tamp down expectations. Which means Sanders must be gaining there. Sanders will get a winners bounce. I’m curious to see how much.
But, to be frank with you, he’s still behind the eight ball. If you include the superdelegates, who can of course change their commitments at any time, Clinton is now ahead with a 394-42 delegate lead.
Can we stop with this? It doesn’t mean squat right now. Does anyone remember what it was in ’08? I bet Clinton held the lead then too, although maybe smaller. And we know how that turned out. Besides, if Sanders wins the most delegates from voting, it would be foolish to overturn the election.
In the scenario where Sanders wins a majority of the elected delegates but Clinton wins a majority of all the delegates, I can see three possible outcomes:
I can’t say I trust Clinton to concede or to give up her superdelegates, so I think she or Sanders better just win this thing outright.
Most of the super-delegates are politicians. Few will vote against the candidate who wins the most elected delegates – which is why so many are uncommitted.
This problem is over-rated.
I’m guessing most of them think voting for Sanders is inconceivable. đŸ™‚
Until they read the writing on the political wall.
Tell me how many super delegates in 2006 thought they would vote against the Clinton Machine for an African American candidate from Chicago, then tell me how many did when the writing appeared on the political wall in the spring and summer of ’08.
#1 splits the party so badly that those Millennials will never vote in the General.
#3 will never happen (maybe that’s why it’s not called #3) One positive thing that I will say for the Clintons is that they don’t quit. they are pit bulls.
So that leaves #2. Why is that a nightmare? Maybe it starts the process of eliminating the superdelegates which were created to prevent another McGovern.
Most likely is #1. If she has the elected delegates, OK. If she wins because of phony caucuses and superdelegates, that’s bad. If she wins ONLY because of superdelegates, it’s a nightmare. Still, after she then lose the general, it MAY start the process of having a truly democratic Democratic Party.
Why is #2 a nightmare? – just because if Hillary doesn’t concede and the superdelegates switch late, her supporters will perceive the nomination was stolen from her. Both camps feels strongly enough that the party will have trouble uniting for the general election unless the principals support that.
I think it is interesting that for all the talk about electability, only 12% of respondents in CNN:s exit poll (page 2) gives it as the answer to “top candidate quality”. It is trailing honest (34%), cares (26%) and experience (26%). Sanders voters listed overwhelmingly cares or honest while Clinton voters went for experience or electability.
Perhaps I am reading to much election geeks (not that there is anything wrong with that). Is there polling or research that supports the voters in the primaries holding electability as a highly sought criteria?
I strongly suspect electability is not a normally a major component of the primary vote decision. Primary voters tend to be committed voters (if not to the person then to the party). Electability means very little to someone who wants to make a statement. re: Get Clean for Gene, Good jobs at Good Wages, In Your heart you Know He’s right.
On this election, tho? With the Klown Kar we got running on the other side? Who knows?
Someone from the Klown Kar will be the next POTUS. Bet on it (tm Arthur Gilroy). People are fed up and scared. That’s always good for Republicans.
Except in 1932 ….
Or 2008, the general election was happening as the economy crashed.
Remember the meeting at the white house late Sept 2008 where John McCain “suspended” his campaign to go to a meeting about Henry Paulson’s TARP plan????
The two greatest economic calamities of the last 100 years … and both ended up with democratic control of the white house.
With Bernies message getting louder each day now that the corporate owned MSM cannot keep their black out of his campaign the old GOtPer fear and smear machine might not have the intended results.
In many ways this election is a pivotal election, with clear choices on both sides of the debate in both parties. T-rumps economic message feeds into Bernies, and I think might help him in the long run, because bernie has a plan where teh Donald has sound bites.
Here’s what I don’t like about the whole ‘2008, fresh off of the heels of an economic crash and disastrous W. Bush administration, represented a unique opportunity for the Democratic Party’ analysis:
Exit polls showed that 2012 Obama performed very similarly to 2008 Obama. With one cross-cutting exception (and it’s a huge one) the only demographic category — whether by age, race, class, region, whatever — he lost by more than 2% was Millenials. And it was a huge drop. He lost white Millenials by 11% and black male Millenials by 14%. Latino and Asian Millenials stayed about the same, but considering that their racial categories as a whole rose by a whopping 12%, they probably would’ve tanked too were it not for the GOP going stupid on immigration. Turnout for all of these groups ranged from dropping slightly (for Asian youth) to dropping massively (for black youth). That 60% of the white vote 2012 Romney crowed about would’ve never happened if white Millenials voted at 2008 preference and turnout rates, which would’ve instead been around 56-57%.
Given that Millenials was the only category 2012 Obama dropped appreciably in, the Democratic Party, Bernie Sanders or no should stop looking at 2008 like it was some unique opportunity and event and instead plan their strategy and messaging as if 2008 was the baseline. The Clinton campaign is doing everything they can to make things tilt more towards a 1996 electorate (an election with record-low youth turnout) so I have no confidence in them being able to complete this task.
fascinating, thanks
This is usually about 25%. The tendency is for it to be higher in races where the Party will be running against an incumbent in the Fall.
11% is low.
I predicted the top 3, I just had Trump severely underperforming the polls. He underperformed Iowa by 6, but I thought maybe he’d substantially underperform Iowa. I think partly it’s I didn’t want to believe it.
Had I utilized polls and believed them more, I’d have predicted Trump for 1st, Kasich 2nd, Cruz 3rd, Rubio 4th, Bush 5th. My actual predictions, however, I put Kasich 1st, Trump 2nd, Cruz 3rd, Rubio 4th, Bush 5th.
At dinner tonight, a friend of mine was like “Depending on the results tonight, the big money boys are going to be telling Bush to hang up his cleats and move the fuck out of the way.” Well, I didn’t agree with him simply because I figured Bush would perform well enough not to, and he still has cash on hand. Tonight vindicates that. Now it looks like all hell has broken lose.
Also, looks like Sanders has cleared 60%. Devastating. I figured he’d win by 12-15. 20%+? Thrashed.
substantially underperform NH*
You were and remain correct about Kasich (as was I). Hopefully he gets the second look he should from the Republican establishment (including their big money people like the Kochs, Adlesons, and Wall Street) now that he’s won New Hampshire. He’s duller than dirt, but otherwise respectable and there are a couple of items on his record that could have appeal to independents.
HRC campaign is already downplaying NV (where the Dem primary voters in 2008 by race looked like a pretty representative slice of general election America) and even the effect of Sanders winning 49% of nonwhites in NH.
Sanders crushed Trump, as he got 46,000 (138,979 Sanders, 92,819 Trump, 88,964 Clinton) more NH votes than did Mr. Trump. Hillary followed Trump by less than 4,000 votes. Bernie crushed them all!!!
According to Nate Cohn, Dem turnout as a whole in 2016 is unfortunately less than in 2008 for both IA and NH. Like 10-15% less.
Republican turnout is up, too (see above).
I don’t see much reason for optimism w/re to turnout.
“Clinton has so far held big leads with the Latino and black voters”
This shit drives me crazy. The polling on the Latino vote is VERY sparse. In the last PPP national poll Bernie’s number of Hispanics was virtually identical to his number among whites. In the Field Poll in California Bernie was over 30 among “Ethnics”.
But they are all people of color, so they are all the same?
If your going to make a general statement about the different groups in the party, it is too much to ask to people to CHECK if what they are saying is true.
Because honestly its a bit insulting to Hispanic voters.
Silly fladem, minority voters are not only easily manipulated but they’re uniform throughout the country. A California black votes the same as a New Hampshire black who both vote the same as a South Carolina black.
I’ve been asking since forever about AA support for Clinton, which she claims, but I find hard to believe; Bill’s performance in 08 alone, seems to me, would rule out Clinton support – but finally a couple days ago found this article by Shaun King
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/king-african-american-firewall-clinton-insulting-article-1.
2521962
Reading that article reminds me the corporate owned MSM is as much about projecting the approved propaganda as reporting the effects from that projection.
Real NEWS reporters who go out and research the facts on the ground need not apply, cause the beltway always has the answer if we would just close our minds and blindly follow then off the cliff ……
found this about SC –
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/2/11/1483310/–Not-Your-Firewall-Minority-Voters-Refuse-To-Be-T
oken-in-Clinton-Strategy-Map
“Sanders paying more than 100 black organizers to go door to door” and has an actual record to run on, not just propaganda and obfuscation
maybe the msm propaganda item “AA voters are Hillary’s firewall” proving unhelpful for her campaign
Yeah. Even if you think that is true, it seems pretty crass to be taking it for granted. And dangerous.
There is almost no difference in number of voters at this point. So that must have been an issue at 12 AM, but it isn’t a problem now.
I suggest that instead of dumping on Trump, and calling his supporters racists and stupid, that Democrats ask why he has such strong support. Now it is clear that at least SOME of his supporters will pull the lever for him. Continue to denigrate his supporters if you wish. I strongly suggest a more thoughtful analysis. There are a LOT of people who do not support the fiction that Americans support amnesty for criminals.
He has such strong support BECAUSE the people supporting him are lower educated, less introspective and inclined to blame their problems on anyone but someone who looks like them.
Amnesty for Criminals? Oh yeah, where have I heard THAT dogwhistle before?
Trump also led the NH primary among post-graduates (though Kasich was much closer) and he also does better with Republican moderates and conservatives.
The number one fiction of the non-GOP American centrist consensus rests on a composition and division fallacy. That because the GOP represents herrenvolk supremacy and conservatism, someone who supports the former must support the latter and vice-versa. This is how they get away with repeatedly sneering about how GOP voters, especially Trump voters, are unreconstructed bigots that are completely unreachable via any policy platform that doesn’t involve stabbing the Rainbow Coalition in the back.
There we go, yet another language comment. Use whatever language you want. Call it “stricter enforcement for undocumented aliens”.
There is a huge resentment in the working class about illegals. The skilled trades sector, where a lot of those WWC voter (and BWC voters) work, has been absolutely devastated by illegals. This was not the case 20 years ago. The loss of these jobs is not a fact of nature. And the Democratic Party notion that these are “jobs Americans won’t do” simply means that Democrats are fucking stupid. FUCKING STUPID.
The refusal to enforce visa rules about limits of time is another grating issue.
And the recent situation, where Obama is attempting to deport persons who lost in court after seeing an immigration judge merely convinces more and more voters that the Democratic Party is the party of illegals. That’s a loser position. Again, these asylum seekers lost in court. They are criminals.
“instead of dumping on Trump, and calling his supporters racists”
“Democrats ask why he has such strong support”
Are these mutually exclusive? I mean, democratic processes don’t always yield optimal results. A significant number of people are just plain mean. You don’t exactly need to be an expert on world history to figure that out, although there are plenty of examples to point to.
Republican turnout was higher than Democratic turnout again. This is alarming for a whole host of reasons.
Specifically what is that comment based on? Turnout is a percentile matter. What percentile D turned out? R?
The raw counts are very similar. R: 264K D: 232K. That’s not that different, considering the number of R voters. I don’t see those numbers being worth getting into a panic about.
Republican turnout was higher because the media has had a hot property in the RatPub debates/Trump in general whereas the Dem debates have been duller than rainwater. Hype brings out the people. This problem will continue for the Dems unless they manage to get Elizabeth Warren involved in the political process, because Trump will continue to be a hot ticket unless he is somehow stopped by a real scandal or massive slipup of some kind. Warren appears to me to be the only Dem who produces real, populist-style heat on the media. HRC comes off as hectoring or totally false and Sanders? I am glad that he is doing well but he is beginning to look very…tired…to me. I watched him come off the stage after his post-win speech last night, and as he came down the stairs and into the crowd, he visibly wilted. He diminished immediately, looking like he wanted to be anywhere other than surrounded by a crowd of well-wishers after a long, hard day in a long, hard campaign. The speech was moderately low-energy too, but that’s true of all of his public appearances. He is all information and ideas, no popular fire. Not enough, anyway. The anti-Trump.
I also watched Trump’s appearance last night. I watched him get more and more excited, watch the color run up his neck and into his face as he Trumpeted his infallibility. He’s a big, mean dick, surrounded by women who all look like blonde Kardashians. He is king of the American media-created celebrity culture now, and he is hot, hot hot!!! Only Warren among the Dems has that kind of fire, and fire is going to be needed to stop Trump.
“Fight fire with fire” say the forest rangers.
Here too, only neither of the two current Dem candidates has much fire. Neither does Bill Clinton, who looks suddenly old.
Once again:
Please!!!
AG
This comment is now a standalone post.
Why More RatPub than Dem voters in NH? Months of Media Heat. Duh!!!
Please comment on it there if you wish to do so.
AG
AlGiordano @AlGiordano
Why Democratic turnout is underperforming GOP turnout may be the most important question to answer today.
AlGiordano @AlGiordano
The roughly 250,000 voters in NH Democratic primary underperformed from the 280,000 in 2008 even with the influx of Ron Paul Independents.
AlGiordano @AlGiordano
GOP turnout in NH however increased from 2008’s 234,000 to about 290,000 even with the exodus of libertarians. Who are these new voters?
AlGiordano @AlGiordano
Lower turnout is even more of an alarm button for Democrats considering that we’re only talking about white voters so far in Iowa and NH.
AlGiordano @AlGiordano
The numbers show that even among white Democrats a significant part of “base” feels neither inspired by Sanders nor Clinton.
Maybe because they are repeatedly told that only Hillary can win.
Isn’t that largely a function of the Republicans being the non-incumbent party? I thought I read that the party that didn’t hold the White House always had more enthusiasm.
Benen’s morning comments about Thirsty Marco:
BWA HA HA A HA HA H HA HA HA HA HA HA
The best thing about 2016 is watching the centrists being forced to repeatedly eat humble pie as their most cherished myths (fundraising is everything, you can’t compete without a ground game, Trump is a joke, the establishment party machinery is all-powerful, endorsements as a gestalt mean a heckuva lot) get repeatedly demolished.
I predicted that Rubio would go down in flames — but the prediction rested on the assumption that the veneer of civility and moderation would come off. I didn’t expect him to go down thanks to his dorkiness and inexperience.
I can’t stand Teenbeat-On-The-Potomac…
but, this headline was too good to pass up:
GOP establishment stares into the abyss
After Trump’s big win and Rubio’s collapse, Republican Party elites suddenly find themselves without a horse to ride.
By Alex Isenstadt
02/10/16 05:13 AM EST
MANCHESTER N.H. – For the establishment wing of the Republican Party, the picture just keeps getting bleaker.
Far from winnowing the crowded field of mainstream GOP contenders and allowing it to unify around a standard-bearer, New Hampshire thrust it further into chaos. Marco Rubio, after taking steps last week to coalesce the backing of the party’s upper echelons, saw his momentum halted in the state, which punished him for delivering an overly scripted debate performance.
The establishment lane is now more crowded than ever, with Rubio, Jeb Bush, and New Hampshire runner-up John Kasich heading for a brutal fight in South Carolina – a state known for its rough-and-tumble political culture. Chris Christie, who was also competing for establishment support, is reassessing his campaign’s future.
All of this, many in the mainstream wing of the GOP worry, is excellent news for one man: Donald Trump.
Yes, they do have a horse to ride.
Bloomberg.
Watch.
The Republican…and the Democratic as well …so-called elites are not in the least bit committed to anything but continuing the Permanent Government’s hold on this country by any means necessary. Bloomberg is their hole card. One more slipup from HRC and he’s in like gangbusters.
Watch.
AG
Thanks for the link. That’s a thing of beauty.
You write:
Why do you wish that? Do you really hope that Clinton will win? Do you really think that she can beat Trump? I don’t. Sanders/Warren might have a shot. Clinton/Warren too, but I don’t see that happening. Not the way Warren has been acting. Clinton and some semi-nameless Dem functionary? Clinton and Biden? (The AARP ticket.) Nope.
Here’s what I wish. I wish she’d drop the fuck out and go back to a nice, cosseted retirement in Chappaqua with Bill. She’s earned it.
AG
Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote
From the crime bill to welfare reform, policies Bill Clinton enacted–and Hillary Clinton supported–decimated black America.
By Michelle AlexanderTODAY 6:00 AM
Hillary is looking to gain momentum on the campaign trail as the primaries move out of Iowa and New Hampshire and into states like South Carolina, where large pockets of black voters can be found. According to some polls, she leads Bernie Sanders by as much as 60 percent among African Americans. It seems that we–black people–are her winning card, one that Hillary is eager to play.
And it seems we’re eager to get played. Again.
“If you want to know why you read this blog, it’s because I told you forever ago that Kasich was going to be the guy, not Rubio, who would challenge Jeb Bush for Establishment support.”
That must be the reason; this is by far the very best Establishment political advice column ever. But wait, we’re not done yet because there seems to be another Establishment politician in trouble.
“I guess the Clintons will retool now. I hope they take some of my advice.” (Why Clinton Needs a Plan to Take Congress).
If she just did that, had a plan to take back congress, everything will be just fine so we can continue down our well worn no risk moderate Republican path to incremental change. Don’t you know all the votes are in the center, where they’ve always been?
The revolution won’t be televised (and the pundits won’t get it either). As I listened to Bernie’s rather long emotional victory speech one thing stood out for me as the most charged. That one thing was Bernie’s call for a political revolution where millions of people come together to fix our rigged economy and broken political system. Watching our millennials embrace these ideas gave me the same feeling I had when Nixon made his last disgraced helicopter exit from the White House, “Our democracy really does work.”
Let us pray that you are right.
AG