New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Why Bernie is kicking Hillary's butt

Max R.

On the road
Supporting Member
Although it appears the author of this article is attempting to give Hillary advice, I think it's too little, too late. However, it's a great synopsis of why Bernie is kicking Hillary's ass. In April Hillary was polling 54% to Bernie's 6%. Now it looks like a replay of 2008 where Hillary thought she had the crown but ends up in the audience on Inauguration Day.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/02/05/when-bernie-met-hillary-column/79849590/
Bernie is an impractical dreamer. Hillary has been bought by Wall Street. In a nutshell, that’s what each side says about the other as they campaign in New Hampshire, and those were the arguments they sharpened in their debate ahead of Tuesday’s primary.

The result is a foregone conclusion: Bernie Sanders will clobber Hillary Clinton. He’s had monster leads all week and was up by 31 points Thursday in a CNN/WMUR poll. Much of Sanders’ gargantuan margin comes from under-30 voters, who give him an8-to-1 advantage in a tracking survey conducted by the University of Massachusetts-Lowell and NBC’s Boston affiliate.

Yep, that big.

A wise political friend once said of a candidate, “He describes like a lion but prescribes like a lamb.” That’s Sanders. He has a great, gutsy critique of America, Wall Street, capitalism, and wealth inequity, but his remedies are missing. It all comes down to an undefined “revolution,” with thousands of people, as he put it Thursday night, standing outside Republican Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell’s window, demanding change. That’s simply naïve and only a campaign stuffed with idealistic young people would buy such a solution.

Nevertheless, Sanders speaks in simple, declarative sentences that assign blame, demand sweeping change, and pay no regard to practical or political reality. In the MSNBC debate Thursday night in Durham, his answer on a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees was direct: no one who supports the Citizens United campaign finance decision. Clinton’s answer was vague and did her no good. You could almost hear the gears in her head turning as she imagined what might happen to This One or That One whom she might nominate.

The problem for Clinton is that offering only what she thinks can pass an intractableRepublican Congress stifles her idealism and makes her seem timid, not moderate. This is how she lost to Barack Obama and why she finds herself trailing another bold idealist named Sanders. Gradualism isn't compelling at time of voter anger and fear. She’s so much better than Sanders on foreign and military policy, she needs to push for at least one more debate just on those topics.

When he wins New Hampshire big, Sanders will surely party like it’s 1999. But he shouldn’t. The state has a relatively paltry 32 Democratic convention delegates. And his momentum will likely come to a screeching halt 11 days later, when 59 delegates are at stake in South Carolina’s Feb. 20 primary. Then come the Feb. 27 Nevada caucuses, with their 43 delegates. Nevada's population is 27.5% Latino; its African-American population 9%. In South Carolina, African-Americans comprise 27.8% of the population and Latinos 5.4%. Both minority groups heavily favor Clinton; it’s one of the few times she benefits from her marriage to Bill.

It’s Super Tuesday on March 1 that will decide this campaign. Fourteen states will vote in what’s been dubbed the SEC Primary, for the many states in it that belong to the Southeastern Conference. The date is in fact dominated by seven southern states – Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia – with diverse electorates. But also voting that day on the Democratic side are Sanders’ home state of Vermont plus Colorado, Massachusetts and Minnesota – places where he may be able to get traction. On March 1 alone, more than 1,000 Democratic delegates will be at stake.

As the campaign moves to Southern and less liberal states, Sanders may find Clinton emphasizing the costs of his pipe dreams, as she did in the debate. The Wall Street Journal – not exactly the Bible for Democrats – pegged the cost of his programs at $10 trillion over 10 years. It goes for Medicare for all, free government-paid college, and massive infrastructure rebuilding. And his promise to raise taxes “a little” to pay for universal health insurance won’t be greeted warmly in the South and the Rockies, even among Democrats.

But Clinton can't just criticize Sanders. Long before Super Tuesday, she and her advisers need to rethink her pitch. The only time she sounds charged up is when she talks about health care for children, freedom of choice on abortion, civil and LGBT rights, and pay equity for women. More passion and vision would make her more compelling in future debates, in press interviews, and in daily campaigning. Otherwise, regardless of what happens in New Hampshire, the Clinton-Sanders duel will go on and on.
 

Lukey

Senator
So Bernie's harder angrier "hope and change" is still the non-solution that Obama's kinder gentler version was. They are both talking about a "fundamental transformation" which is a euphemism for Marxist anti-capitalism, and the fact that so many Americans are still anti-communist, so they have their work cut out for them and have to craft their Marxist policies in a way that it can be (falsely) claimed to be a "capitalist" approach (think Obamacare).

Bill Kristol this morning actually gave her some good advice - he said she should stop trying to out Marxist him and start embracing Bill's economic agenda, which actually worked pretty good. I doubt if she will do that but it's an excellent idea. Even more socialism as a response to failed socialist policies is like the Keynesians who always say more Keynesianism is the remedy for failed Keynesianism. At some point this simple logic will have to start looking good even to the most blind partisans.
 

Max R.

On the road
Supporting Member
So Bernie's harder angrier "hope and change" is still the non-solution that Obama's kinder gentler version was. They are both talking about a "fundamental transformation" which is a euphemism for Marxist anti-capitalism, and the fact that so many Americans are still anti-communist, so they have their work cut out for them and have to craft their Marxist policies in a way that it can be (falsely) claimed to be a "capitalist" approach (think Obamacare).

Bill Kristol this morning actually gave her some good advice - he said she should stop trying to out Marxist him and start embracing Bill's economic agenda, which actually worked pretty good. I doubt if she will do that but it's an excellent idea. Even more socialism as a response to failed socialist policies is like the Keynesians who always say more Keynesianism is the remedy for failed Keynesianism. At some point this simple logic will have to start looking good even to the most blind partisans.
I doubt he's a full blown Marxist/Socialist like some on this forum, but we can certainly agree he and other Socialist Democrats want to milk capitalism like a cow until it runs dry.
 

Lukey

Senator
I doubt he's a full blown Marxist/Socialist like some on this forum, but we can certainly agree he and other Socialist Democrats want to milk capitalism like a cow until it runs dry.
In for a penny in for a pound. As soon as you become anti-capitalist, and lets face it, when they constantly complain about "millionaires and billionaires" and criticize businesses that choose to leave the US and it's declining economic freedom, they are definitely operating in the anti-capitalist realm, you might as well be full on communists.
 

Max R.

On the road
Supporting Member
In for a penny in for a pound. As soon as you become anti-capitalist, and lets face it, when they constantly complain about "millionaires and billionaires" and criticize businesses that choose to leave the US and it's declining economic freedom, they are definitely operating in the anti-capitalist realm, you might as well be full on communists.
Despite the heated rhetoric and constant bashing of the wealthy....not to mention constantly offering to throw other people's money to the thriving masses, even Bernie recognizes that nationalizing industry and becoming completely socialist will only end up turning the US into the USSR.
 

Lukey

Senator
Despite the heated rhetoric and constant bashing of the wealthy....not to mention constantly offering to throw other people's money to the thriving masses, even Bernie recognizes that nationalizing industry and becoming completely socialist will only end up turning the US into the USSR.
Yeah, but the effect is the same as the economy slows to a crawl under all the government and redistribution.
 

worldlymrb

Revenge
Bill Kristol this morning actually gave her some good advice - he said she should stop trying to out Marxist him and start embracing Bill's economic agenda, which actually worked pretty good. I doubt if she will do that but it's an excellent idea. Even more socialism as a response to failed socialist policies is like the Keynesians who always say more Keynesianism is the remedy for failed Keynesianism. At some point this simple logic will have to start looking good even to the most blind partisans.
Hillary going to announce "the era of big govt is over" like how Bill Clinton kicked off his 1996 re-election?

 
Last edited:
Although it appears the author of this article is attempting to give Hillary advice, I think it's too little, too late. However, it's a great synopsis of why Bernie is kicking Hillary's ass. In April Hillary was polling 54% to Bernie's 6%. Now it looks like a replay of 2008 where Hillary thought she had the crown but ends up in the audience on Inauguration Day.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/02/05/when-bernie-met-hillary-column/79849590/
Bernie is an impractical dreamer. Hillary has been bought by Wall Street. In a nutshell, that’s what each side says about the other as they campaign in New Hampshire, and those were the arguments they sharpened in their debate ahead of Tuesday’s primary.

The result is a foregone conclusion: Bernie Sanders will clobber Hillary Clinton. He’s had monster leads all week and was up by 31 points Thursday in a CNN/WMUR poll. Much of Sanders’ gargantuan margin comes from under-30 voters, who give him an8-to-1 advantage in a tracking survey conducted by the University of Massachusetts-Lowell and NBC’s Boston affiliate.

Yep, that big.

A wise political friend once said of a candidate, “He describes like a lion but prescribes like a lamb.” That’s Sanders. He has a great, gutsy critique of America, Wall Street, capitalism, and wealth inequity, but his remedies are missing. It all comes down to an undefined “revolution,” with thousands of people, as he put it Thursday night, standing outside Republican Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell’s window, demanding change. That’s simply naïve and only a campaign stuffed with idealistic young people would buy such a solution.

Nevertheless, Sanders speaks in simple, declarative sentences that assign blame, demand sweeping change, and pay no regard to practical or political reality. In the MSNBC debate Thursday night in Durham, his answer on a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees was direct: no one who supports the Citizens United campaign finance decision. Clinton’s answer was vague and did her no good. You could almost hear the gears in her head turning as she imagined what might happen to This One or That One whom she might nominate.

The problem for Clinton is that offering only what she thinks can pass an intractableRepublican Congress stifles her idealism and makes her seem timid, not moderate. This is how she lost to Barack Obama and why she finds herself trailing another bold idealist named Sanders. Gradualism isn't compelling at time of voter anger and fear. She’s so much better than Sanders on foreign and military policy, she needs to push for at least one more debate just on those topics.

When he wins New Hampshire big, Sanders will surely party like it’s 1999. But he shouldn’t. The state has a relatively paltry 32 Democratic convention delegates. And his momentum will likely come to a screeching halt 11 days later, when 59 delegates are at stake in South Carolina’s Feb. 20 primary. Then come the Feb. 27 Nevada caucuses, with their 43 delegates. Nevada's population is 27.5% Latino; its African-American population 9%. In South Carolina, African-Americans comprise 27.8% of the population and Latinos 5.4%. Both minority groups heavily favor Clinton; it’s one of the few times she benefits from her marriage to Bill.

It’s Super Tuesday on March 1 that will decide this campaign. Fourteen states will vote in what’s been dubbed the SEC Primary, for the many states in it that belong to the Southeastern Conference. The date is in fact dominated by seven southern states – Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia – with diverse electorates. But also voting that day on the Democratic side are Sanders’ home state of Vermont plus Colorado, Massachusetts and Minnesota – places where he may be able to get traction. On March 1 alone, more than 1,000 Democratic delegates will be at stake.

As the campaign moves to Southern and less liberal states, Sanders may find Clinton emphasizing the costs of his pipe dreams, as she did in the debate. The Wall Street Journal – not exactly the Bible for Democrats – pegged the cost of his programs at $10 trillion over 10 years. It goes for Medicare for all, free government-paid college, and massive infrastructure rebuilding. And his promise to raise taxes “a little” to pay for universal health insurance won’t be greeted warmly in the South and the Rockies, even among Democrats.

But Clinton can't just criticize Sanders. Long before Super Tuesday, she and her advisers need to rethink her pitch. The only time she sounds charged up is when she talks about health care for children, freedom of choice on abortion, civil and LGBT rights, and pay equity for women. More passion and vision would make her more compelling in future debates, in press interviews, and in daily campaigning. Otherwise, regardless of what happens in New Hampshire, the Clinton-Sanders duel will go on and on.
Before reading the article. I'd say Bernie is doing well against Hillary 25% because of who and what Hillary is (i.e. millions of dollars in speaking fee from banksters and other fraudsters) while the remaining 75% of the reason is because we have an enormous number of citizens who are strong socialist to full blown communist.

We no longer have a population worthy of the appellation of American.
 

Max R.

On the road
Supporting Member
Before reading the article. I'd say.......
LOL

....We no longer have a population worthy of the appellation of American.
So what is your plan? Kill the unworthy? Declare war on the United States? Leave the country for an über-religious, über-conservative nation like Saudia Arabia or Iran? Oh, wait, they're the "wrong" religion. How about Chile or American Samoa? Both are very conservative Christian nations. Buy or invade a small country? I hear the island nation of Kiribati is for sell.....cheap too! ;)

Another alternative is to form an enclave and hide in a compound until the Feds charge the top male leaders with statutory rape.

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2012/11/warren-jeffs-rape-bed-polygamist-abused-children/
Just when you think that the dark world of cult leader Warren Jeffs couldn’t get any sicker, graphic images have emerged of the bed that he had personally made for the purpose of sexually assaulting a multitude of underage girls.

Made of sturdy hardwood so it wouldn’t rattle and covered with a plastic sheet to “protect the mattress from what will happen on it,” the place of rest turned into a method of torture for the children of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in the desert town of Colorado City on the border between Arizona and Utah
.....




https://baptiststoday.org/americas-christian-conservatives-ponder-a-babylonian-exile/
......Rod Dreher at The American Conservative argued that his own Eastern Orthodox tradition was best suited to survive the “internal exile.” That, in turn, prompted a post by Baylor University humanities professor (and Anglican) Alan Jacobs, who also dinged Trueman for encouraging sectarian “braggadocio.” Jacobs and New York Times columnist Ross Douthat (a convert to Catholicism) then went back and forth on Twitter, and so it continued.

Leaving aside the confessional competition, the very premise of the exile narrative might be surprising to those who see Christian conservatives as driving, not leaving, the nation’s political dynamics.

For liberals, the religious right is pushing the U.S. back to a cultural and religious Dark Age. For conservatives, on the other hand, the religious right holds the promise of restoring American society to a Golden Age that has been tarnished by years of mainly Democratic malfeasance.

But there is another strain of culturally conservative Christianity that views the political path to renewal as putting, as the psalm says, too much trust in princes. In fact, Christians in that tradition see (and many political scientists agree) that the electoral and cultural trends on issues like gay marriage are moving inexorably against their values. And they don’t put much faith in the Republican Party to save them.

Hence the comparisons of American Christians today to ancient Israelites who were sent into exile in the sixth century B.C. by the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar, after his armies sacked Jerusalem. “By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion,” the psalmist records.

In the U.S., there is some precedent for this sort of withdrawal: after the famous 1925 Scopes “Monkey Trial” in Tennessee, when creationists won a court case but lost the larger argument, fundamentalist Christians were so aggrieved by the backlash against them that they retreated into their own Bible Belt enclaves for decades.....
 

Jen

Senator
Although it appears the author of this article is attempting to give Hillary advice, I think it's too little, too late. However, it's a great synopsis of why Bernie is kicking Hillary's ass. In April Hillary was polling 54% to Bernie's 6%. Now it looks like a replay of 2008 where Hillary thought she had the crown but ends up in the audience on Inauguration Day.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/02/05/when-bernie-met-hillary-column/79849590/
Bernie is an impractical dreamer. Hillary has been bought by Wall Street. In a nutshell, that’s what each side says about the other as they campaign in New Hampshire, and those were the arguments they sharpened in their debate ahead of Tuesday’s primary.

The result is a foregone conclusion: Bernie Sanders will clobber Hillary Clinton. He’s had monster leads all week and was up by 31 points Thursday in a CNN/WMUR poll. Much of Sanders’ gargantuan margin comes from under-30 voters, who give him an8-to-1 advantage in a tracking survey conducted by the University of Massachusetts-Lowell and NBC’s Boston affiliate.

Yep, that big.

A wise political friend once said of a candidate, “He describes like a lion but prescribes like a lamb.” That’s Sanders. He has a great, gutsy critique of America, Wall Street, capitalism, and wealth inequity, but his remedies are missing. It all comes down to an undefined “revolution,” with thousands of people, as he put it Thursday night, standing outside Republican Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell’s window, demanding change. That’s simply naïve and only a campaign stuffed with idealistic young people would buy such a solution.

Nevertheless, Sanders speaks in simple, declarative sentences that assign blame, demand sweeping change, and pay no regard to practical or political reality. In the MSNBC debate Thursday night in Durham, his answer on a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees was direct: no one who supports the Citizens United campaign finance decision. Clinton’s answer was vague and did her no good. You could almost hear the gears in her head turning as she imagined what might happen to This One or That One whom she might nominate.

The problem for Clinton is that offering only what she thinks can pass an intractableRepublican Congress stifles her idealism and makes her seem timid, not moderate. This is how she lost to Barack Obama and why she finds herself trailing another bold idealist named Sanders. Gradualism isn't compelling at time of voter anger and fear. She’s so much better than Sanders on foreign and military policy, she needs to push for at least one more debate just on those topics.

When he wins New Hampshire big, Sanders will surely party like it’s 1999. But he shouldn’t. The state has a relatively paltry 32 Democratic convention delegates. And his momentum will likely come to a screeching halt 11 days later, when 59 delegates are at stake in South Carolina’s Feb. 20 primary. Then come the Feb. 27 Nevada caucuses, with their 43 delegates. Nevada's population is 27.5% Latino; its African-American population 9%. In South Carolina, African-Americans comprise 27.8% of the population and Latinos 5.4%. Both minority groups heavily favor Clinton; it’s one of the few times she benefits from her marriage to Bill.

It’s Super Tuesday on March 1 that will decide this campaign. Fourteen states will vote in what’s been dubbed the SEC Primary, for the many states in it that belong to the Southeastern Conference. The date is in fact dominated by seven southern states – Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia – with diverse electorates. But also voting that day on the Democratic side are Sanders’ home state of Vermont plus Colorado, Massachusetts and Minnesota – places where he may be able to get traction. On March 1 alone, more than 1,000 Democratic delegates will be at stake.

As the campaign moves to Southern and less liberal states, Sanders may find Clinton emphasizing the costs of his pipe dreams, as she did in the debate. The Wall Street Journal – not exactly the Bible for Democrats – pegged the cost of his programs at $10 trillion over 10 years. It goes for Medicare for all, free government-paid college, and massive infrastructure rebuilding. And his promise to raise taxes “a little” to pay for universal health insurance won’t be greeted warmly in the South and the Rockies, even among Democrats.

But Clinton can't just criticize Sanders. Long before Super Tuesday, she and her advisers need to rethink her pitch. The only time she sounds charged up is when she talks about health care for children, freedom of choice on abortion, civil and LGBT rights, and pay equity for women. More passion and vision would make her more compelling in future debates, in press interviews, and in daily campaigning. Otherwise, regardless of what happens in New Hampshire, the Clinton-Sanders duel will go on and on.
It gives some Democrats an itchy feeling to know that if things are allowed to go forward naturally that their party will be outed as the Democrat Socialist Party forevermore. Hillary sucks as a candidate and will be even more sucky as a president. But it's her turn and nobody wants to be around for the nasty hissy fit that will ensue if they ask her to bow out.
 

Max R.

On the road
Supporting Member
It gives some Democrats an itchy feeling to know that if things are allowed to go forward naturally that their party will be outed as the Democrat Socialist Party forevermore. Hillary sucks as a candidate and will be even more sucky as a president. But it's her turn and nobody wants to be around for the nasty hissy fit that will ensue if they ask her to bow out.
They may not have a choice just as the RNC is quickly losing their first choice of Jeb!
 
Why Bernie will send the Clintons back to Walmartland:
"The headline on the website Pravda trumpeted President Vladimir V. Putin’s latest coup, its nationalistic fervor recalling an era when its precursor served as the official mouthpiece of the Kremlin: Russian Nuclear Energy Conquers the World.'

"The article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.

"But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.

Continue reading the main story
  • Public Editor's Journal: An ‘Exclusive’ Arrangement on a Clinton Book, and Many QuestionsAPRIL 23, 2015
"At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One."

Clinton crime family.
The US would be better off without a Chief Executive over the next 8 years than with a rich Bitch like Hillary.
 
The RNC lost their shot at Jeb long ago and they knew it then. They have moved on to Rubio.
Where does the RNC go next if Rubio's smeared into oblivion?
http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/marco-rubios-childhood-friend-tied-to-miamis-most-infamous-gay-porn-case-8203133


"Barrios and Rubio were born a year apart, in 1970 and '71, respectively, and grew up in West Miami, a blue-collar town of 5,000 just north of more affluent Coral Gables. By summer 1990, an 18-year-old Rubio returned home after washing out of low-level college football.

"He had played one season at Tarkio College in Missouri before injuries and bad grades forced him to rethink his plans.

"He spent that summer working as a courier for Brickell legal firms, earning extra cash by driving documents around in a 1983 Pontiac Firebird his dad had bought him. In the fall, he planned to head to a junior college in Gainesville.

On May 23, 1990, Rubio and Barrios were with another friend, 18-year-old Derek Preston Wilson, after dark at Alice C. Wainwright Park, a leafy Brickell public space then infamous as a late-night trouble spot. ('People went out there to smoke illegal substances, have sex, drink,' a police spokesman told the Post in its story published last Friday.) At 9:37 p.m., the three teens were booked."
 

justoffal

Senator
Although it appears the author of this article is attempting to give Hillary advice, I think it's too little, too late. However, it's a great synopsis of why Bernie is kicking Hillary's ass. In April Hillary was polling 54% to Bernie's 6%. Now it looks like a replay of 2008 where Hillary thought she had the crown but ends up in the audience on Inauguration Day.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/02/05/when-bernie-met-hillary-column/79849590/
Bernie is an impractical dreamer. Hillary has been bought by Wall Street. In a nutshell, that’s what each side says about the other as they campaign in New Hampshire, and those were the arguments they sharpened in their debate ahead of Tuesday’s primary.

The result is a foregone conclusion: Bernie Sanders will clobber Hillary Clinton. He’s had monster leads all week and was up by 31 points Thursday in a CNN/WMUR poll. Much of Sanders’ gargantuan margin comes from under-30 voters, who give him an8-to-1 advantage in a tracking survey conducted by the University of Massachusetts-Lowell and NBC’s Boston affiliate.

Yep, that big.

A wise political friend once said of a candidate, “He describes like a lion but prescribes like a lamb.” That’s Sanders. He has a great, gutsy critique of America, Wall Street, capitalism, and wealth inequity, but his remedies are missing. It all comes down to an undefined “revolution,” with thousands of people, as he put it Thursday night, standing outside Republican Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell’s window, demanding change. That’s simply naïve and only a campaign stuffed with idealistic young people would buy such a solution.

Nevertheless, Sanders speaks in simple, declarative sentences that assign blame, demand sweeping change, and pay no regard to practical or political reality. In the MSNBC debate Thursday night in Durham, his answer on a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees was direct: no one who supports the Citizens United campaign finance decision. Clinton’s answer was vague and did her no good. You could almost hear the gears in her head turning as she imagined what might happen to This One or That One whom she might nominate.

The problem for Clinton is that offering only what she thinks can pass an intractableRepublican Congress stifles her idealism and makes her seem timid, not moderate. This is how she lost to Barack Obama and why she finds herself trailing another bold idealist named Sanders. Gradualism isn't compelling at time of voter anger and fear. She’s so much better than Sanders on foreign and military policy, she needs to push for at least one more debate just on those topics.

When he wins New Hampshire big, Sanders will surely party like it’s 1999. But he shouldn’t. The state has a relatively paltry 32 Democratic convention delegates. And his momentum will likely come to a screeching halt 11 days later, when 59 delegates are at stake in South Carolina’s Feb. 20 primary. Then come the Feb. 27 Nevada caucuses, with their 43 delegates. Nevada's population is 27.5% Latino; its African-American population 9%. In South Carolina, African-Americans comprise 27.8% of the population and Latinos 5.4%. Both minority groups heavily favor Clinton; it’s one of the few times she benefits from her marriage to Bill.

It’s Super Tuesday on March 1 that will decide this campaign. Fourteen states will vote in what’s been dubbed the SEC Primary, for the many states in it that belong to the Southeastern Conference. The date is in fact dominated by seven southern states – Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia – with diverse electorates. But also voting that day on the Democratic side are Sanders’ home state of Vermont plus Colorado, Massachusetts and Minnesota – places where he may be able to get traction. On March 1 alone, more than 1,000 Democratic delegates will be at stake.

As the campaign moves to Southern and less liberal states, Sanders may find Clinton emphasizing the costs of his pipe dreams, as she did in the debate. The Wall Street Journal – not exactly the Bible for Democrats – pegged the cost of his programs at $10 trillion over 10 years. It goes for Medicare for all, free government-paid college, and massive infrastructure rebuilding. And his promise to raise taxes “a little” to pay for universal health insurance won’t be greeted warmly in the South and the Rockies, even among Democrats.

But Clinton can't just criticize Sanders. Long before Super Tuesday, she and her advisers need to rethink her pitch. The only time she sounds charged up is when she talks about health care for children, freedom of choice on abortion, civil and LGBT rights, and pay equity for women. More passion and vision would make her more compelling in future debates, in press interviews, and in daily campaigning. Otherwise, regardless of what happens in New Hampshire, the Clinton-Sanders duel will go on and on.
People from New Hampshire are a bit different....

The reason why Sanders is so popular there is because NiHi'ites thrive on bucking the system...they always have. It is a culture with them. If Hillary represented the outsider ticket ...she would be likewise popular with them.

Sanders should enjoy his week....because I'm pretty sure this contest is going to be 48-2 to Cliinton.

We shall see...of course I could be wrong and this could be a replay of 08....but I seriously doubt it.

JO
 
If the RNC is smart they will back Trump.
Do you think Trump is serious when he says things like this?
"During a weekend rally in New Hampshire, according to a report from the Washington Examiner’s Byron York, Trump broke from typical GOP rhetoric even more than usual.

"Instead of railing against high taxes or big government, Trump, York says, was 'in full populist mode,' railing against big pharma, big insurance, big oil and big defense.

"At times, York reports, Trump even went so far that he 'sounded like Bernie Sanders, if Sanders had Trump’s sense of showmanship.'

"But what York quotes Trump saying about the big donors who support his opponents is far more incendiary than anything Sanders himself has uttered.

"These corporate fat cats, Trump raged, were “bloodsuckers.”

http://www.salon.com/2016/02/08/the_real_threat_to_wall_street_is_not_bernie_sanders_its_donald_trump/

“'Bloodsucker' is not a word you hear often in U.S. politics; and for good reason. It’s not because the word is so brutish and Americans are otherwise so cuddly; it’s because “bloodsucker” — like “cockroach,” “vermin,” “parasite,” or “disease” — is considered too dehumanizing and eliminationist. It’s how Nazis and Stalinists speak..."
 

justoffal

Senator
Where does the RNC go next if Rubio's smeared into oblivion?
http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/marco-rubios-childhood-friend-tied-to-miamis-most-infamous-gay-porn-case-8203133


"Barrios and Rubio were born a year apart, in 1970 and '71, respectively, and grew up in West Miami, a blue-collar town of 5,000 just north of more affluent Coral Gables. By summer 1990, an 18-year-old Rubio returned home after washing out of low-level college football.

"He had played one season at Tarkio College in Missouri before injuries and bad grades forced him to rethink his plans.

"He spent that summer working as a courier for Brickell legal firms, earning extra cash by driving documents around in a 1983 Pontiac Firebird his dad had bought him. In the fall, he planned to head to a junior college in Gainesville.

On May 23, 1990, Rubio and Barrios were with another friend, 18-year-old Derek Preston Wilson, after dark at Alice C. Wainwright Park, a leafy Brickell public space then infamous as a late-night trouble spot. ('People went out there to smoke illegal substances, have sex, drink,' a police spokesman told the Post in its story published last Friday.) At 9:37 p.m., the three teens were booked."
Clinton would run over Rubio in any contest....he's too green to face her.

Trump is about the only hope the GOP has of taking the Nationals...
Even then with California and New York already in the Bag for the Democratic candidate I don't see how anyone can beat the Dems.... 84 to zip is a very bad starting point for the losing side.

JO
 

Drumcollie

* See DC's list of Kook posters*
Although it appears the author of this article is attempting to give Hillary advice, I think it's too little, too late. However, it's a great synopsis of why Bernie is kicking Hillary's ass. In April Hillary was polling 54% to Bernie's 6%. Now it looks like a replay of 2008 where Hillary thought she had the crown but ends up in the audience on Inauguration Day.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/02/05/when-bernie-met-hillary-column/79849590/
Bernie is an impractical dreamer. Hillary has been bought by Wall Street. In a nutshell, that’s what each side says about the other as they campaign in New Hampshire, and those were the arguments they sharpened in their debate ahead of Tuesday’s primary.

The result is a foregone conclusion: Bernie Sanders will clobber Hillary Clinton. He’s had monster leads all week and was up by 31 points Thursday in a CNN/WMUR poll. Much of Sanders’ gargantuan margin comes from under-30 voters, who give him an8-to-1 advantage in a tracking survey conducted by the University of Massachusetts-Lowell and NBC’s Boston affiliate.

Yep, that big.

A wise political friend once said of a candidate, “He describes like a lion but prescribes like a lamb.” That’s Sanders. He has a great, gutsy critique of America, Wall Street, capitalism, and wealth inequity, but his remedies are missing. It all comes down to an undefined “revolution,” with thousands of people, as he put it Thursday night, standing outside Republican Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell’s window, demanding change. That’s simply naïve and only a campaign stuffed with idealistic young people would buy such a solution.

Nevertheless, Sanders speaks in simple, declarative sentences that assign blame, demand sweeping change, and pay no regard to practical or political reality. In the MSNBC debate Thursday night in Durham, his answer on a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees was direct: no one who supports the Citizens United campaign finance decision. Clinton’s answer was vague and did her no good. You could almost hear the gears in her head turning as she imagined what might happen to This One or That One whom she might nominate.

The problem for Clinton is that offering only what she thinks can pass an intractableRepublican Congress stifles her idealism and makes her seem timid, not moderate. This is how she lost to Barack Obama and why she finds herself trailing another bold idealist named Sanders. Gradualism isn't compelling at time of voter anger and fear. She’s so much better than Sanders on foreign and military policy, she needs to push for at least one more debate just on those topics.

When he wins New Hampshire big, Sanders will surely party like it’s 1999. But he shouldn’t. The state has a relatively paltry 32 Democratic convention delegates. And his momentum will likely come to a screeching halt 11 days later, when 59 delegates are at stake in South Carolina’s Feb. 20 primary. Then come the Feb. 27 Nevada caucuses, with their 43 delegates. Nevada's population is 27.5% Latino; its African-American population 9%. In South Carolina, African-Americans comprise 27.8% of the population and Latinos 5.4%. Both minority groups heavily favor Clinton; it’s one of the few times she benefits from her marriage to Bill.

It’s Super Tuesday on March 1 that will decide this campaign. Fourteen states will vote in what’s been dubbed the SEC Primary, for the many states in it that belong to the Southeastern Conference. The date is in fact dominated by seven southern states – Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia – with diverse electorates. But also voting that day on the Democratic side are Sanders’ home state of Vermont plus Colorado, Massachusetts and Minnesota – places where he may be able to get traction. On March 1 alone, more than 1,000 Democratic delegates will be at stake.

As the campaign moves to Southern and less liberal states, Sanders may find Clinton emphasizing the costs of his pipe dreams, as she did in the debate. The Wall Street Journal – not exactly the Bible for Democrats – pegged the cost of his programs at $10 trillion over 10 years. It goes for Medicare for all, free government-paid college, and massive infrastructure rebuilding. And his promise to raise taxes “a little” to pay for universal health insurance won’t be greeted warmly in the South and the Rockies, even among Democrats.

But Clinton can't just criticize Sanders. Long before Super Tuesday, she and her advisers need to rethink her pitch. The only time she sounds charged up is when she talks about health care for children, freedom of choice on abortion, civil and LGBT rights, and pay equity for women. More passion and vision would make her more compelling in future debates, in press interviews, and in daily campaigning. Otherwise, regardless of what happens in New Hampshire, the Clinton-Sanders duel will go on and on.
Because old white Democrats people vote for males.
 

Jen

Senator
Do you think Trump is serious when he says things like this?
"During a weekend rally in New Hampshire, according to a report from the Washington Examiner’s Byron York, Trump broke from typical GOP rhetoric even more than usual.

"Instead of railing against high taxes or big government, Trump, York says, was 'in full populist mode,' railing against big pharma, big insurance, big oil and big defense.

"At times, York reports, Trump even went so far that he 'sounded like Bernie Sanders, if Sanders had Trump’s sense of showmanship.'

"But what York quotes Trump saying about the big donors who support his opponents is far more incendiary than anything Sanders himself has uttered.

"These corporate fat cats, Trump raged, were “bloodsuckers.”

http://www.salon.com/2016/02/08/the_real_threat_to_wall_street_is_not_bernie_sanders_its_donald_trump/

“'Bloodsucker' is not a word you hear often in U.S. politics; and for good reason. It’s not because the word is so brutish and Americans are otherwise so cuddly; it’s because “bloodsucker” — like “cockroach,” “vermin,” “parasite,” or “disease” — is considered too dehumanizing and eliminationist. It’s how Nazis and Stalinists speak..."
You have the right to your analysis and opinion. I have the right to mine. Obviously you and I don't agree.
 
Top