Dear God, Hillary Clinton. Please, Just Go.

[Terry]

Part of where the Democrats are failing and where it matters are the same "fly-over" states blamed for getting Trump elected, that hold a lot of rank & file Democrats, but they are written off and assumed not numerous enough when compared to the packed population centers on the coasts. Several of my Democrat friends are completely repulsed by the likes of Pelosi, Schumer, Gillibrand and Booker...

Minorities are also shifting away from the Democratic strongholds as well... too many times they have been portrayed as the "cause" Democrats are fighting for only to be ignored and left empty-handed once election day passes. Trump's "what have you got to lose..?" campaign approach is paying off in the jobs and economy 10 fold. What do Democrats offer... roll back the Trumps taxes and reinstate the job killing regulatory measures... who's gonna seriously buy into that crap..?

Polling used to be fairly decent in predictive measures when it was land-line based and certain geographic centers were reliable predictive elements. Now with land-line usage dropping drastically and massive population shifts, the only place to go is the internet. This weighs poorly due to trolling and social media flies that flock to the smelliest pile shit presented to them... Flies don't show up on voting day...

The Democratic Party grand strategy seems to be the rationale that eventually non-whites will outnumber whites, thus in the long run ensuring perpetual victory for the party when that demographic shift comes to fruition.

This assumes that non-whites are bloc voting groups that by default will be Democrats. That such factions as the Latino vote are monolithic. Or that the Women's Vote would by default ensure a female candidate would prevail in a Presidential election.

It is a mistaken long range strategy to pursue. In part because such factions aren't necessarily monolithic. Also in part because the Democratic Party has either acquiesced nearly every step of the way in terms of tax cuts for those who didn't need them, or been powerless to prevent those cuts (both of which amount to the same thing in terms of the net result). Working class people know this by the very lives they lead and the experiences they have had. They have gained this knowledge in the most direct and practical way imaginable, and they rightfully disregard nuanced arguments to the contrary offered in publications such as The New Yorker as the bullshit that they are.

Sadly, in terms of social media trolling, the Democratic Party is trying to grease all the squeaky wheels instead of laying out what they stand for economically. The Democratic Party now is far more concerned with appearing to be on the right side of social issues than actually winning elections.

I have as yet to hear any sort of Moon Shot jobs plan from either party. Or any bold measures which address the rapidly aging Baby Boomer population and what is going to happen to these people (and there are a fucking LOT of them) when their retirement money runs out. Or why we need to keep putting trillions into upgrading nuclear arsenals everyone agrees should never be used.

One thing I thought MIGHT happen under Trump is a Grand Plan along those lines. If only because he wasn't a typical politician, and the manner he won meant he wasn't beholden to either of the parties. He seemed just crazy enough to actually attempt to institute a Trillion Dollar Infrastructure plan. Could have provided a lot of jobs fixing things that need to be fixed. Nope.

[Nickdfresh]

The Democratic Party grand strategy seems to be the rationale that eventually non-whites will outnumber whites, thus in the long run ensuring perpetual victory for the party when that demographic shift comes to fruition.

This assumes that non-whites are bloc voting groups that by default will be Democrats. That such factions as the Latino vote are monolithic. Or that the Women's Vote would by default ensure a female candidate would prevail in a Presidential election.....

It may seem that way with a often inept leadership in the party, but they are making inroads with the educated white suburban voters that used to often default to the GOP. This shift is becoming more pronounced in places like Virginia, where counties are flipping Blue with middle and upper class whites moving in, and it's frustrating the blatantly obvious white gerrymandering that is the main reason the Republicans are competitive at all nationally (along with the Electoral College). The Republicans are by no means the universal party of white people since they only really seem to represent the interests of about the top 10% of (mostly) whites..

I mean, why in the world are any white women not fat and ugly and over 50 (not named Rosanne) be voting Republican anymore other than if they're wealthy? The message they must get is, "we're gonna grab your pussy and you gonna' get raped! But you have to keep the baby! Boys rule girls drool!" I think the GOP becoming a minority party is fairly inevitable, and a lot of it has to do with their "RHINO"nonsense that began in the 1980's seemingly, where the party turned into a Stalinist-like-ideological-purity-fuckfest that has alienated a lot of socially liberal yet inherently fiscally conservative people....

[Nickdfresh]

...

I'm also very skeptical with putting much faith in polling results after a lot of the 2016 polling was dead wrong. Technology has fragmented traditional polling to the point where it's no longer a viable gauge of results.

...

But it wasn't "dead wrong". That's sort of a self-serving revisionist myth. Several did predict Trump would win and the Comey (we're reopening the Clinton email investigation) last minute October surprise turned things on their head. The polls had the race fairly tight, but most seemed to default to Clinton, but you can't say things were completely wrong by any means. And really, the polls only were really off in a few key areas such as in Michigan. Clinton still won the popular vote with a substantial margin. And polls also have to contend with the "asshole money" that we call the Electoral College which makes things complicated and ridiculous, frankly...

[Nitro Express]

Part of where the Democrats are failing and where it matters are the same "fly-over" states blamed for getting Trump elected, that hold a lot of rank & file Democrats, but they are written off and assumed not numerous enough when compared to the packed population centers on the coasts. Several of my Democrat friends are completely repulsed by the likes of Pelosi, Schumer, Gillibrand and Booker...

Minorities are also shifting away from the Democratic strongholds as well... too many times they have been portrayed as the "cause" Democrats are fighting for only to be ignored and left empty-handed once election day passes. Trump's "what have you got to lose..?" campaign approach is paying off in the jobs and economy 10 fold. What do Democrats offer... roll back the Trumps taxes and reinstate the job killing regulatory measures... who's gonna seriously buy into that crap..?

Polling used to be fairly decent in predictive measures when it was land-line based and certain geographic centers were reliable predictive elements. Now with land-line usage dropping drastically and massive population shifts, the only place to go is the internet. This weighs poorly due to trolling and social media flies that flock to the smelliest pile shit presented to them... Flies don't show up on voting day...

It was hard enough in the days of landlines and face to face interviews to get good sampling. Who you survey, where you survey, who asks the questions, what questions are asked, how many questions are asked and a lot more variables affect the accuracy of the sample Add in all the online junk like you mentioned and that makes it even harder.

Good points on the Democrat Party. It can be summed up they have moved too far left for the working class to support them. It used to be the working class thought the Democrats had their back but now they no longer think that way. Also there is no real serious leadership in the party and there needs to be a long-term plan. Hating Trump is not a plan.

[Nitro Express]

That's a key point on the Pelosi/Schumer angle. They are not helping unify the party any more than Clinton/Obama adding a hand are bringing a center of control into clearer view. It's all muddying the murky water and making it worse.

I'm also very skeptical with putting much faith in polling results after a lot of the 2016 polling was dead wrong. Technology has fragmented traditional polling to the point where it's no longer a viable gauge of results.

In addition, gauging any candidate's ability to win votes based on money raised is no longer a meaningful measurement by a long shot. Trump's campaign proved that miserably. I'd love to see an actual statistic of how much money was just outright thrown down the drain and utterly wasted on all the losing campaigns from 2016... I suspect it's well up over a billion... I think it would be a real eye opener, especially when people realize that their money could have been spent on something far more productive that may actually improved real life...

Hillary had over a billion to spend. Trump spent very little money in comparison and won. Hillary was spending a ton of money on television adds. Trump was using Twitter to great affect. So yup. Trump proved you don't need two billion dollars to win. Bernie Sanders did well with grass roots donations as well and who knows, he might have won the presidency if the Democrat Party didn't throw him under the bus by using their super delegates. That proved there is no democracy in the Democrat Party and that's another reason people don't trust the Democrats. Not that the Republicans are any angels.

[Nitro Express]

Should Democrats regain the House, I wouldn't be so sure that Jellyfish Pelosi automatically gets the Speaker seat back. Unfortunately, some of her potential replacements could be even worse. Steny Whore definitely would be. The best choice of anybody with a credible shot at House leadership (since they do go on a "seniority" basis) would be Barbara Lee. Unlike Pelosi and so many other so-called "Democrats" in the house, she's been consistent with actual Democratic values over the years, even taking a stand against the BCE's post 9/11 agenda (illegal wars/patriot act/etc.)

In the slim chance that they take the Senate, I doubt anybody would challenge Cuck Schumer, but I wish they would. If Bernie decides not to run in 2020, he would be perfect for Senate Majority Leader. Because unlike Schumer (or Spineless Harry before him) Bernie would take the words "Majority" and "Leader" seriously.

I think Nancy has dementia. There really should be an age cap on who serves in public office. They don't let commercial pilots fly past age 65 yet you can serve in public office wearing Depends with half your marbles gone.

[Nitro Express]

People vote their pocketbook. That comes before issues.

[ZahZoo]

But it wasn't "dead wrong". That's sort of a self-serving revisionist myth. Several did predict Trump would win and the Comey (we're reopening the Clinton email investigation) last minute October surprise turned things on their head. The polls had the race fairly tight, but most seemed to default to Clinton, but you can't say things were completely wrong by any means. And really, the polls only were really off in a few key areas such as in Michigan. Clinton still won the popular vote with a substantial margin. And polls also have to contend with the "asshole money" that we call the Electoral College which makes things complicated and ridiculous, frankly...

I was referring to polling over-all through the primaries and general election for all open seats... the specific polling for the presidential race wasn't as flawed as a lot of it leading up to that point.

The Electoral College will stay in place for the foreseeable future based on it's deep roots within the Constitution for equal state representation. It helps to understand this in the context that this is the United "States" of America... not the United "Population Centers" of America.

One of the core facets in the creation of the Constitution was rooted in equal representation by a republic of states. In order to amend the Constitution to alter some sort of equalization based on population would require ratification by 2/3rd's of the states. New York and California will never hold enough sway over the mid-section of the states to amend it... So, deal with it.

[Nickdfresh]

People vote their pocketbook. That comes before issues.

Then WTF would they ever vote Republican? Statistically, Wall St. has done much better under Democratic Admins. the last 30 years...

[Sgt Schultz]

[FORD]

The Longest Goodbye: Why the Clintons Need to Leave the Stage

William Rivers Pitt
Truthout
Published October 19, 2018



To the great confusion of many, Bill and Hillary Clinton will embark on a multi-city speaking tour beginning one scant week after the 2018 midterm elections. They will visit seven cities together, including Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver and the immortal Wallingford, Connecticut, and will join Michelle Obama for another six engagements.

Without a clear purpose, the Clintons’ tour has the feel of some strange roadshow zoo. Come see the politicians! Only $375 a ticket! “Attendees will have the opportunity to hear one-of-a-kind conversations with the two leaders as they tell their stories from some of the most impactful moments in modern history,” explains Live Nation, which is promoting the tour.

Right, except when someone asks about the impeachment, Monica Lewinsky or Bill Clinton’s place in the constellation of #MeToo villains. Like as not, attendees will hear nothing of the sort; the itinerary for this journey only involves cities very friendly to the former First Family, and uncomfortable questions of any sort will probably be checked with the coats at the door.

The Clintons, for their part, are offering no public explanation for the timing or purpose of this road trip. They aren’t promoting a book like Obama is, and the midterm campaigns will all be over.

“Spokesmen for Bill and Hillary Clinton didn’t respond to questions about whom the ticket sales benefit,” reported the Boston Globe. “Or what, exactly, the message of the events would be. Or why the former two-term president and former secretary of state feel the need to hit the road now as a slice of the nation looks to future leaders to take on Trump.”

Pertinent question, that last bit there.

Thirty years after the Clintons first appeared on the national stage, the Democratic Party is in an astonishing state of disrepair. The midterm elections since 2010 have been lopsided wipeouts for the most part, with Republicans currently in control of both congressional chambers. Republicans have been running the table on state and local elections all across the country. Donald Trump is president of the United States of America, and has put a pair of far-right ideologues on the Supreme Court with the giddy help of Mitch McConnell and the Senate majority.

Blame gerrymandering, an unfair news media, money in politics, 9/11 or the man in the moon for these serial electoral calamities. All these are chapters in this book of failure, to be sure, but the book itself was written in large part by the policies and priorities of Bill and Hillary Clinton. So long as they fashion themselves as the reigning leaders of the Democratic Party, they will own much of the responsibility for its comprehensive collapse.

Bill Clinton was introduced to the country 30 years ago when he delivered a tragically poor opening night address to the 1988 Democratic National Convention. He became a candidate for president 27 years ago, won 26 years ago with the assistance of Ross Perot, won again outright 22 years ago and left office 18 years ago. In the intervening years, he has campaigned (grudgingly and sloppily at times) for candidates like Barack Obama, and delivered knockout convention speeches that all but erased his shabby 1988 showing. With the advent of the #MeToo movement, however, Bill Clinton has gone as dark and silent as a nuclear submarine … until this newest speaking tour.

Hillary Clinton – First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State and twice-failed presidential candidate – has arguably left a larger imprint on society than her husband over those three decades. At this point, however, her public presence is politically toxic, which is why she has also been virtually invisible during this midterm election season. Former candidates who lose to Donald Trump and poll at 36 percent don’t get invited to a lot of rallies.

While there is ample reason to disapprove of Hillary Clinton’s politics, a significant portion of that low approval rating can also be attributed to rank misogyny. The GOP took one look at Hillary Clinton 30 years ago, perceived her as a menace to its carefully constructed social order, and marked her for destruction. The higher her aspirations grew, the more gruesome the attacks against her became.

Hating the Clintons on a professional level has become a multi-million-dollar cottage industry. The garbage that has been thrown at Hillary Clinton over the last 30 years can only be explained by recognizing the shamelessness of her Republican enemies. From accusations that she had White House adviser Vince Foster murdered to claims she was running a pedophile ring out of a pizza shop, the bottom of the barrel has yet to be located.

In 2001, National Review columnist John Derbyshire argued that Bill and Hillary’s daughter Chelsea should be killed because her last name is Clinton. “Chelsea is a Clinton,” he wrote. “She bears the taint; and though not prosecutable in law, in custom and nature the taint cannot be ignored.” Derbyshire went on to favorably explain how Stalin, the Nazis and Imperial China murdered the family members of “objectionable citizens,” as he put it, often killing anyone else who happened to be nearby. “Neca eos omnes, deus suos agnoscet,” he concluded. “Let God sort ’em out.”

Derbyshire’s appalling statement wasn’t treated as some wild firework polluting the sky. It was, in fact, hardly noted simply because it was neither new nor particularly special. For the Clintons, the Derbyshire assault was just another Thursday, and therein lies the rub.

Hillary Clinton’s approval ratings are in the basement not because most people believe these preposterous stories, but because after 30 years a great many people are sick and tired of hearing them. Clinton’s enemies have not permanently damaged her political standing with facts, but with plodding duration. Quite simply, they wore everyone out.

Meanwhile, along with the Republican attacks are all the things Hillary Clinton actually did do – voted for the PATRIOT Act, voted for the Iraq War, cuddled up to Wall Street, promoted fracking across the globe while Secretary of State, lost a presidential election to Donald Fa Chrissakes Trump, to name a smattering few – that have made her name a poison word to significant segments of Democratic base. The story behind those decisions is the real reason why both Clintons need to step out of the limelight and find a truly worthy endeavor, like building houses with Jimmy Carter.

Bill and Hillary Clinton, along with the modern Democratic Party, were all created by the full-spectrum political dominance enjoyed by Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. With the exception of Carter’s four years, the Republicans had claimed full ownership of the White House since 1968. Watergate blew that up for a bit, but Reagan and his far-right post-Vietnam rampage put them back on track again.

In 1990, Bill Clinton became a founding father of the New Democrats, a genuinely cowardly movement based on the premise that the only way for Democrats to win a national election was to become more like Republicans. This involved accepting the flawed trickle-down economic premise of tax cuts and deregulation combined with massive defense spending and disdain for the social safety net. In short, Bill Clinton and his New Democrats dragged the party away from Franklin Delano Roosevelt and toward Ronald Reagan, and Hillary Clinton was right there with him.

One of the ideas behind this generational disaster of a movement was that the Republicans would play nicer if the Democrats were more like them, and maybe then we could “get things done.” The New Democrats failed to recognize then, and continue to do so even now, that the GOP is only interested in the complete annihilation of the Democratic Party and the establishment of autocratic/theocratic one-party rule in the United States.

You don’t try to make friends with a house fire. You douse it. Imagine a football team letting its opponent start at the 50-yard line at the beginning of every drive, or a baseball team gifting second base to every opposing batter. They are halfway to scoring before you’ve even pulled your cleats on. The “New Democrat” strategy did not make sense 30 years ago, and makes even less sense today.

Beyond all this, there is the financial aspect of the politics. A central part of the New Democrats’ drive to be more like Republicans was, and remains, the establishment of deep ties between candidates, officeholders, the party and the worst people in the country. Wall Street brigands, petroleum barons and wealthy so-called “liberals” who only support candidates willing to preach the GOP’s “We Love Money” gospel are all welcome in the Clinton’s Democratic Party. As much as anything else the New Democrats have done, this embrace of high finance and Republican economic nonsense has damaged the entire country deeply, and perhaps permanently.

New and exciting progressive candidates like Beto O’Rourke and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have not been invited to the fundraising banquet but managed to haul in unprecedented campaign donations anyway, another sign that the party is moving away from the failed Clinton/New Democrat model. The country is on the precipice of a potential political earthquake, with progressive candidates on the verge of securing historic victories virtually everywhere. If such a triumph is indeed secured, it will be the loudest possible signal to the Clinton faction of the party that its time has come to an end.

The Clinton Way has been with us for 30 years. Call it fair, call it unfair, call it a tomato sandwich for all I care. The brute fact of the matter is that the Democratic Party is badly damaged, the Clintons own a large slice of responsibility for the current state of affairs, and the time has come for new faces and better ideas to emerge. This will only happen if Bill and Hillary Clinton take a bow, say their thanks and exit the political stage.

It is my great hope that the two of them enjoy their upcoming speaking tour with quiet dignity and stay fully the hell out of the news cycle while the country digests the results of the midterm elections … and scene. They have ruled the Democratic Party roost for three decades. Their best possible final political act will be knowing when to quit.

[FORD]

[Nitro Express]

Then WTF would they ever vote Republican? Statistically, Wall St. has done much better under Democratic Admins. the last 30 years...

Most people don't own stocks nor do they know anything about Wall Street. Actually finance is driven by larger cycles than politics alone. People are going to vote for who they perceive helps them financially. In the 70's the cliche was the Democrats were the blue collar party and the Republicans were the white collar party. If you lived in a town where most people belonged to a union then it tended to be Democrat. That's why the railroad and mining towns in conservative states tended to be Democrat. Then if you owned your own business or wore a suit and tie to work you were more likely to be a Republican. Not always the case but that was the cliche. It wasn't so much about issues, it was about who you thought would help you have more take home pay. Why do you think politicians lobby like hell to keep military facilities open in their district? They want to keep the jobs and that means votes for them because people vote their paycheck. Maybe in reality that facility really isn't needed but the politicians want the votes and the voters want their paychecks.

[Nitro Express]

Hillary is the poster child of Never Give Up!

[Nitro Express]

Oh well. Hillary is Hillary. I don't know what is worse. A raving psychopath or watching Ted Cruz and Donald Trump suck each other's dicks. What can you say. It's politics.