Hillary Wins Nevada

~ Clarissa

So Hillary won Nevada. I’m very glad.

MSNBC is alternating between “it’s not a real victory” and “imagine how much damage losing would have done to Hillary’s campaign.” There’s nothing she can do to win with them, and it’s not because they are ideologically closer to Bernie or respond better to his campaign. It’s simply because you can squeeze out more coverage from a Bernie win.

As a Russian writer once said to his colleague, “Gosh, it’s such a relief to know you are being a blackguard because you are getting paid for it. I was afraid your heart was in it but if it’s just for money, that’s better.”

Unknown's avatar

Published by Clarissa

27 thoughts on “Hillary Wins Nevada”

  2. And Trump won too, saying “Bush lied, there were no WMDs” didn’t hurt him one tiny bit. Somehow, even hard core Republicans have grown enough to admit that. Rather amazing, I think.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Ha, there’s a lot of talk on TV about Trump winning despite [something]. This week that something was picking up a fight with the fucking pope, and blaming Bush for 9/11.

      But they don’t complete that thought. They don’t talk about why he’s winning. It’s all this euphemistic talk about ‘being angry at washington’. But calling all Mexicans rapists, or refusing to let american muslims enter their own country, or saying that Obama would have attended Scalia’s funeral if it were held in a mosque (Hi Cliff!) is not ‘anger at washington’. It’s just racism.

      Radio silence on that one. Must be the overtly PC culture we live in. 😦

      Like

      Reply

      1. I have to say, I do feel some pleasure when I observe the angst of the Republicans who notice how easily their party base ditches all of the GOP orthodoxy the moment Trump offers an opportunity to bash Mexicans. Nobody cares that he supported abortion, that he is anti free markets, that he is less religious than a door knob, that he easily condemns the war in Iraq, etc. The base let all of that go very easily.

        We should all be grateful to Trump for helping us see this.

        Like

        Reply

  3. The mistake the people who are just now admitting that Bush lied made is believing the wrong sources (and not making corrections as soon as it was obvious their sources were poor ones).

    Here in this graph above, we have a similar problem: it is from a conservative source that is going to do its best to paint Clinton in a bad light.

    Moreover, what does “lead” mean? As measured against what/whom? Also, why should we care this early in the season? Last time she was running against a master politician, this time, not so much.

    Like

    Reply

      1. ” I experience cognitive dissonance when I’m forced to feel sorry for a Bush”

        The worst part is he’s probably the closest to a decent human being in the lot and now he’s going to be remembered as the one who let the family down…

        In my weaker moments, I almost pity him.

        Like

        Reply

      2. I think that Bush dropping out will strengthen Rubio’s campaign though. To me, they both attract a similar voting block. And truth be told, I would rather have Bush than Rubio (I can’t believe I’m saying that by the way.)

        Like

        Reply

        1. “I would rather have Bush than Rubio”

          Bush is just stale and from a corrupt horrible dynasty. But probably the least horrible of that bad lot (nb I’m glad he’s out and hope he stays there).

          I find Rubio actually repulsive in a very visceral way. I don’t mean the supposed gay vibe but rather something kind of … mechanical and slimy at the same time, I didn’t know a person could combine both those traits but somehow he does (shivers).

          Like

          Reply

  5. “how easily their party base ditches all of the GOP orthodoxy”

    Oh, this is going to happen anyway. The moment their candidate loses in the general, they start shitting on him for not being a REAL CONSERVATIVE. Happened with McCain, happened with Romney. The way 2016 gets written in GOP history books is that liberal New Yorker Trump tricked them into nominating him, when what was needed was a TRUE CONSERVATIVE (which they’ll nominate NEXT TIME, just you wait). Nobody will learn any lesson, the grifting machine will plod on, direct mail companies will continue making millions from scamming angry white people.

    Rinse and repeat.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Oh yes. They will keep denying the painfully obvious for as long as they can. But the efforts to pretend this isn’t happening are getting really desperate.

      Like

      Reply

    2. Do you remember the 15 nanoseconds of self-introspection by the likes of Fox News the morning after 2012? They actually admitted that it was time to broaden their base to include minorities, younger people, etc.

      Four years later, GOP front runner: “I’LL BUILD THE YOOOOGEST WALL EVER TO KEEP OUT RAPIST MEXICANS”.

      lol GOP.

      Like

      Reply

      1. The way they hoped to broaden their base was to reiterate their trickle – down mythology plus to convince themselves that Hispanics will support them because they are all religious anyway. Of course, this brilliant plan backfired.

        Like

        Reply

        1. They’re counting on voter suppression and low voter turnout. There will be <a href=”http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/no-one-in-america-should-have-to-wait-7-hours-to-vote/264506/’>all kinds of shenanigans and low grade tricks.

          My state was too close to call on Election Night and they didn’t determine who won the state until months later. In one county the elections commissioner sent out 12,000 robocalls on election day stating voters had until the next day to vote. I saw people running around trying to get the police to ticket voters (the meters were free to voters). The election before that I spent 4 hours in line waiting to early vote.

          Like

          Reply

          1. <a href="shenanigans

            In Pennsylvania, House Majority Leader Mike Turzai was caught on tape this summer boasting about his colleagues’ success: “… First pro-life legislation — abortion facility regulations — in 22 years, done. Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.” In Ohio, the Republican Party chairman of Franklin County, which includes Columbus, was even more blunt. Doug Preisse said, “I guess I really actually feel we shouldn’t contort the voting process to accommodate the urban — read African-American — voter turnout machine.”
            Since then the VRA has been weakened so who know what will happen.

            Like

            Reply

    3. ” Trump tricked them into nominating him, when what was needed was a TRUE CONSERVATIVE (which they’ll nominate NEXT TIME”

      The problem is the republican party has nothing left to conserve – it’s an unholy alliance of bible crazies and neocons (aka worst people ever). All the republican establishment wants to conserve is their own influence within the party.

      Trump (as scary as the idea of him as nominee or president might be) is in a weird way reviving the long banished Rockefeller republican wing symbolized by conservative fiscal policies, more liberal social policies (and prudent international relations? I forget what his foreign policy was but I’m favor of prudent engagement rather than either isolationism or invading the world, inviting the world and being in hock to the world).

      The voters are making it clear they don’t want what the republican establishment is offering – they establishment can either realize and act on that or go out of business.

      Like

      Reply

  8. Well, I just got home from an all-you-can eat local Austrian Society potluck, but even with most of my blood diverted from my brain to my stomach, I’m still awake enough to see all the good news from Nevada and South Carolina:

    Sanders is still a contender who’s got Hillary rocked her her heels, and Rubio came in a high second, while Bush finally dropped out!

    Are you Democrats still going to be gloating when President Rubio is sworn in, and Sanders goes back to the Senate admitting that he’s an Independent socialist? 🙂

    Like

    Reply

  9. “Are you Democrats still going to be gloating when President Rubio is sworn in”

    I don’t see that happening. If Trump doesn’t get the nomination the people voting for him now are going to stay home. They’re not going to automatically support another neocon to be disastrously wrong about everything….

    Like

    Reply

  10. “Are you Democrats still going to be gloating when President Rubio is sworn in?”

    I think my fellow liberal/progressives are being way too confident here. If Trump or Cruz take the nomination, I think that either Sanders or Clinton can win the presidency. But Rubio makes things harder and once the field narrows, he becomes an increasingly viable candidate. I think Clinton probably has a better chance of beating Rubio than Sanders but according to initial poll numbers, her chances are slender at best.

    And to me Rubio presents a worst prospect than Trump: hysterically religious, war mongering, profoundly anti woman, anti regulation etc. etc. He reminds me a lot of GW Bush actually. Bush ran as a “moderate” and a “compassionate conservative” and many of my fellow liberals stupidly thought there was very little difference between Bush and Gore. Well we saw how those eight years went. We are still suffering from Bush’s disastrous foreign and domestic policy decisions.

    So this is a long way of saying that yes: I think a Rubio presidency is a very real possibility. And I heartily blame the DNC for not finding someone more viable than Clinton as a front runner. I think she will be a fine president but for a variety of reasons (many of them having to do with a depressingly sexist American electorate), she just isn’t a very strong candidate.

    Like

    Reply

    1. I agree that Rubio is not in any way better than Trump. He keeps giving those canned speeches because there’s no substance to him. The guy is not even an honest fanatic like George W Bush. He’s just an empty shell devoid of any meaning of his own.

      He’s better than Cruz, though. Cruz is the worst.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Yes. I completely agree that Cruz is the worst. I think he has no shot at the presidency though. He’s going to be a Huckabee style candidate. I predict he will run in the next 3-4 presidential cycles, make a bunch of outlandish statements about religion, get his fanatical base fired up, and then drop out.

        Like

        Reply

Leave a reply to NG Cancel reply