May 29 Open Thread: Is Trump Impeachable?

Filed in National, Open Thread by on May 29, 2018

Some people are peddling the notion that there is no “civil war” among Democrats. Their evidence: Candidates who have won primary races span the ideological spectrum from Blue Dogs to Berniecrats. The flaw in this logic should be clear — internal differences usually get papered over in the face of a common enemy — but there are lots of other indications that all Democrats aren’t using the same playbook. One of the biggest, and perhaps most troublesome for fans of participatory democracy, is Democratic billionaire Tom Steyer’s monomaniacal insistence that candidates should run on a platform of impeaching Trump. As the article makes clear, there’s a big problem with that — it polls terribly. It’s almost impossible to tell a billionaire anything — they all think they’re rich because they’re so fucking smart — but someone should remind Steyer that what you say is a lot less important than what you do, as Trump-criticizing Republicans who vote for his agenda demonstrate daily.

Another day, another round of panicky stories about how the Trumpkins are winning the PR war over the Mueller probe. For the life of me I can’t figure out how the Deep State allowed Trump to live long enough to take office, considering that the NSA knew well before the election that Russia was treating him as an intelligence “asset” — not because of some Deep State conspiracy, but because foreign intelligence agencies around the globe were telling the NSA about the copious contacts between powerful Russians and people in Trump’s orbit.

Kudos to WDEL for finding a national expert to call bullshit on gun-humping fuckstick Sen. Dave Lawson’s proposal to force schools to hire armed guards. The expert points out that this is part of the NRA’s push to put its unregulated products everywhere.

If you doubt the media played a major role in electing Trump — and I don’t see how it’s debatable, given that the “Trump” his fans voted for is a fictional character introduced to the public through the newspaper industry’s raw sewage sluice, the gossip columns — read this Daily Beast account of how gossip site TMZ helped blunt the effect of the Access Hollywood tape.

Indeed, it’s easy to argue that American media — not just the news media, all of it — is a major force in making life on Earth worse than it has to be. Case in point: Who’s the asshole at ABC who green-lighted a reboot of Roseanne Barr’s show? She hasn’t been funny in 25 years, if indeed she ever was, and she’s a mentally ill shitshow besides. She took her demons out for a stroll with another racist tweet, this one about Obama administration official Valerie Jarrett. All the plastic surgery in the world won’t cover up bone-deep ugliness.

About the Author ()

Who wants to know?

Comments (88)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

Sites That Link to this Post

  1. Sticker line | May 30, 2018
  2. Https://disqus.com/by/proxumer/ | May 31, 2018
  1. Alby says:

    In a sign that Americans know what’s important*, pressure on ABC to fire Roseanne Barr has been swift and furious:

    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/29/1767852/-Will-ABC-stand-by-Roseanne-Barr-after-she-sent-this-racist-joke-targeting-a-former-Obama-advisor

    *sarcasm alert

  2. Alby says:

    Also, too, effective: Variety is reporting that ABC has cancelled the show, which it had already greenlighted for a second season:

    https://variety.com/2018/tv/news/roseanne-canceled-abc-1202824211/

  3. Paul says:

    For some reason I cannot quite put my finger upon, Kristjien Nielson is on my radar. Looking her up, I could not find any info on her early socio-economic status. I could not find anything that qualifies her as a foreign policy expert either. She has a batchelors, which qualifies no one as an expert in anything; a law degree, ditto, except parts of the law maybe; and the slimmest of paper trails that consists of a string of jobs, also not necessarily a qualifying experience as an expert on anything. Her hearing isn’t so good, she doesn’t hear the spoken word, “shithole”, and she’s not sure Norwegians are “white”. I guess none of this should matter, but her current job is Director of Homeland Security. Shades of “Brownie” it’s another example of “stable genius”.

  4. Liberal Elite says:

    @A “One of the biggest, and perhaps most troublesome for fans of participatory democracy, is Democratic billionaire Tom Steyer’s monomaniacal insistence that candidates should run on a platform of impeaching Trump.”

    Well… That won’t work, but running on stopping Trump’s agenda might..

    Consider how pathetic the Dem field for 2020 is looking:

    “In wide-open 2020 presidential field, Democrats are road-testing messages — and trying to redefine their party”
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/no-one-has-a-leg-up-in-wide-open-2020-presidential-field-democrats-jockey-to-define-their-party–and-gain-an-advantage/2018/05/12/42ba34f2-5547-11e8-9c91-7dab596e8252_story.html

    Cohen’s right. We probably don’t want any of them. We need someone who will step up and flatten Trump and all that he stands for.

    “For Democrats, 2020 should be about one thing”
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/for-democrats-2020-should-be-about-one-thing/2018/05/28/ba263962-628c-11e8-a768-ed043e33f1dc_story.html

    Make America virtuous again <– love it

  5. puck says:

    We already tried a campaign focused on Trump in 2016. Are Democrats stupid enough to try it again? Probably.

  6. Ben says:

    in 2016 they campaigned against what he *could be…. now they are campaigning against what he is (even though they are the same thing). please tell me you understand this difference.

  7. jason330 says:

    His track record in the office stinks. But his track record as a business man also stunk.

    The only thing he is good at is owning libs, and that may be enough for his base. It certainly is enough for the media.

  8. RE Vanella says:

    It’s a distinction without a difference. And as a political strategy it’s incredibly naive.

  9. puck says:

    Americans are ready for candidates to run on traditional Democratic issues. But except for a few Democrats they won’t, because such a campaign might offend their patrons.

  10. Liberal Elite says:

    @REV “It’s a distinction without a difference.”

    Sorry. Wrong again (as usual). When he ran for office, Trump promised to be there for the little guy. …promised to bring back jobs. …promised to help the middle class.

    He’s done NOTHING but cater to the 0.1% and corporate interests.
    It’s been nothing but a stream of broken promises.

    If you cannot see that difference…

  11. RE Vanella says:

    “My reply to this was that if you gave in once, there was no reason for not continuing to give in.”

    –Albert Camus, The Plague, Part Four

  12. RE Vanella says:

    Wine mom! I thought you got salty and gave up. Good for you.

    Everyone knew he wasn’t for the little guy on 2015. Your narrative is wrong and your politics are terrible.

    Poor people voted for Clinton. The petite bourgeoisie with no uni degree voted for Trump. You’re a very naive lady. And still very cowardly.

  13. RE Vanella says:

    Camus’ next line is the kicker…

    “It seems to me history has borne me out.”

  14. RE Vanella says:

    C’mon, honey.. you love these little spanking sessions… Don’t interrupt them. Say another dumb thing and take your punishment!

  15. Alby says:

    I’m thinking Stacey Abrams might be the right standard-bearer, though that’s only from listening to her speak. If she uses her oratory skills to preach populism to the masses, she’d be my pick.

    I confess that I think the best candidate, all else being equal, would be a black woman, and Abrams would be free of the baggage Kamala Harris carries as an ex-prosecutor (which, of course, makes her “centrist” enough for the cash dispensers).

  16. RE Vanella says:

    Where’s that guy Kevin been? The one with a fascination of Ramone’s pool party…

    After he outted himself re: the Russian brides advert he’s gone underground.

    He was fun to tease as well. But again he gets extra credit for using his own name.

  17. RE Vanella says:

    Also, please take one moment today to consider this.

    Erica Garner would have turned 28 today.

    Heather Heyer would have turned 33 today.

    Heroes, both and Bernie Bros.

    Rest in power.

  18. Liberal Elite says:

    Hey REV. Here’s an apropos quote for you from the movie “Gladiator”:

    Quintus: People should know when they’re conquered.
    Maximus: Would you, Quintus? Would I?

  19. RE Vanella says:

    You think Trump will lose because he’s had a “stream of broken promises.”

    Hahahahahaha

    Gladiator quote.. holy fucking shit you’re stupid.

    Hahahahahaha

    Now I know why you don’t use your real name! You would embarrass your family.

    Hahaha.. holy shit. I gotta catch my breathe a minute…

  20. RE Vanella says:

    …I’m hyperventilating… She dumber than my left ball.

  21. Liberal Elite says:

    @REV “She dumber than my left ball.”

    Two weeks ago poor REV was stuffed in a box and made to look the fool. And since then, what from him? It looks to me like about 30 unrequited random off-topic posts all over the place trying to convince everyone that he wasn’t actually stuffed in a box and made the fool. We got and endless stream of this sort of nonsense:
    “I won! I really won” “No. I really did win.” “He quoted the NYTimes… or was it the WaPo. I just can’t remember” “He’s a she” “She’s dumber than…” “Did I tell you that I won that argument!” Yea. I really did.” “He was wrong.. I mean She was wrong…” “I spanked her good” “Did I mention that I won?” “Yea. I really did.” “…”

    That’s certainly NOT what winners do. That’s just pathetic. And guess what? You didn’t convince anyone… even when you use profanity… not one person.

    So what now REV?
    Back to 30 more unrequited and stupid off-topic posts? That’s certainly what I expect from you and your purportedly great intellect. Why don’t you just stay on topic?… You actually only embarrass yourself with this kind of nonsense.

    Oh. And sorry. No embarrassment here. Not even a shred.

    And back on topic…

    There really is a huge difference between what Trump promised and what he delivered. That is something that anyone can run on.
    Just ask the Trump supporting farmers who can’t sell their soybeans to China.
    http://www.startribune.com/stakes-are-high-in-soybean-country-if-china-adopts-tariffs-on-u-s-agricultural-exports/483892181/

  22. RE Vanella says:

    You’re so into it tonight. Cool.

  23. spktruth says:

    Focus please. The alt right of the GOP has been grooming the Con Man Presidunce at least since 2013, same time Russians began grooming him. Israel, Saudia Arabia, China, Japan, Phillipines, et al, begain to groom him too. They all knew he was for sale, they oould simply BUY him and his brand! A man without principles, ignorant of rule of law, no concience, bully who would push the alt right agenda and work in tandem with SOME foreign governments to end democracy creating a world of oligharchs in control of masses.. They want an oligharchy, a King! Their corporations are global, the world is their cherry pie. This bunch of treasonists are willing to take us into a civil war to continue what Trump and the Treasonists have already overturned.
    McConnell, Ryan, Nunes, the Freedom Party nuts, support this man because he supports their agenda. GOP has been waiting for Trumpolini for decades. They wanted someone who would run the government LIKE he ran his business…a Ponzi scheme. Trump and his treasonous cohorts are in an international conspiracy with foreign agents and governments, to destroy the United States as our founders created.

    There is no choice if your truly a progressive, adopt the same or similiar agenda of Franklin D. Roosevelt…he didn’t win 4 presidencies because he was a dunce, he knew what the citizens needed and worked to git her done.
    Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are of that ilk. No corporate owned democrat can win in 2020, cuz they are alt right on the corporate Democrat side. There is a fight within the party…the Resist and other ground up groups are true progressive. Their message can and is winning…this is the fight of our lives. You want fascism, think Trump, GOP and corporate owned demorats. Work for the common good, with candidates running with OUR agenda…If I am wrong, just let me know. Love to hear it.
    Professor Tribe on impeachment and why we shouldn’t do it, UNTIL Muellers investigation is complete.

  24. RE Vanella says:

    You think convincing Trump voters with links they were bamboozled is a good political strategy.

    You’re an entertaining one, I’ll give you that. But really you’re just a stubborn cow and a coward.

    You can get your minge in a sweaty twist, but you’re still embarrassing yourself. That cat that you don’t recognize it is very funny to me.

    Can you accuse me of misogyny again? That’s my favorite bit.

  25. RE Vanella says:

    FDR was able to stand up and say that the oligarchs hated him and he welcomed their hatred. The Clintons and Obama and Biden sucked the oligarchs dicks and swallowed the load.

    This dumb cunt thinks some wet, worthless candidate can just say Trump is dangerous and bad and that’s good enough. Anything else is a litmus test and negotiable. This is garbage politics. Nobody is buying it.

    Fuck her, she’s a coward who won’t use her real name.

  26. RE Vanella says:

    I’m baiting you. Don’t let me down.

  27. RE Vanella says:

    Please note, if these insults offend your sensibilities (royal sense, plural), tough shit. I give no anonymous crank here any respect whatever.

    You all know exactly what I’m arguing. Candidate better have good positions and there are litmus tests. You can scream PURITY TESTS till your fucking lungs explode. We simply don’t care.

    I’m not spending my money or energy shitting on Trump and screaming Russia and hoping Mueller will save us. There are real position we can convince people of and win back political power.

    Dumb dumb shit like Liberal Elite is a waste of your time.

  28. RE Vanella says:

    Is that “on topic”… sweet pea?

  29. spktruth says:

    RE: who are you directing your comments too?

  30. RE Vanella says:

    I’m bored now.

  31. Paul says:

    If you are wondering what Democrats could run on, a good start is the Deldem platform. It should designed to be a signpost for Dem candidates to win on, and therefore they should start with it. If a candidate cannot run on it because their donors won’t approve, then they are the wrong candidate.

  32. spktruth says:

    Your bored now? just answer my question, its important to me.

  33. puck says:

    @LiberalElite: “There really is a huge difference between what Trump promised and what he delivered. That is something that anyone can run on.”

    Are you suggesting Democrats should run on fulfilling Trump’s 2016 campaign promises? WTF?

  34. Liberal Elite says:

    @p “Are you suggesting Democrats should run on fulfilling Trump’s 2016 campaign promises? WTF?”

    Well… Some of them ARE worth fulfilling.

    He promised healthcare for all.
    He promised healthcare pricing transparency.
    He promised to lower drug prices.
    He promised much needed infrastructure investment ($550 billion).
    He promised to close the carried interest loophole.
    He promised to close the revolving door (5-year rule) and drain the swamp.

    These are all good things that could be part of any populist campaign.

  35. spktruth says:

    LE MSNBC just did a program on “trolling”. Are you a liberal troll, or do you really believe what you wrote. You really believe Trump was going to deliver on those lies. That agenda was Bernie Sanders, Trumpolini the con man drew you into his “other reality” and your no w caught in his web of deceit and criminality. -Where’s our GOP medical plan?

  36. Liberal Elite says:

    @s “…do you really believe what you wrote.”

    I wrote that Trump didn’t deliver on his progressive promises. Yea. I really do believe that.

    “You really believe Trump was going to deliver on those lies.”

    Not a bit. Never.

    “That agenda was Bernie Sanders,…”

    Sure. And that’s why Trump claimed them for his own, once Bernie was defeated. That’s how he got a whole bunch of idiot Bernie supporters to vote for him.

    “Trumpolini the con man drew you into…”

    Not me! …just the idiot Bernie supporters.

    But Trump DID make all those promises, and he did NOT deliver, and you CAN run on that as part of a progressive campaign.

  37. RE Vanella says:

    “I just want people to have health care, honey.”

    Liberal Elite made a video.

    https://twitter.com/nobody_stop_me/status/991741815765241857?lang=en

  38. Alby says:

    LE is right. Trump conned a lot of people — most of them not Bernie supporters, btw — by promising a number of proposals liberals and Democrats would support. Remember, Trump will say anything that gets him applause.

    A lot of people who hated Hillary were looking for any slim reed on which they could hang their rejection of her, and chose what any reasonably rational person could judge were obvious lies.

  39. RE Vanella says:

    The people conned weren’t leftists.

    They people conned wanted to be conned, or more accurately it didn’t matter that it was a con.

    They will never ever admit there were conned (at least not in any substantial numbers).

    They love the strongman fascist stuff and the scumbag rhetoric.

    They like it because it owns the libs.

    That’s why continuing to stomp your feet and point fingers as a political strategy is dumb.

    The fact that’s it’s all true is irrelevant. Everyone knows what’s happening. They do not care. They like it. Pointing it out is of no political value. That’s the point.

  40. Alby says:

    I agree completely. That comment was aimed elsewhere.

  41. Ben says:

    He made promises with no policy suggestions. His long public record was there to see. People ignored that just like they’ll ignore his actual record. LE, you give far too much credit to the people who voted for him.

    What this rabid fans voted for was the racist red-meat. they dont give a shit that their jobs are never coming back as long as they get that wall.

  42. Alby says:

    @Ben: His rabid fans didn’t get him elected. Haven’t you seen interviews with, for example, the people at that Carrier plant in Indiana who lost their jobs a year or so after the big PR moment? They certainly believed him.

    As you surely know, most people believe what they want to believe. The guy has been failing upward for 40 years. Those voters weren’t his first suckers.

  43. RE Vanella says:

    Noted.

  44. puck says:

    @LE… Your claim that Bernie supporters voted for Trump is a blood libel.

  45. Ben says:

    Alby, I know it wasnt. That is why Im disagreeing with the fact that his dupes will turn on him even in the face on overwhelming evidence he fucked them. Every ounce of proof shown to them that they were duped only strengthens their belief.
    Convincing or even considering trmp voters is fucking stupid. the dems should be looking to get the people who didnt vote.

  46. Alby says:

    We still don’t know if any of those millions of Russian bots who follow Trump on Twitter “voted.” We have been told very little detail about the penetration of electoral systems by hackers, Russian or otherwise.

  47. Ben says:

    Well, if you’re saying votes were changed, then we are totally fucked and should be talking about something far more serious than election messaging. There will be nothing to prevent that from happening again this year or in 2020 and as he installs more loyalists it will only get worse.

  48. Alby says:

    @Ben: Analyses show otherwise. About 10% of Trump voters, almost all of them independents rather than GOP-registered, have abandoned him.

    You don’t win by peeling away everybody. You don’t need everybody. Ten percent is plenty.

    On the voting thing, we just don’t know. When officials stress, without being asked, that vote totals weren’t tampered with, I’m automatically skeptical.

    Also, Trump can’t “install” loyalists to election posts. Those are state jobs, and in many states it’s handled by an elected Secretary of State.

  49. RE Vanella says:

    Just remember, puck, more spiteful wine mom Hillary primary voters voted for McCain in 2008 than Bernie primary voters pulled the lever for Trump and Stein.

    I think about this every time Liberal Elite comes on here with her cowardly sanctimony.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/24/did-enough-bernie-sanders-supporters-vote-for-trump-to-cost-clinton-the-election/?utm_term=.0df7c18d023c

    “Another useful comparison is to 2008, when the question was whether Clinton supporters would vote for Barack Obama or John McCain (R-Ariz.) Based on data from the 2008 Cooperative Campaign Analysis Project, a YouGov survey that also interviewed respondents multiple times during the campaign, 24 percent of people who supported Clinton in the primary as of March 2008 then reported voting for McCain in the general election.

    An analysis of a different 2008 survey by the political scientists Michael Henderson, Sunshine Hillygus and Trevor Thompson produced a similar estimate: 25 percent. (Unsurprisingly, Clinton voters who supported McCain were more likely to have negative views of African Americans, relative to those who supported Obama.)

    Thus, the 6 percent or 12 percent of Sanders supporters who may have supported Trump does not look especially large in comparison with these other examples.”

  50. Ben says:

    the PUMAs! oh man where is Dominique?

  51. RE Vanella says:

    Nearly a quarter of Clinton primary voters in ’08 voted for McCain.

    So, from one “Bernie Bro” to all those centrist crying worthless liberal elites…

    …die of slowing tearing rectal fissures…

  52. Liberal Elite says:

    @REV’s quote “Thus, the 6 percent or 12 percent of Sanders supporters who may have supported Trump does not look especially large in comparison with these other examples.”

    Yea. Granted… But it’s ENORMOUS when compared with Trump’s margin of victory in a half-dozen states. <– and that's why it mattered.

  53. Liberal Elite says:

    @REV “Nearly a quarter of Clinton primary voters in ’08 voted for McCain.”

    Pure BS. Do some basic math. If that was really true, how was a large Obama victory even possible.

    Maybe Obama got a lot of GOP cross over votes …maybe? Ha!

  54. RE Vanella says:

    It’s literally cited from two sources. You’re a very strange bird, you.

  55. RE Vanella says:

    It’s like the argument that Bernie wouldn’t have won the general because he lost the Democratic primary. There’s quite literally no relationship between a private political party’s primary system and the general election.

    These are the talking points of sad, scared people. Anonymous people.

  56. RE Vanella says:

    Do some basic math! 🙂

  57. Liberal Elite says:

    @REV “It’s like the argument that Bernie wouldn’t have won the general because he lost the Democratic primary.”

    Ha! That is dumb. Who made that argument?

    But the 25% thing is also just dumb. Do the math.

  58. RE Vanella says:

    How can they be “non-Democrats” if they voted for Hillary in the 2008 primaries? Aren’t the lion’s share of primaries closed?

    And even in caucus states where you can choose the party caucus, imagine going into a high school gym to sit around for hours to support Hillary and then go and vote for McCain over Obama.

    You’re such a fucking embarrassment.

  59. RE Vanella says:

    Do some basic math!

  60. RE Vanella says:

    You’re a hysterical dipshit with some sort of retarded critical thinking.

    I’m done stating facts and then having you just say random things…

    Maybe I’ll abuse you more on another thread later… This is gratuitous.

  61. RE Vanella says:

    And for the record, if you’ve never heard a fellow dipshit respond to the statement “Bernie would’ve won” by saying some “how could he have won when Hillary got x more votes in the primaries…” you’re a fucking liar as well.

  62. Liberal Elite says:

    Look. What you said makes no sense.

    Think for a minute. If 25% of Hillary supporters, or about 12% of all Dems crossed over and voted for McCain, then where did Obama’s decisive victory come from?

    Obama won by more than 7%. If we assume that McCain got nearly all of the Republican vote, so that must mean that…

    …wait for it…

    …Obama got 135% of the independent vote.

    Yes. That’s how he did it.

  63. Liberal Elite says:

    @REV “And for the record, if you’ve never heard a fellow dipshit respond to the statement “Bernie would’ve won” …”

    I must have missed that day.
    But I did say that I thought Trump would roll over Sanders, if given the chance…
    I don’t think I was wrong.

  64. RE Vanella says:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/24/did-enough-bernie-sanders-supporters-vote-for-trump-to-cost-clinton-the-election/?utm_term=.0df7c18d023c

    “Another useful comparison is to 2008, when the question was whether Clinton supporters would vote for Barack Obama or John McCain (R-Ariz.) Based on data from the 2008 Cooperative Campaign Analysis Project, a YouGov survey that also interviewed respondents multiple times during the campaign, 24 percent of people who supported Clinton in the primary as of March 2008 then reported voting for McCain in the general election.

    An analysis of a different 2008 survey by the political scientists Michael Henderson, Sunshine Hillygus and Trevor Thompson produced a similar estimate: 25 percent. (Unsurprisingly, Clinton voters who supported McCain were more likely to have negative views of African Americans, relative to those who supported Obama.)

    Thus, the 6 percent or 12 percent of Sanders supporters who may have supported Trump does not look especially large in comparison with these other examples.”

  65. RE Vanella says:

    You’ve missed quite a bit actually.

  66. RE Vanella says:

    Can you please type more random numbers? I’m working on an encryption key thing.

  67. Liberal Elite says:

    They weren’t random. I even made a nice little spreadsheet.

    OK. Then you explain the 7% victory.

    How, exactly, did Obama win?

    (Hint.. Look at exit polling and see your 25% just disappear)

  68. RE Vanella says:

    Take it up with

    Michael Henderson at LSU
    Sunshine Hillygus at Duke
    Trevor Thompson at Ohio State

    and the 2008 Cooperative Campaign Analysis Project..

    Maybe send them your spread sheet.

  69. RE Vanella says:

    Also, this should be added to the pantheon of self cucks. It was already borderline self own. Then she said she did a spreadsheet. That is a whole other level. Self-immolation for the cause sanctimonious stupidity.

    Good stuff

  70. Liberal Elite says:

    There you go. I’ll even help you…

    http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=USP00p1

    Oh. Poor REV… There’s simply no possibility whatsoever of 25% Hillary voters crossing over. Rank BS confirmed.

  71. RE Vanella says:

    I’ll alert the professors. You may be onto something.

    I’m just noting what a scholarly study, and comprehensively researched reported.

    Maybe your goofy anonymous ass is right. We could take it to peer review…

    This is very 2018 internet shit here, kids.

  72. RE Vanella says:

    Anonymous internet character, scared or embarrassed, never standing behind what she says… with a spreadsheet… Don’t forget.

    Or 3 prestigious political science scholars and a respected polling science shop.

    It’s a tight call.

  73. Liberal Elite says:

    @REV “It’s a tight call.”

    It really is. I didn’t show up without a reputable source of data.

    In order for me to be wrong, then the published exit polls need to also be wrong or somehow very misleading.

    It’s as simple as that.

    If what you claim actually did happen, then Obama would have lost.

  74. Liberal Elite says:

    Just for you REV

    Here’s more data to chew on (all from major exit polling, mostly CNN), for first time presidential candidates for the last three decades.

    (a) Percentage of Dems voting for Dem candidate
    (b) Percentage of total Dem votes

    Bill Clinton 1992 — 89%
    Al Gore 2000 ——- 89%
    John Kerry 2004 — 89% 37%
    B. Obama 2008 —- 89% 39%
    H. Clinton 2016 —- 89% 36%

    They ALL got 89%. All of them!
    There is ZERO evidence in this data of any abandonment of Obama by any large faction of Dems. It just didn’t happen.

    The major difference for Hillary is that fewer Dems came out to vote in 2016.
    She got screwed over by those who just didn’t bother to vote…

    @puck “Your claim that Bernie supporters voted for Trump is a blood libel.”

    OK… I’ll amend. She apparently got screwed over by those Bernie supporters who just didn’t bother to vote. It’s only half as bad… but still same result.

  75. anon 1 says:

    Liberal: You do know all exit polls were flawed? Shocking highly educated, political reporters, and party leadership. The Exit Polls had Hilary winning! They were all wrong. You forget the Russian, Saud, Israel and other go foreign govts, and crooked world businessmen, all played their part to elect Trumpolini. I was absolutely supporting Bernie. I followed his facebook pages and all the ground groups who supported him, and I will say I don’t believe any of those damn polls, even WAPO. What I do know is the day after the primary Bernie supporters were debating “who we were going to vote for”. Most said, “fuck it, its all rigged, gotta form another party, not voting at all, or voting Clinton, or Stein….never did I see or hear one person say they were voting for Trump. Trump was evil, the most corrupt con man ever to run, and a bigot. Sanders supporters were all ages, educated, common sense pro citizens representing the 99%. His agenda appealed to working class, poor, middle class. Its friggin hogwash to believe any polls, or any percentages…that argument will argued for decades. Perhaps the Mueller report will provide some new information.

  76. nathan arizona says:

    Not voting at all or for Stein was pretty much voting for Trump. Good job. But I think most Bernie fans were smarter than that.

    Trump doesn’t believe in polls either. Great minds . . .

  77. anon 1 says:

    http://www.alternetsurveys.org/survey-would-bernie-have-beaten-trump/

    Donna Brazile’s book exposes Clinton and DNC agreement, Sanders didnt know about for almost a year…all through the primary and general election. Newsweek and others did many stories on that issue…It was rigged…that issue, Trump didnt lie about.

  78. RE Vanella says:

    I’m totally convinced. Incredible work. Compelling and rich.

    In news from reality, had a great chat with Chris Johnson this evening. Cool music at Gallucio’s too..

    Just vote for Chris Johnson AG in September. It’s not even a question.

    On ditzy anonymous…

    Don’t pay attention to this this fucking dummy. Between you and me, I don’t even read what she writes. (It’s a secret!)

    Don’t care. (Not a secret..)

  79. RE Vanella says:

    You guys should definitely argue more. We totally respect anonymous content.

    I vote based on a coin flip.

  80. RE Vanella says:

    Spread sheets!

  81. anon 1 says:

    https://twitter.com/VicStoddard/status/1002378051945095169/photo/1

    This is what the GOP has evolved into.

    RE: so you don’t anonymous…ok…you convinced me…I shall now be who I am..screw it. I am Liz Allen…now lets see the haters come out.

  82. Alby says:

    You two are working from different data sets. Independents can vote in open primaries, so it’s quite possible that 24% of primary voters defected, because not all of them are Democrats. But most aren’t Republicans, either, though there is some of that kind of crossover voting — that’s how Dan Lipinski won his primary this spring, for example.

    I think the takeaway is that there’s always a bleed rate of around 10%. Trump got the same number of votes Romney got. Hillary underperformed Obama in the states that mattered, so the election was lost because people either stayed home or had their votes suppressed.

  83. anon 1 says:

    Again, forgetting the Russian bots, Sauds, Israel, and other foreign governments who were involved (conspiracy) to elect Trump. Look at the states Trump won, they only had to take a few states to permit Trumps win. Hilary still got 3 million more votes and lost.

  84. Liberal Elite says:

    @A “so it’s quite possible that 24% of primary voters defected”

    Thanks for this. I think your post is mostly correct, but I think that if you actually look at the numbers, you’ll see that it can’t be as high as 24%, nationally.

    Consider:
    1. There weren’t that many open primaries (less than half of the states).
    2. The fraction of non-party members voting was small, for states that had open primaries. Larger fractions than in GOP contests, but still rather small, overall.

    My argument is based on the actual election results…

    If there was a massive 24% defection of Hillary supporters (~20% of the electorate), you simply cannot explain a rather large 7% popular vote win for Obama. There’s simply no corner of the electorate out there to make up for such a large defection.

  85. RE Vanella says:

    Pulled an all-nighter in Excel. Lots of V-Lookups and nested IF statements.

    Big news, folks. Kayne is president.

    I couldn’t believe it either.

  86. RE Vanella says:

    I also had a conference call with the professors at Duke, LSU and Ohio St and their teams. Provided thwm the internet comments from the anonymous grandma.

    They’re working on a full retraction.

    Big night.