Super Tuesday: it's going to be huge
March 1, 2016 1:11 AM   Subscribe

The March 1st round of voting in US primaries and caucuses is today. Since 1988, no candidate has won his party’s nomination without winning Super Tuesday. With early voting and absentee voting already happening, the people of Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont and Virginia will turn out for both Republicans and Democrats. Republicans in Alaska will hold caucuses, as will Democrats in Colorado. Democrats in American Samoa also nominate. On the Republican side, with 661 delegates to be allocated today, Donald Trump currently holds the delegate lead. On the Democrat side, with 865 delegates to be delegated today, Hillary Clinton currently holds the delegate lead. (A more visual delegate tracker) The actual POTUS election odds continue to make Hillary the favorite, from Donald with the rest at long odds. Politico has more information on today, as does the Wall Street Journal and 538. With variable weather for voters, Nate Silver being cautious about assumptions and Obama's surprise endorsement of Trump, it's all to play for.
posted by Wordshore (2708 comments total) 52 users marked this as a favorite

 
Good post, Wordshore.

I've been expecting a Republican victory this year because of lukewarm support for Hillary Clinton on the Democrats' side and rabid opposition to her on the Republican side.

As the "cautious about assumptions" 538 link notes, Hilllary Clinton is "quite unpopular". (I think she'd do a great job as president, but I'm just one person). As we get closer to the election, her approval falls and disapproval rises.

So whether it's Rubio, Cruz, or Trump, to me it seems like there's a strong chance of a Republican victory.

Yet the oddschecker.com link seems to show everyone favoring Clinton to win.
posted by Sleeper at 1:40 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


From news media here in the UK this morning:

BBC - US election 2016: Super Tuesday to test candidates.
Guardian - Super Tuesday: crisis for Republican party as Trump heads for victory.
Independent - Super Tuesday: By the time today is over Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton could be set for a show-down.
Telegraph - Super Tuesday: Donald Trump looks stronger than ever as opponents launch toxic attacks.
The Sun - Donald Trump's dark secret: How baby scandal on a Scottish island haunts presidential hopeful's family.
posted by Wordshore at 1:45 AM on March 1 [13 favorites]


That's the best summary I've seen recently of the respective focuses of the Sun versus news outlets.
posted by frimble at 1:52 AM on March 1 [39 favorites]


reagan:obama::ghwbush:hillary [??]
posted by the man of twists and turns at 1:53 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Wow, the Sun's "baby scandal" is a story dating to 1920.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 1:58 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Installed the Drumpfinator extension for maximum fun in this thread.
posted by Pendragon at 2:07 AM on March 1 [20 favorites]


Oh, boy. Stupid Tuesday.

People here keep asking me to explain Trump. And I say, "Look, I don't ask you to apologize for Toru Hashimoto. Or Shinzo Abe for that matter. ..."
posted by oheso at 2:38 AM on March 1 [18 favorites]


My other answer being, "Why the hell do you think I'm here?"
posted by oheso at 2:44 AM on March 1 [48 favorites]




I found out this morning that the the 40 million Hillary received from Wall Street has been more than matched by (over) 40 million that Bernie Sanders has received from, well, not Wall Street.
posted by Juso No Thankyou at 2:52 AM on March 1 [17 favorites]


A friend is dragging me to a pub in Sydney's inner west to watch cable tv so we can see this unfold in the morning. It really does feel ghoulish. If America was a poor country, I'd be accusing my friend of ugly voyeurism. But because I'm a smug (unjustifiably) Australian, and my friend is a smug (justifiably) kiwi, we'll suck it up and eat popcorn while sipping our sav blancs. (After skimming flattened white Campos, hey taz?!)

Looking forward to it. Mwhaha.
posted by taff at 2:56 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


I'll be at work, with no access to a TV, when the results start to roll in. I'm counting on you wonderful fellow Mefites for updates.

And praise Bob for early voting, such a sanity saver.
posted by 1066 at 3:02 AM on March 1


Voting stations, or whatever they are called there, have just opened in Virginia.
posted by Wordshore at 3:02 AM on March 1




And Fark.com has changed their "Politics" tab to "Ow! My balls!" to mark the occasion.
posted by 1066 at 3:07 AM on March 1 [34 favorites]


I can't believe how much resigned Chicken Littling I've been seeing from people this time around. The election is SO far away, the Republican side is SO in chaos, the Dems are, despite deep disagreements, pretty damn well placed to win regardless of who the nominee is, and yet I see people throwing up their hands as if Presidente Trump's boot was already on their necks so why even bother? It's downright perverse. I think some people just get off on the worst case scenario.
posted by showbiz_liz at 3:11 AM on March 1 [133 favorites]


Voting stations, or whatever they are called there
"shame cubicles"
posted by thelonius at 3:19 AM on March 1 [69 favorites]


wanking boxes
posted by pyramid termite at 3:21 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Democratraps
posted by Molesome at 3:32 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Meanwhile here in North Carolina, early voting starts on Thursday and the general primary is on March 15... for national races (President, Senate, House). State and local races have been postponed to this summer due to the battle over gerrymandering which led to a Supreme Court case that upheld the lower court's decision due to Scalia's death, meaning the republican majority here is required to redraw two districts (which actually means redrawing all but one of them, since the two in dispute are so snakey) and then resubmit their plans for approval before candidates know who their constituents will be, and voters know who their candidates are.

I half wish North Carolina had been on the Super Tuesday slot just to see more political operators get heart attacks over the winter's turns of events, but this will do. Stakes are high and there is a lot of injustice to rectify but that doesn't mean we can't take our pleasures where we find them.
posted by ardgedee at 3:37 AM on March 1 [10 favorites]


[Quick note: I appreciate the fun stuff, but this is going to be a long thread (yes, I know, it's going to be YUUUGE!) for people to keep loading, so let's try to avoid filling it up with a ton of jokes, snark and repeated comments from other threads. Thanks ]
posted by taz at 3:38 AM on March 1 [19 favorites]


And so it begins.
posted by pxe2000 at 3:56 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I think some people just get off on the worst case scenario.

The sooner people start thinking about the impeachment campaign, the better prepared they'll be.
posted by Segundus at 3:56 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Any republicans, please please please spread the vote around between all three, a throw just enough to Kasich to keep him in. A "brokered" conventions entertainment value is totally worth... oh heck vote for Bernie if you can...
posted by sammyo at 4:09 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


I can't believe how much resigned Chicken Littling I've been seeing from people this time around.

It's a long standing Democratic Party tradition to catastrophize the situation even when things are going your way. That why we have things like the "Everybody Chill The Fuck Out, I Got This" Obama meme.
posted by octothorpe at 4:13 AM on March 1 [33 favorites]


I can't believe how much resigned Chicken Littling I've been seeing from people this time around.

Well, after tonight a dangerously megalomaniacal racist who openly advocates violating the Geneva Conventions and ending journalistic freedom of speech will be the virtually inevitable presidential nominee for one of America's two major parties. It's been a scant few months from "that's impossible!" to "dear God, please let him lose the general election." People are off balance.
posted by Pater Aletheias at 4:26 AM on March 1 [71 favorites]


When you americans elect Drumpf, we will be safe here in europe, right ? RIGHT ?
posted by Pendragon at 4:26 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


MetaFilter: Even when things are going your way.
posted by lazycomputerkids at 4:26 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


the basic problem is that the opportunity for moderate "pragmatic" politics is already over. when, not if, but when the next crisis comes there's no room for an Obama to come in and make a tweak here and there, give a blandly inspiring speech and exit to a lucrative public consultancy because we've tried that and it hasn't worked, it wasn't "pragmatic", it was just a reaction against the feeling of crisis.

so, the question is whether "real" change is going to come from the right or the left.
posted by ennui.bz at 4:31 AM on March 1 [10 favorites]


Yeah, seriously. Go read threads from August and see what people were saying about Trump. Since then he's only become more of a caricature, and has only gotten more and more popular. And even on the D side, Bernie Sanders is doing way better than anyone thought possible at the beginning of the campaign. This election has contradicted everyone's expectations and that means no one knows what's going to happen in the general and that is scary.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 4:33 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Yeah, but to go from 'it's scary' to 'we have no chance of winning' is patently ridiculous. It's MARCH!
posted by showbiz_liz at 4:36 AM on March 1 [13 favorites]


I am voting after work today with the two millennial voters I spawned. Voting has always been a big family event for us because I am a nerd. I am a little bit envious of them, because they are so enthusiastic about their candidate of choice. When I was their age it was Reagan2.

Because of their enthusiasm, I am also a bit nervous for them (and their cohort) -- their candidate losing will teach hard lessons about the political machine, the value of a vote, and settling. It's one thing for a former non-voter to get fired up. It's another thing for a former voter to become discouraged. I fear that a lot of first-time voters will end up as one-time-only voters.
posted by headnsouth at 4:40 AM on March 1 [10 favorites]


The op-eds are rolling as well...

As Europe knows, democracies do die. Often, they are the midwives of their own demise. (NYT)

Sanders is thus an almost perfect secret weapon against Trump. He can pull off the only maneuver that is capable of neutralizing Trump: ignoring him and actually keeping the focus on the issues. (Current Affairs)

Yes, we could be like the good citizens who voted for a 'tameable' Hitler back in 1933 to get things back on track. But the alternatives look worse. (Unknown)

Warren Buffett has a message for presidential candidates and others who are down on the U.S. economy: You are “dead wrong.”
(WSJ)

Perhaps the crowning disaster of this long list of disasters has been Hillary's relentless promotion of CIA-led regime change in Syria. (HuffPo)

White women may be flocking to the socialist dream of Bernie Sanders, but black women aren’t buying it. (Telegraph, UK)

“The Republican Party would be split apart if he became the nominee,” Rubio said about Trump on Friday in Oklahoma City. (Bloomberg)

Trump and his troops are killers in making. (Rolling Stone)

If young people come out in a large number to oppose [Trump], he could be in trouble, perhaps not in primaries but if he is nominated, definitely in the general (Mother Jones)

Having reduced the Republican establishment to quivering jelly, Mr Trump will now turn that voice, language and values, or lack of them, on the rest of the country (Financial Times)
posted by nickrussell at 4:43 AM on March 1 [18 favorites]


It's one thing for a former non-voter to get fired up. It's another thing for a former voter to become discouraged. I fear that a lot of first-time voters will end up as one-time-only voters.

Isn't that true for all generations of voters, though? Candidates lose. In the US, if only 40% of the voters have a candidate who loses, that's considered a blow-out election.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 4:45 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


In my experience, it's easier easier for a voter to become discouraged after their candidate of choice wins.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 4:49 AM on March 1 [20 favorites]


Cool! Thanks to that " visual delegate tracker" I discovered that I can vote through Democrats Abroad now and it actually counts for something rather than waiting until June primaries in California when it will likely all be over. Thank you, Wordshore.
posted by Gotanda at 4:53 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


I can't believe how much resigned Chicken Littling I've been seeing from people this time around...

The Republican Party ain't done until they're done. I expect to go out canvassing this cycle because I don't want him in the white house.
posted by JoeXIII007 at 5:00 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Oh what a lovely day!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:01 AM on March 1 [18 favorites]


I knew Jon Oliver's rebaptism reminded me of something:

"Er griff sein vorpals Schwertchen zu,
Und suchte lang das manchsam' Ding;
Dann, stehend unterm Tumtum Baum,
Er an-zu-denken-fing.

Als stand er tief in Uldacht auf,
Des Jammerwochen's Augen-feuer
Durch tulgen Wald gar wifflich kam,
Ein drumpfend Ungeheuer!

Eins, Zwei! Eins, Zwei! Und durch und durch
Sein vorpals Schwert zerschniffer-schnück,
Da blieb es todt! Er, Kopf in Hand,
Geläumfig zog zurück."

Of course, had Robert Scott checked his Upper Austrian Volksmund dictionary, he'd have found the word exists - and quite aptly, at that: (dahin) drumpfen - eilfertig und trutzend fortgehen = to act in pigheaded haste.
posted by progosk at 5:01 AM on March 1 [22 favorites]


Today also marks the start of in-person voting for the delegates assigned to Democrats Abroad. There are polling places all over, scheduled on various days over the next week, and you can also vote by remote ballot. And as Gotanda pointed out, it actually counts for something!

Of course you could also vote absentee in your former state's primary, if it's a primary; you can't do both. And if you're wanting to vote in the Republican primary from abroad, you can only do that via your state's absentee process; there aren't delegates in that primary specifically assigned to overseas voters.
posted by nat at 5:01 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I was honestly snookered by that Obama endorsement article until I finished it. Why is this not real?
posted by Trifling at 5:02 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Looking a little closer at the betting markets (and bearing in mind that odds can and do change, and if you lose then you lose), there are other options.

At Ladbrokes:
- Cruz to end/suspend his campaign before March 8th: 2/1
- Donald Trump NOT to be Republican nominee: 5/2
- Hillary Clinton NOT to win 2016 presidential election: 6/5
- Bloomberg to announce run for president: 3/1
- Donald Trump to run as a 3rd party candidate: 8/1
- Biden beats Cruz in the 2016 presidential election: 500/1

Over at Paddy Power:
- Republicans - Virginia Primary: Trump (1/33), Rubio (15/2), Cruz (12/1)...
- Republicans - Texas Primary: Cruz (1/14), Trump (5/1), Rubio (10/1)...
- Republicans - Oklahoma Primary: Trump (1/25), Rubio (7/1), Cruz (7/1)...

Over at Coral:
- Democrat Candidate: Clinton (1/20), Sanders (9/1), Biden (22/1).

And William Hill:
- To Become President Of The United States In Their Lifetime: George Clooney (100/1), Kanye West (200/1), Will Smith (250/1), Lady Gaga (500/1), Tiger Woods (500/1).
posted by Wordshore at 5:03 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


A new CNN poll today had Clinton beating Trump 52-44, and Sanders beating Trump 55-43. As others have said, it's a long way until November, so those numbers aren't predictive. But I think they do show that most people are not entirely excited about voting for Trump.

I was one of the people who was convinced that Trump wouldn't win the Republican nomination because my thinking was that at some point, the entire party would try to take him down. Well hey, I was at least partly right! It's just... what took them so long?

Love 'em or hate 'em, the Clintons know how to play dirty in politics. I think the range of outcomes for November are anywhere from "holy shit narrow Trump win" to "holy shit landslide Clinton victory and Trump's name is forever garbage, his kingdom in ruin."
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 5:03 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


I think the problem is that the party did try to take him down, but that just made the base love him more.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 5:06 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


My optimistic take is that Trump as GOP candidate kills GOP GOTV and helps the Dems get the Senate back. But I guess we'll see!
posted by Elementary Penguin at 5:07 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


A new CNN poll today had Clinton beating Trump 52-44,

Even if that's considered a win, the thought that 44% of Americans are okay with this is terrible.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:07 AM on March 1 [23 favorites]


Not 44% of Americans, 44% of American voters.
posted by showbiz_liz at 5:10 AM on March 1 [33 favorites]


I think the problem is that the party did try to take him down, but that just made the base love him more.

They hoped he'd go away, while they fought each other to occupy the "establishment" lane. Look at the advertising in Iowa and New Hampshire. It was all circular firing squad, leaving Trump untouched. The thinking was: don't attack Trump, because you want his voters when he leaves the race.

The other thing is that as a Republican, it's hard to criticize Trump for his super racist, misogynistic, I-love-war-crimes rhetoric. You can't criticize that when that's your base! Democrats won't have that problem.

I mean, the Republicans are just now attacking Trump for being a bullshit artist who sucks at business and peddles scams, swindling dupes out of their money. They waited this long... why?
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 5:11 AM on March 1 [10 favorites]


Not 44% of Americans, 44% of American voters.

That might be worse, considering most of those people why stay home are just voting "I don't care."
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:13 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


That might be worse, considering most of those people why stay home are just voting "I don't care."

They could be voting, "I don't trust that the computers will accurately tabulate my vote, so since we're just getting the prearranged results, so there is literally no point."
posted by mikelieman at 5:14 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Hey, be fair, don't forget the mass disenfranchisement of the poor!
posted by showbiz_liz at 5:15 AM on March 1 [34 favorites]


( And for disclosure, that's my view, but I Vote Left! just in case they're not rigged. )
posted by mikelieman at 5:15 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


They could be voting, "I don't trust that the computers will accurately tabulate my vote, so since we're just getting the prearranged results, so there is literally no point."

And also: I don't want to go outside and absorb more chemtrails.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 5:16 AM on March 1 [31 favorites]


To Become President Of The United States In Their Lifetime: George Clooney (100/1), Kanye West (200/1), Will Smith (250/1), Lady Gaga (500/1), Tiger Woods (500/1)

I would definitely vote for Zombie George Clooney.
posted by Dr Dracator at 5:16 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


The other thing is that as a Republican, it's hard to criticize Trump for his super racist, misogynistic, I-love-war-crimes rhetoric. Democrats won't have that problem.

but they will have the problem that Trump will attack Clinton *from the left* on jobs, the economy, banking, inequality even (i bet). If you think about it, it's really not good regardless of who wins.

also, who loves war crimes more, Trump or Kissinger-is-my-foreign-policy-guru Hillary?
posted by ennui.bz at 5:16 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


also, who loves war crimes more, Trump or Kissinger-is-my-foreign-policy-guru Hillary?

It's the guy who very recently suggested targeting the families of terrorists. I don't love Hillary's connection with Kissinger either either, but the answer to your actual question isn't hard.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 5:20 AM on March 1 [85 favorites]


I still have a hope that some inside maneuvering or a gaffe will sideline Trump, but that is probably just wishful thinking.

As a measure of anger at business as usual, the support for Trump and Sanders should say a lot.
posted by Dip Flash at 5:21 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


When the choice is the lesser of two evils, you may as well vote for the Best Evil.

Could Cthulhu trump the other Super Tuesday contenders?: The US goes to the polls on 8 November. Who knows, if the voting goes Cthulhu’s way, maybe the national motto, In God We Trust, has had its day. The question after that will be whether this will fit on a dollar bill: Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wgah’nagl fhtagn (“In his house at R’lyeh, dead Cthulhu waits dreaming”).
posted by sapagan at 5:23 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


I know it is not a good idea to mention Hitler when addressing an issue that is not about Hitler and WWII, but having spent some time working and teaching Holocaust courses and issues, I can better appreciate the spell the German leader cast on the needy Germans as he rose to power; how bamboozled they were by his promises and accusations and the emptiness of his rhetoric when I see the GOP front runner getting such massive support from true believers, those white middle class folks threatened by Others, non-whites, taking over "their" country.

On the bright side, whereas the volk of Germany mostly supported their imagined messiah, in our country there seems a lot of people who just might stand up to Der Trump and say Never Again.
posted by Postroad at 5:24 AM on March 1 [17 favorites]


Trump is the Republican candidate who is:

--against the Iraq war
--against war with Russia
--for 'not letting people die in the streets' due to lack of health care
--willing to speak in defense of planned parenthood
--in favor of affirmative action for minorities
--in favor of gay rights
--against cutting Social Security or Medicare

I'm rooting for him to win the Republican nomination.

The other guys are worse, just smoother about how they say it.
posted by zipadee at 5:24 AM on March 1 [11 favorites]




In case anyone here thinks this is the most important election ever, the great Samantha Bee has a reminder for you (discussion over at FanFare).
posted by lmfsilva at 5:27 AM on March 1 [12 favorites]


Postroad, I love your comment, but I also love that zipadee's is directly below it. In your research, what did you find about the spell he cast not just on those who were drawn to his racial and ethnic rhetoric, but on reasonable people who thought to themselves "you know he might not be as bad as he lets on; there are a few things that I like about him?"
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 5:28 AM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Why is Trump not business as usual, in America if not in politics? A guy getting ahead, strictly on the basis of his sales and marketing appeal? His whole career is, at this point, built around funny money, personal branding, and letting others take on his risk, by having shell companies file for bankruptcy protection. Over the years, I've witnessed some of his shenanigans on the Miss. Gulf Coast and New Orleans, and there are plenty of other examples, as "Next Week Tonight" demonstrated. He is, in part, the 2007 recession causes personified. His campaign financing is funny money-oriented as well. Then there's the racism, which isn't exactly different than "business as usual," except that he's quasi-open about it (as in, say something blatantly racist today, then say the opposite or deny you said it later).
posted by raysmj at 5:30 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


It's the guy who very recently suggested targeting the families of terrorists. I don't love Hillary's connection with Kissinger either either, but the answer to your actual question isn't hard.

we are already targeting the families of "terrorists" although we keep the body count down by counting any male relative of a terrorist as a terrorist.

but, Kissinger was front and center for the illegal bombing of Cambodia, the genocide in east Timor, mass political murder in Chile, and more! he's a for real war criminal and Hillary is an admirer.

it's really not an easy question.
posted by ennui.bz at 5:39 AM on March 1 [31 favorites]


also, who loves war crimes more, Trump or Kissinger-is-my-foreign-policy-guru Hillary?
It's the guy who very recently suggested targeting the families of terrorists. I don't love Hillary's connection with Kissinger either either, but the answer to your actual question isn't hard.


To me, the distinction here seems to be not whether either of them would do this, but whether they would brag about it afterward.
posted by indubitable at 5:41 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Trump is the Republican candidate who is:

Donald Trump is the candidate whose website lists positions on five issues total: Trade reform with China, Veterans Administration Reform, Tax Reform, the Second Amendment, and Immigration. He's not running a traditional campaign where you stake our policy positions and try to enact them when you get into office. I don't think it's wrong to say that we've have zero clue what Trump will actually do on any of the issues you've named, if he even cares enough to do anything on them. He's not running on those issues, and he's made it clear that he's someone for whom honesty, thoughtfulness, and consistency are of no importance.

A Rubio presidency will be Bush-44 with better hair, but a Trump presidency seems totally unpredictable. Given that his most recent appearance is as the megalomaniacal id of the Republican party, I have little faith that it will look like his older positions, though. I'm not saying vote for Rubio (don't, he'll be a terrible president, vote for the Democrat), but the assumption that Trump is more middle of the road candidate seems to be based on an assumption that Trump is a normal politician, which I think is a mistake.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 5:41 AM on March 1 [28 favorites]


> "Trump is the Republican candidate who is: --against the Iraq war"

Although in an interview at the time, he said he supported it.

> "--for 'not letting people die in the streets' due to lack of health care"

Although he wants to get rid of Obamacare and replace it with "Health Savings Accounts" (i.e., screwing over anyone who can't afford health care), and has not stated exactly HOW this will prevent people from dying in the streets.

> "--willing to speak in defense of planned parenthood"

Although not to fund it.

> "--in favor of gay rights"

Although he specifically wants to appoint Supreme Court Justices who will overturn same sex marriage and unmarry literally hundreds of thousands of currently married people.

And so on.

I'll agree that Cruz and Rubio are horrible. As in, no, I would not support Cruz or Rubio over Trump, they're that bad. But if Trump is better, I'm not really seeing it.
posted by kyrademon at 5:42 AM on March 1 [39 favorites]


Surely Trump is America's Berlusconi, not its Hitler or its Mussolini. A businessman who sees running a country as a good business move, nothing more.

Which, Lord knows, is not good, but it's not Godwinningly bad.
posted by ardgedee at 5:43 AM on March 1 [10 favorites]


The most frustrating part so far of how this whole shitstorm has unfolded is that, despite Sanders's successful-beyond-all-dreams campaign, it's not going to change the Democratic platform at all. It's going to be for nothing.

In a normal year, the tremendous response to his message would force the Overton window significantly to the left. But now, Clinton can't tack left at all, or she will think she can't -- rather than being opposed from the right, Trump is going to attack her from the strong-arm, bulldog, 50's-flavored white-populist-economic-Left. He'll call her weak, corrupt, out of touch. She's going to decide the winning strategy is to seem level-headed, competent, experienced, and capable of reaching down both sides of the aisle. That's the gameplan that she and Bill wrote the book on, that's what she will fall back to in times of crisis. And meanwhile, when the left wing complains, they'll be told to stop whining and vote for her -- it's not the right time to make that move yet! and Don't you care about the Supreme Court?

I still think she'll win (and I plan to vote and volunteer to get her elected) but the increasingly rare opportunity to motivate people, to move the frame to the progressive side, and to maybe GOTV and pick up some downballot territory, is lost.
posted by penduluum at 5:45 AM on March 1 [32 favorites]


It's going to be Trump versus Clinton.
Nelson Muntz versus Lisa Simpson.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 5:48 AM on March 1 [20 favorites]


> "A businessman who sees running a country as a good business move, nothing more. Which, Lord knows, is not good, but it's not Godwinningly bad."

A call for "a complete and total shutdown of Muslims coming to the U.S." is not just a businessman planning business things.
posted by kyrademon at 5:50 AM on March 1 [36 favorites]


We Found the Coolest Populist in America, and He’s Running for U.S. Senate
Donald Trump’s slogan is “Make America Great Again.” Is there an alternative narrative that you’d like to advance?

My campaign has released a one-sentence press release calling Donald Trump a “jagoff ,” which is Western Pa. for jerk. Populism has a dark side and Donald Trump is mining that for all it’s worth by saying reprehensible things about Muslims, about immigrants, about you name it. If you get to live vicariously through that and cheer him on, I don’t expect to get your vote, and frankly, I don’t want it.
posted by audi alteram partem at 5:53 AM on March 1 [23 favorites]


One of the few reasons I actually keep my landline is so I can influence pollsters. I'm on the lists as an independent so I tend to get a lot of calls. For robopolls, I usually troll towards the craziest opinions and show little consistency. This actually confuses the robot sometimes, especially when I express very negative opinions of the candidate I previously indicated I support.

For actual people calls, both polls and campaign, I play the role of a Single Issue Voter. This year, my Single Issue has been UFO Disclosure. This has lead to some awkwardly nice conversations (Hillary's campaign chairman is a UFO nut like me), some awkward ones (Bernie doesn't care about cryptids yet he was TOTALLY HAPPY to accept Champ tourist dollars as Mayor of Burlington), and some weird ones (arguing with a Carson caller about whether or not aliens are demons and if they were, who built the pyramids then? GOTCHA *click*).

So what I'm saying is, don't trust the polls. There are a lot of nuts out there getting it out of our system before seriousness hits in November.
posted by robocop is bleeding at 5:54 AM on March 1 [61 favorites]




He was born in New York City.
He's got eye-catchingly odd, and much commented on, blonde hair.
He's rich.
He's an outsider and a maverick in his own party, and has no problem rubbishing the leadership.
He has a morally dubious historical private life.
He's been hostile, occasionally threatening, to journalists.
He's politically opportunistic.
He's the author of several books.
He's been described as the Berlusconi of our time.
He runs as a right-winger, but has a hotch potch of right wing, libertarian and liberal views, which change to suit the situation.
His vocabulary, as politicians go, is unusual.
He has massive grass roots support, which baffles many looking in.
He can work the media like no other. Everything he says and does becomes major news.

And he could, very well, be elected to the top political post in the country by this time next year.

Help us all.
posted by Wordshore at 5:56 AM on March 1 [24 favorites]


All this talk of the Republican party splitting apart or revolting over a Trump nomination is just wishful thinking. The GOP always gets behind its nominee. Remember how much they hated the traitorous John McCain? They all fell in line even after his ludicrous choice of Palin for a VP. Remember how unexcited the fundies where about a Mormon nominee? It didn't matter. I'm betting the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson will be paying back Trump's loans to his campaign this fall.
posted by Bee'sWing at 6:04 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Bernie Sanders has also raised millions from Wall Street for the Democratic Senate Campaign Comittee.
posted by humanfont at 6:05 AM on March 1


I read "The Rise of Hitler's Empire" a few years ago, and I'm not afraid to go Godwin. The echoes are just plain there. It's not about Trump, it's not about Palin, it's the followers. It's all the organizations, the KKK, the Militias. All wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross.
posted by Trochanter at 6:05 AM on March 1 [29 favorites]


If we're going to descend into fascism, insurrection, and civil war, why couldn't we have done it back in my 20s?
posted by entropicamericana at 6:09 AM on March 1 [19 favorites]


A Rubio presidency will be Bush-44 with better hair, but a Trump presidency seems totally unpredictable.

My Inverse Black Mirror Theory of presidential politics predicts Trump will defeat Hillary in a landslide, execute the office of President wisely and prudently for eight years, heal our partisan wounds, marry Gloria Steineim, and be remembered by history as the second coming of George Washington.
posted by echocollate at 6:09 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


their candidate losing will teach hard lessons about the political machine, the value of a vote, and settling. It's one thing for a former non-voter to get fired up. It's another thing for a former voter to become discouraged. I fear that a lot of first-time voters will end up as one-time-only voters.
posted by headnsouth at 4:40 AM on March 1 [3 favorites +] [!]


Glad so much has changed since I cast my first ever presidential vote for Kerry as a college sophomore.

No really, i hope a fuck ton has changed because George W Bush taught me all those lessons in his second term and there are several hundreds of thousands of dead people who cant unlearn them.
posted by Exceptional_Hubris at 6:22 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Voting stations, or whatever they are called there, have just opened in Virginia.

Actually we opened them on Jan 15. While we theoretically don't have "early voting" the requirements for absentee are exceptionally easy to meet. I happen to be away but simply being outside your home county for work is enough.
posted by phearlez at 6:23 AM on March 1


[A couple of comments deleted. Let's drop the derail about the computers being prearranged to tabulate voting a certain way, please.]
posted by taz at 6:33 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Greg Sargent: Democrats are taking the Trump threat very, very seriously. They’re right.
Trump is making a very different kind of appeal. He is not arguing that the way to help struggling Americans is to get government out of the way; it’s to get stupid, corrupt, and/or weak elites out of the way. He is not an economic technocrat. He’s an economic bull-in-the-China shop who knows the elites’ scam from the inside and is here to bust up their party. Judging by the months of polling and voter interviews we’ve seen, he appears to be connecting with a sense among many people that the system is cheating ordinary people on a profound level — on behalf of illegal immigrants, multinational corporations, China, and Mexico (the “new China) — and that he’d set all this right with smarts and, above all, strength. Trump relentlessly repeats two phrases: “Politicians are all talk and no action,” and “we’re going to make America great again.” In this telling, Hillary Clinton — another establishment politician who takes lots of Wall Street money and is openly sounding defeatist tones about the limits of the possible — would simply be cast as part of the problem.

Judging by the New York Times’s reporting, Democrats get this and are starting to think seriously about how to counter it. Obviously Trump would start out at a tremendous demographic advantage, and it’s very possible that even if Trump did win over a lot of blue collar whites, he’d still get swamped by the Democrats’ advantage among core their constituencies, who might be inspired by Trump to turn out in astronomical numbers. A Trump nomination would also encourage Dems to redouble their focus on Rust Belt swing states, which are probably Trump’s best hope for surprise inroads, with the result that Trump could end up facing an insurmountable electoral college map, as well. Still, it’s good to see Dems operating from the premise that a cakewalk defeat of Trump is anything but a certainty, particularly in a year as strange as this one.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:35 AM on March 1 [10 favorites]


All this talk of the Republican party splitting apart or revolting over a Trump nomination is just wishful thinking. The GOP always gets behind its nominee.

Yeah. Just wait until the Fox News Machine gets behind him 24/7. They would LOVE him as a presidential nominee. It will literally be Trump 24/7. How great Trump's policies are. How great he's going to protect the country. How you all have to get out and vote otherwise the evil muslims and liberals are going to win and destroy our country. Even the most respected of Republican candidates will say something like "I don't like the man, but I believe he's Americas best hope!"

Surely Trump is America's Berlusconi, not its Hitler or its Mussolini. A businessman who sees running a country as a good business move, nothing more.


I largely agree with this, but man what he'll do just out of arrogance and grandstanding scares the piss out of me. I also feel like he's a fairly incompetent man and would have some fairly successful backroom corruption to make him and his cronies even more money, but in the long run he'll actually get ran over and eaten by the real backroom players. And these are the backroom players that play for keeps on the world.
posted by mayonnaises at 6:35 AM on March 1 [8 favorites]


All this talk of the Republican party splitting apart or revolting over a Trump nomination is just wishful thinking. The GOP always gets behind its nominee.

Anecdata only but my Father-in-Law and a number of other die hard Republicans I know hate Trump. HATE him. They all plan to not vote if Trump gets the nod. My FiL has multiple framed photos of Reagan and Bush I, and countless Reagan memorabilia. The GOP stands behind their guy, but Trump aint their guy.
posted by Twain Device at 6:37 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


People really need to stop trying to sell Trump as "maybe not so bad" to the left. He's fucking horrible just like Ruboto and Cruz are fucking horrible. He's wrapping himself in an insane bubble of faux populism like he's actually planning on doing anything to the entrenched interests when he is a part of the .01% that the game is rigged for.

I understand that Hillary is not so popular with progressives for a variety of reasons (she's relatively hawkish, she's cozy with bankers, etc) but to pretend that she's not vastly better than any of the Republicans is fucking nuts.

So vote for Sanders in the primary to show your displeasure with the Democrats and DNC for rigging the game and if you absolutely cannot support Hillary on moral grounds in November then vote for someone like Jill Stein especially if you live in a state that is reliably Red or reliably Blue. But don't even consider voting for Trump unless you are willing to admit that you want to go full accelerationist.

Because while a good number of people here are well insulated by their privilege there are also plenty of people whose lives would be appreciably worse without ACA or if the Republicans are able to get an ironclad 6-3 majority in the SCOTUS. I know progressives are tired about hearing "but what about the SCOTUS" but please stop and consider your fellow Americans for a bit before racing down the accelerationist highway.
posted by vuron at 6:38 AM on March 1 [74 favorites]


They all plan to not vote if Trump gets the nod.

My question is whether they stay home or vote for Hillary Clinton.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:39 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Just staying home is good enough.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 6:39 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Update from Massachusetts! I was in line when the polls opened, with half a dozen people in front of me. Somehow, folks in line got the idea that it was necessary to produce ID before being allowed to vote, and the woman behind me in line started talking about needing to go back out to the car to get her driver's license, but that would mean she'd be late for work so maybe she'd just leave.

Fortunately, at just this moment, I was next in line, and the poll worker (not an elections official, but they're paid workers who nominally train for this in MA) asked me for identification. Many Shuvs and Zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of the Slor this day, I can tell you.
posted by Mayor West at 6:40 AM on March 1 [72 favorites]


My question is whether they stay home or vote for Hillary Clinton.

That's the problem, I think - there's a snowball's chance that a few would flip for Bernie, but none at all that they'll vote for Hillary. The Rs in my office are all SHOCKED!!! that Trump is going to be their candidate, but have all stated that they'll just stay home, they can't in good conscience vote for Hillary, even to block Trump.

In the race against Trump, Bernie's advantage is that he's another white guy, and Hillary's advantage is that she is not. Which advantage is stronger?
posted by Rat Spatula at 6:47 AM on March 1


Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ) is using hatred of Trump in a pretty brutal anti-McCain TV spot.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:47 AM on March 1 [23 favorites]


It is conventional wisdom that people do not turn out to vote *against* someone. But I think this will be different if Hillary can succeed in demonizing Trump with Nazi imagery.
posted by spitbull at 6:47 AM on March 1


I absolutely love voting. I haven't missed an election (national, state, or local) since I became of voting age. The polling location I go to is a sad little event space, but it was humming with a lot of early voters and the dear, dear older people who man the check-in and check-out tables.
posted by xingcat at 6:48 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


but in the long run he'll actually get ran over and eaten by the real backroom players.

they'd better be as good at hiding what they eat as orlotan diners, because if trump is seen as being defeated, or worse, by dirty tricks, you will see real rage in this country
posted by pyramid termite at 6:48 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


That Kirkpatrick ad is exactly what I'm talking about.
posted by spitbull at 6:49 AM on March 1


Fortunately, at just this moment, I was next in line, and the poll worker (not an elections official, but they're paid workers who nominally train for this in MA) asked me for identification. Many Shuvs and Zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of the Slor this day, I can tell you.

I salute those doing this where it is still possible. Sadly, Virginia is no longer one of those states; photo ID is now required by law.
posted by indubitable at 6:50 AM on March 1


All this talk of the Republican party splitting apart or revolting over a Trump nomination is just wishful thinking. The GOP always gets behind its nominee.

I'm not so sure. My parents are diehard GOP loyalists, and my father in particular is a Fox News casualty. We don't discuss it much, but my mother divulged last night that this might be the first primary election in which they don't cast a vote since 1972, because the inmates are running the asylum. The GOP may have out-crazied themselves this time.
posted by Mayor West at 6:51 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


It is conventional wisdom that people do not turn out to vote *against* someone. But I think this will be different if Hillary can succeed in demonizing Trump with Nazi imagery.

I think it's a lot easier to motivate conservatives to vote against a candidate, because they're used to being powered by hate. We liberals are softer and more prone to despair, so we need someone to excite and enthuse us before we take action. And that's why I'm worried about Clinton's chances against Trump in the general, in contrast to Sanders'.
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:53 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Basically Trump's entire strategy depends on GotV of disaffected working class whites in battleground states. Even then simply increasing numbers of voters isn't going to help him unless he also increases his winning percentage among working class whites.

At the same point in time he's got to hope that shenanigans about Voter ID laws will somehow depress minority voting vis-a-vis 2012. And let's be honest he's going to get crushed by Clinton in regards to the Latino community especially if she chooses a charismatic Latino for VP like Julian Castro.

Even the most ardent Republican strategists understand that a base only strategy is a loser for the Republican party moving forward because winning whites by more than 60% is very difficult and if you assume roughly 90% of African-Americans will vote for the Democrat and Asian and Latino voting will hover around 50% turnout with a 65-35 split towards the Democrat and it's exceedingly difficult territory for a Republican to win the presidency.

Republicans are terrified because Trump is putting loser stink all over their crop of Latino candidates (who were supposed to be the new face of Republicans reaching out to the Latino community) while simultaneously engaging in the worst sort of race-baiting aimed at Latinos. This not only damages their shot at the 2016 election but weakens the brand and the Republican Brand is the valuable thing.
posted by vuron at 6:54 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Last I saw in Minnesota, Clinton and Rubio are leading the polls. On the GOP side, Cruz is second and Trump is third. Although this isn't up to the minute polling, so things could have changed. Rubio will also be stopping here today - I think the only candidate to do so. Though Hillary was/is leading on the Dem side, this is a strong state for Bernie and he has been here a LOT over the past couple of months, including (I think) just this last weekend. We have 77 delegates. I will be heading out to caucus after work.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:58 AM on March 1


Proposed initiative would switch Colorado presidential nomination process from caucus to primary.
posted by audi alteram partem at 7:02 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Among people likely to vote in the Republican primary, people are 86.5 percent more likely to prefer Donald Trump as the first-choice nominee relative to all the others if they “somewhat” or “strongly agree” that “people like me don't have any say about what the government does.” Using statistical techniques, we can conclude that this increased preference for Trump is over and beyond any preferences based on respondent gender, age, race/ethnicity, employment status, educational attainment, household income, attitudes towards Muslims, attitudes towards illegal immigrants, or attitudes towards Hispanics.

The role of “people like me don't have any say…” is not significantly related to preference for Cruz, Rubio, Clinton, or Sanders as the first choice for party nominee (where Clinton and Sanders are rated by likely Democratic primary voters).
(See Figure 6.)

source: RAND Presidential Election Panel Survey

posted by bluecore at 7:06 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Getting rid of caucuses would be a good thing, they tend to be anti-democratic as hell.

Yes caucus states allow for lower cost campaigning and more retail politics because you are mainly focusing on party loyalists but they are also a relic of an older time and less and less acceptable as a way of selecting candidates.
posted by vuron at 7:06 AM on March 1 [8 favorites]


So, I fondly (read: not fondly at all) remember how all the "PUMA" Clinton supporters in 2008 were intimated to vote and campaign for Obama or else!!! and how Clinton herself was responsible to get her base in line. And they did and she did.

What I hear from the Sanders side this time is how Clinton, in the event she wins the nomination, is herself responsible to get the Sanders supporters to vote for her or else!!! she will lose the election for the Dems and it will be all her fault and we should just nominate Sanders regardless because no one will want to vote for her anyway.

Hmmmm. How odd.
posted by lydhre at 7:15 AM on March 1 [14 favorites]


I found out this morning that the the 40 million Hillary received from Wall Street has been more than matched by (over) 40 million that Bernie Sanders has received from, well, not Wall Street.

Bernie's daily emails asked people (who haven't contributed yet) for $3 for a while, and now it's down to $2.70. I don't know if the ask has decreased to get more people to donate, or if they're pushing people who haven't donated yet to give anything.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:16 AM on March 1


Good news, everyone! Sanders has won New Zealand!
posted by Faint of Butt at 7:17 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Another stupid Trump sound bite, unpacked for all it's errors: How Donald Trump Got Everything Wrong About Apple in One Sentence
I was saying make America great again, and I actually think we can say now, and I really believe this, we’re gonna get things coming … we’re gonna get Apple to start building their damn computers and things in this country, instead of in other countries.
It’s hard to quantify exactly how much Trump gets wrong with that one statement, and how little power he will have, if elected, to do what he says.

But Recode tries, and does a good job of breaking it down.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:19 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]




instead of another 800+ comments on trump vs rubio vs cruz vs clinton vs sanders, i was wondering if anyone has any interesting, neat, weird, or otherwise notable downballot votes this election? i early voted yesterday and got to give a vote for a city council person running for judge who helped our anti-discrimination ordinance pass, i got to vote against a judge who is getting too cozy with the local big money (and for a judge who favors treatment focused drug courts instead of long prison sentences). i got to decide if the incumbent judge who has a strong history of domestic violence advocacy was better than a new comer with a history of really understanding the foster care system and vowed to consider families when sentencing people. every single thing on my ballot was more interesting than the big question.
posted by nadawi at 7:19 AM on March 1 [26 favorites]


What I hear from the Sanders side this time is how Clinton, in the event she wins the nomination, is herself responsible to get the Sanders supporters to vote for her or else!!!

From Sanders' New Hampshire victory speech:
I also hope that we all remember -- and this is a message not just to our opponents, but to those who support me as well. That we will need to come together in a few months and unite this party, and this nation because the right-wing Republicans we oppose must not be allowed to gain the presidency.
posted by audi alteram partem at 7:20 AM on March 1 [40 favorites]


roomthreeseventeen: Vox: Donald Trump ditched free market ideology for nationalism — and it's working

A different spin: Trump understands the grand-stand politics better than his counterparts - say what will rally the most voters, even if it doesn't hold water and is nigh impossible - but what will he actually do if he wins?
posted by filthy light thief at 7:22 AM on March 1


TBH, I'd just like to vote for this guy again.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:23 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


As someone who grew up going to integrated schools in a segregated city, I say fuck Donald Trump. I don't care if he is left of the rest of the Republican field. I'd rather see President Rubio, or anyone else. No one who openly courts white supremacists, advocates violence against protestors, and puts forward openly racist policy positions should ever be elected. It's the 21st century. Leave this Strom Thurmond-Bull Connor shit to the dead past where it belongs.
posted by Existential Dread at 7:24 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Yes, Bernie supports party unity even if he's not the nominee. Too bad so many of his vocal supporters do not.
posted by palomar at 7:25 AM on March 1 [20 favorites]


That attack ad from Kirkpatrick on McCain is fucking brutal. Can you imagine similar ads running against every endangered Republican Senator? That is the sort of shit that demolishes campaigns and political careers and basically everytime that the DRUMPF speaks he's providing a massive amount of ammo to be used in attack ads at Republicans. Yeah he might be driving disaffected brownshirts into a frenzy but he's also scaring the fuck out of a lot of Americans who wanted to retain the polite fiction that the nice Republican couple next door weren't about to send you off to a concentration camp the first chance they get.

Yes I'm playing up he fascist similarities a lot but that is the sort of thing that Trump's rhetoric is mimicking. Naked unabashed racism directed at minorities as a way of scapegoating them for the declining privilege of a panicked white majority. I'm sure if Sanders was the nominee he'd play up the anti-semitism that is lurking under the surface as well but right now he mainly is focusing his vilification on Latinos that are coming into the country and stealing jobs and raping women. This is incredibly dangerous rhetoric that amplifies the dogwhistles that "polite" Republicans have been using since the 60s.
posted by vuron at 7:26 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Too bad so many of his vocal supporters do not.

I dunno, everyone I know says "Bernie in the primary HRC in the general."

Please don't put words in our mouths.
posted by Max Power at 7:27 AM on March 1 [37 favorites]


> Trump [...]
--against the Iraq war
--against war with Russia
--for 'not letting people die in the streets' due to lack of health care
--willing to speak in defense of planned parenthood
--...


Something about that reminds me of the man pages for unix utilities. I suspect it's less the double-dashed arguments and more just the overriding sense that he's a tool.
posted by Westringia F. at 7:28 AM on March 1 [14 favorites]


Please don't put words in our mouths.

palomar said many, not all, which is correct. There are plenty of folks (I include myself) who cannot stomach a Clinton vote, and won't. Hopefully, most of us live in states that will go blue, anyway.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:28 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


are you guys really wanting to have another hillary/bernie supporters fight? are you not utterly bored with that?
posted by nadawi at 7:30 AM on March 1 [76 favorites]


There are plenty of folks (I include myself) who cannot stomach a Clinton vote, and won't. Hopefully, most of us live in states that will go blue, anyway.

Don't vote for yourself, vote for the people who are trapped in red states. They need your help.
posted by mpbx at 7:31 AM on March 1 [11 favorites]


are you guys really wanting to have another hillary/bernie supporters fight? are you not utterly bored with that?


NO THIS WILL BE THE TIME IT IS SETTLED ONCE AND FOR ALL

Next we will determine with 100% accuracy and for all time whether the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified and arrive at a final and definitive answer in the eternal battle of sock sock shoe shoe versus sock shoe sock shoe.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:32 AM on March 1 [48 favorites]


The reason states are "reliably" blue or red is because people go out and vote and make them that way, and also because people don't go out and vote and allow them to remain that way.

So if you live in a blue state, contribute to it staying blue.

And if you live in a red state, do your part to make it even incrementally less so.

Staying home is selfish. We're all in this together.
posted by mpbx at 7:33 AM on March 1 [18 favorites]


Well TBH just tired of the "oh noes Trump" crap too.
posted by Max Power at 7:33 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]




[Officially gonna second the suggestion that this not become the nth open thread for "Clinton supporters are bad" vs "Sanders supporters are bad". We've done it, it drives discussion into a spiral of suck, let's see if we can talk about literally anything else in here.]
posted by LobsterMitten at 7:34 AM on March 1 [43 favorites]


I concur with dropping the Sanders and Clinton thing and would be willing to have my last comment deleted so this doesn't become yet another relitigation of that (which seems to be a relitigation of 2008 and even a relitigation of 2000).
posted by vuron at 7:36 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


if your state is all but guaranteed to go in a specific direction, vote your conscious. if your state has any chance of changing color this election, vote the party line. it's a stupid system, but it's the one we've got. fighting with people in strong red or strong blue states about who they'll vote in the general is pretty silly, i'm more interested in what else they'll vote for now and in november.

and really the important thing is VOTE. people always complain about terrible local reps and school boards and judges and city councils, but they don't get out there and vote for better candidates. we have shitty federal representation because we let the petty tyrants get a foot in the door in our local communities. these are the races that matter the most and the ones you can change the outcome of, not this glorified rigged reality show that is the presidential election.
posted by nadawi at 7:36 AM on March 1 [12 favorites]


New York Magazine: Imagining President Trump: A Conversation
By Jonathan Chait , Rebecca Traister , Ed Kilgore , Annie Lowrey , Gabriel Sherman , Rembert Browne , Marin Cogan , Margaret Hartmann , Eric Levitz and Ben Williams
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:37 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


[Cheers, vuron, intervening comment deleted.]
posted by LobsterMitten at 7:37 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I wonder how Trump's lack of filter would play out if he were in office. All my life there has been speculation that newly elected presidents are taken aside by Those That Truly Are In Power and given a briefing on The True State Of The Planet that they must keep secret at all costs.

If this were really the case, could someone like Trump not let it slip?
posted by sourwookie at 7:38 AM on March 1 [10 favorites]


When I start feeling sad that President Obama is leaving office, I think about how GLEEFULLY he is going to stump against Trump for the Dem nominee. You thought the Correspondents' Dinner speech was brutal? Our beloved President (whom even the Republicans I know have come to respect on a personal level - as a husband and dad) is going to take it to the limit against Trump and all the frothing-at-the-mouth racists who support Trump. All those times Obama held his tongue against the birthers and the Teapublicans and the "You lie!" jerk and everyone else...defeating Trump is going to be Obama's big final victory in office.
posted by sallybrown at 7:39 AM on March 1 [35 favorites]



instead of another 800+ comments on trump vs rubio vs cruz vs clinton vs sanders, i was wondering if anyone has any interesting, neat, weird, or otherwise notable downballot votes this election?


The only other thing on the ballot here in Nashville is the property assessor race, but it is sort of a (local) big deal because there will be a new assessment next year and property values have skyrocketed since the last one.
posted by ghharr at 7:39 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


if your state is all but guaranteed to go in a specific direction, vote your conscious.

If your conscience is telling you to do anything other than vote the party line in a presidential election, it's mistaken.

The time for indulging your conscience is before you get in the voting booth, by volunteering, canvassing, donating, and engaging in activism for your views and preferred candidates.

When you're in the voting booth, you vote to win.
posted by mpbx at 7:41 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


I am not entirely comfortable with the idea that there are very many safe Democratic states in this election. I don't think we really know who Trump is going to be able to mobilize. I think that conventional electoral math may not work this time around.

Anyway, I live in a total purple state, so I will be out knocking doors every weekend starting in May or June. If you live in or near a similar state, it would be awesome if you would volunteer too.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 7:42 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


(That article linked upthread about Hillary and aliens is one of the most...remarkable things I've read recently. I can't believe that's not an April Fools joke. Podesta, who knew?)
posted by sallybrown at 7:43 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


mpbx- if your state is all but guaranted to go in a specific direction, there is no pragmatic benefit to voting party line. There's no terrible urgency for a voter in Texas or New York to vote party line when the electoral college has predetermined where all of the electors of that state will go.
posted by Jpfed at 7:44 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


When I start feeling sad that President Obama is leaving office, I think about how GLEEFULLY he is going to stump against Trump for the Dem nominee. You thought the Correspondents' Dinner speech was brutal? Our beloved President (whom even the Republicans I know have come to respect on a personal level - as a husband and dad) is going to take it to the limit against Trump and all the frothing-at-the-mouth racists who support Trump. All those times Obama held his tongue against the birthers and the Teapublicans and the "You lie!" jerk and everyone else...defeating Trump is going to be Obama's big final victory in office.

I can see the memes already: on the left, a photo of the President owning the shit out of Donald Trump in a big speech, and on the right, a photo of the President watching Trump take the oath of office.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 7:44 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


If your conscience is telling you to do anything other than vote the party line in a presidential election, it's mistaken.

Democracy!
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 7:45 AM on March 1 [18 favorites]


sallybrown: You thought the Correspondents' Dinner speech was brutal? Our beloved President (whom even the Republicans I know have come to respect on a personal level - as a husband and dad) is going to take it to the limit against Trump and all the frothing-at-the-mouth racists who support Trump. All those times Obama held his tongue against the birthers and the Teapublicans and the "You lie!" jerk and everyone else...defeating Trump is going to be Obama's big final victory in office.

Except he won't. Why? Because they're still Americans who will be voting, and at this point, anyone attacking Trump just bolsters his supporters. He's doing that now with Cruz and Rubio (and they're doing the same with comments from him, and I imagine Sanders and Clinton are doing the same thing for all comments against them).

You can't just attack someone and say "that person is a stupid, angry, racist," because there are people who are serious fans of the guy, or at least identify with a number of things he says, so when you attack him, you're attacking them and their views.

How do you take down Trump? Offer something better, in an exciting way. Or spend time reaching out to individual voters and communities to show them why it's dump to want to deport all Muslims and why Mexicans aren't evil people who are both trying to steal your jobs and lazy criminals who want to rob you and get free health care.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:45 AM on March 1 [11 favorites]


Next we will determine with 100% accuracy and for all time whether the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified and arrive at a final and definitive answer in the eternal battle of sock sock shoe shoe versus sock shoe sock shoe.

Or when "wiping: sit or stand?" hits the ballot in November.
posted by Dip Flash at 7:46 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Down here in Texas it's generally about selecting whatever sacrificial lambs we will hopelessly vote for in November who will be crushed by Republicans outspending them 10-1.

There are some local races that are getting pretty contentious as Latino politicians seem to be angling to create new power blocks as more and more cities become majority minority. It will be interesting to see how African American and Latino politicians manage to share power as increasingly it's apparent that they will need to do so to avoid white Republican business candidates from dominating the local landscape by playing minority groups against each other.

As always low voter turnout is the biggest challenge Democratic politicians face in Texas though.
posted by vuron at 7:47 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


i am nearly positive i voted next to a wiping: stander yesterday and i'm still unsettled by the experience.
posted by nadawi at 7:48 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


It's sock sock shoe shoe, what is wrong with you people?
posted by dinty_moore at 7:48 AM on March 1 [52 favorites]


TBH, I'd just like to vote for this guy again.

The tragedy of my voting life is that I never got to support Lawton Chiles for president.
posted by phearlez at 7:51 AM on March 1


i've decided that i'm going to go forward viewing this as the death of the GOP and the strangled cries of angry white people, do my part to GOTV for the Dems, and laugh until it's time to start crying

also, I'm volunteering for the Dem convention in Philly, the City of Brotherly Love! The city of many black and brown people! The city with many Muslims! We are going to take the power of love and reach into Trump's throat and pull out his tongue with the power of love

ARE YOU WITH ME
posted by angrycat at 7:52 AM on March 1 [27 favorites]


I had never considered that sock shoe sock shoe was even an option. Is that really a thing?
posted by cjelli at 7:53 AM on March 1 [27 favorites]


sock shoe sock shoe

what
posted by cortex at 7:54 AM on March 1 [70 favorites]


I really hope this all works out. I look at this election terrified for the people who are going to be seriously affected by it. Like life and death levels of affected by it.
posted by Talez at 7:54 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Count me in the group amazed that sock shoe sock shoe even exists. Next you'll be telling me there are people who pour the milk before the cereal.
posted by sotonohito at 7:56 AM on March 1 [17 favorites]


I'm just waiting for the dust to settle so we can all focus on the Thatcher vs. Mussolini general election.
posted by tobascodagama at 7:56 AM on March 1 [12 favorites]


PPP: Democrats Lead Most FL-Sen Match Ups
-It looks like there's a good chance the second time will be the charm when it comes to getting a medical marijuana initiative passed in Florida. 65% of voters say they'll vote for one this fall to only 28% who are opposed, passing the 60% threshold with some breathing room. There's bipartisan support for the measure with Democrats (75/18), independents (70/22), and Republicans (53/40) all expressing their favor for it.

-Florida is another great example of how the politics have changed on Obamacare. Voters in the state narrowly support it, 42% to 41%, a big departure from the old days when it used to be very unpopular in key swing states like Florida. There's 47/31 favor for it among independents.

-Bill Nelson is Florida's most popular politician, with a 40% approval rating to 32% of voters who disapprove of him. That puts him ahead of the perennially unpopular Rick Scott, who comes in at 38/48, and even further ahead of the newly unpopular Marco Rubio whose Presidential bid has hurt him at home and caused his approval spread to drop down to 31/55.

-Floridians take progressive stances on a trio of key issues we've been polling across the country. 76% of voters in the state support increasing the minimum wage to at least $10 an hour, compared to only 11% who think the status quo is fine and another 11% who would like to eliminate it altogether. That includes 92% support from Democrats, 74% from independents, and 62% from Republicans for going to at least $10 an hour. There's also 69% support in the state for the EPA's Clean Power Plan, with only 25% of voters opposing that. It has 86% Democratic, 72% independent, and 51% Republican support. And there continues to be a broad mandate for background checks on all gun purchases. There's 86/8 support for that overall, including from 89% of Democrats, and 84% of both independents and Republicans.
It's kind of weird (and pretty hilarious IMO) that Rubio is more unpopular than Obamacare by double digits in his home state.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:56 AM on March 1 [16 favorites]


A decade back, my father (resident in Ted Cruz's hometown of Calgary) was in Toronto with my stepmother. When they picked up their rental car the rental agency was out of the midsize they had reserved as well as several other calibres of car and they wound up with a swanky town car.

A day or two later, Pa Biscuit was waiting in the pick-up area of the convention centre for the missus when a tangerine-coloured man inexplicably climbed into the back seat and barked an order to head for the airport. My dad turned and said, "Sorry, Mr. Trump, this is not your car." Trump cursed and sullenly climbed back out.

So what I am saying is that my father could have said, "Yes, sir" and sped away with Drumpf in the back seat to who knows where and maybe saved the USA a lot of trouble ten years down the road.

Sorry.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 7:57 AM on March 1 [179 favorites]


I am honest to god terrified that if we end up with Emperor President Trump he's going to start blithely going after other progressive issues that get his goat that morning.

"Mental illness? That's just a bad excuse from the political correct of our society. If you do something wrong you go to jail."
"Drugs? If you don't want to go to jail for drugs then either get a good lawyer or don't break the law!"
"We need to make sure we're all equal. This whole giving women and minorities extra opportunities to level some mythical playing field has to stop!"
posted by Talez at 7:59 AM on March 1


MetaFilter: what is wrong with you people?
posted by Wordshore at 7:59 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I'm a sock sock shoe shoe person myself, but there are times when sock shoe sock shoe is the prudent choice -- such as when you fear a bear attack or sudden flood may interrupt you between sock sock and shoe shoe, and as everyone agrees, danger is wiser met with one foot shorn than none.
posted by notyou at 8:01 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I go sock shoe shoe sock.
posted by kyrademon at 8:02 AM on March 1 [18 favorites]


sock sock shoe shoe sock shoe sock shoe
posted by shakespeherian at 8:02 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


danger is wiser met with one foot shorn than none

Wait, you shave your feet?
posted by aramaic at 8:03 AM on March 1 [21 favorites]


Sock Sock / Shoe Shoe '16
Make America's Feet Warm Again
posted by saturday_morning at 8:03 AM on March 1 [27 favorites]


Socks by the bedside, shoes by the door. That's a lot of extra walking.

Sock shoe, sock shoe will collapse of its internal contradictions.
posted by Trochanter at 8:04 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]




Sock shoe sock shoe ONLY if wearing lace up boots. I need something to break up all the lacing. Otherwise, sock sock shoe shoe.
posted by chainsofreedom at 8:04 AM on March 1


I'm just waiting for the dust to settle so we can all focus on the Thatcher vs. Mussolini general election.

I wonder what Merkel and Berlusconi's working relationship was like.
posted by Apocryphon at 8:05 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Shoes in the streets, socks in the sheets
posted by shakespeherian at 8:06 AM on March 1 [50 favorites]


Jesse Ventura was interviewed by local media at a Sander's rally yesterday in Minnesota. He said he is split between Trump and Sander's and mentioned that he is considering getting in the race as the Libertarian candidate. The race keeps getting more interesting.
posted by misterpatrick at 8:07 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


[Gently and with love: let's maybe let the sock shoe controversy drop, it's too hot for Mefi.]
posted by LobsterMitten at 8:07 AM on March 1 [48 favorites]


Wait, you shave your feet?

I was going for a word that sounds like "shorn" but means "foot clad in sock and shoe" and decided screw-it, bears may be approaching there's no time for a thesaurus.
posted by notyou at 8:09 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Shod?
posted by kyrademon at 8:09 AM on March 1 [8 favorites]


On the Democrat side,

I can't believe I'm seeing "Democrat" being used as an adjective on Metafilter.
posted by John Cohen at 8:09 AM on March 1 [13 favorites]


You meant "shod".

Back on track . . . I am seriously considering volunteering to GotV this fall, and I have NEVER volunteered politically before. I am that scared of Trump.
posted by chainsofreedom at 8:10 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Wait what? How the fuck can you be a fan of Sanders (who would undeniably be a statist) or Trump (who has absolutely no respect for human rights) and then go lol I'll run as a libertarian when by no stretch of the imagination do either candidates represent the small government ideal preached by libertarians?

I mean Ron Paul was a fucktard but at least he seemed to believe at least some of the bullshit that Libertarians try to preach about but thinking populism is somehow compatible with libertarianism is really sketchy snake-oil Jesse is trying to sell.
posted by vuron at 8:11 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


A couple of live reporting websites from here in Ye Olde Motherlande*:

- BBC News
- Guardian

*The Western Colonies are welcome back into the fold at any time (and we can do a rebranding e.g. rename them Outer Cornwall, or something) but you have to renounce President Trump and swear loyalty to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. Deal?
posted by Wordshore at 8:12 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


That Civ V mod is OK but it would have been better to have the the unhappiness scale up as you adopt more social policies, which are limited to the Tradition, Honor, and Commerce trees. The Landschrect are replaced by Border Patrol and cannot be upgraded, but their defensive bonuses scale up over time. For ideology you can only choose autocracy and the offensive bonuses only apply within your own borders.

When great people are born you can publicly execute them for a spike in happiness equal to the number of times the barbarian hordes have been repelled from your borders.

The only Victory Condition is Time, when the entire map is devoured by the sun along with all our suffering.
posted by Tevin at 8:12 AM on March 1 [12 favorites]


Fully expecting the 2020 election to be decided via cagematch. Trump rallys around look and sound like a WWE event.
posted by entropicamericana at 8:13 AM on March 1


I see we're laughing so we don't cry. We're going to have to figure out how to move forward after this. I have no desire in seeing all these people - friends, coworkers, acquaintances - feeling emboldened enough to let their hatred show now that Drumpf's popularity makes them think its okay for them to do so. Basically I just realized that 8 years later, I'm back here again, thinking about resources that help you navigate personal and professional relationships and conversations.
posted by cashman at 8:14 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I was encouraged by the number of minority voters at my polling place, all asking for Dem ballots. There were only two downballot races with a real choice, in both cases I picked the woman because we need more women but also because the dudes talked about cutting taxes while they talked about infrastructure and education.
posted by emjaybee at 8:16 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


John Cena/The Rock vs Brock Lesnar/Triple-H would make for an interesting GE no-hold barred cage match in Madison Garden for the Presidency of the USA entropicamericana.

Just as Brock Lesnar is about to pin John Cena the lights would go out and Taker would explode out of the middle of the ring to usher us into a new zombie future.
posted by vuron at 8:17 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Except he won't. Why? Because they're still Americans who will be voting, and at this point, anyone attacking Trump just bolsters his supporters.

Anybody willing to vote for Drumpf now is pretty much Drumpf always.

Never, ever, EVER let the other side decide your actions. If 51% of the voting population is voting Trump, there's nothing you can do. If 35% is voting Drumpf, then who you need to convince are the people who definitely aren't voting for you. Not the Drumpf voters. They hate you regardless of what you do. Saying "but that will just encourage them!" is insane. They're already encouraged! Anybody willing to go all in for Drumpf is NEVER going to vote D.

You don't win by attract the sure voters for the other side. You win by attracting the unsure voters, and a large part of the unsure population is going to be thinking "But...Drumpf?" Those are the people you need to win the election with, and the best thing you can do is show just what a clusterfuck the Drumpfidency would be.

the drumpty dance is your chance to do the Drumpf
posted by eriko at 8:17 AM on March 1 [11 favorites]


Fully expecting the 2020 election to be decided via cagematch.

My email signature was recently changed to read "Elizabeth Warren/Joseph P. Kennedy III 2020: Retrieving America from Four Years of Trumpocalypse".

Actually, there's a thought; perhaps time for a 2020 US election thread here on MetaFiOW CORTEX STOP IT THAT HURTS OKA
posted by Wordshore at 8:19 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


If you've NEVER shaved your big toe, even once, just to see, then you are lacking in the experimental spirit upon which the American Dream is based.

Or you're less hairy than I am.
posted by showbiz_liz at 8:20 AM on March 1 [14 favorites]


*The Western Colonies are welcome back into the fold at any time (and we can do a rebranding e.g. rename them Outer Cornwall, or something) but you have to renounce President Trump and swear loyalty to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. Deal?

I'm good with that, I'm good with footie, I *love* real ale, but the u in color is going to be a friction point, I think.
posted by eriko at 8:20 AM on March 1 [10 favorites]


It's kind of weird (and pretty hilarious IMO) that Rubio is more unpopular than Obamacare by double digits in his home state.

Both opinions are the result when people get to know them better.
posted by phearlez at 8:23 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


instead of another 800+ comments on trump vs rubio vs cruz vs clinton vs sanders, i was wondering if anyone has any interesting, neat, weird, or otherwise notable downballot votes this election?

I spent a few hours online last night researching my local downballot races, and I'm glad I did. I wasn't particularly impressed by the statements from one of the judge candidates in the League of Women Voters Guide, so I was planning on voting for the other guy. And then I ran across information that Other Guy had a history of voting in more Republican than Democratic primaries, and that his wife was one of the Republican candidates for the same spot on the primary on the other side. (So that, if they both won their primaries, someone in their family would be guaranteed to wind up with the job, you see - and they'd admitted it!) So research does mean something. I also found a site that had organized a table for the contested races showing who had picked up which endorsements, which was also helpful.

Maybe most of these people will end up slaughtered in the general, who knows. I'm in a blue county in a red state that is gerrymandered to hell, but there are lot of very cool referenda items on the Democratic ticket, all of which I was excited to vote for.

So I voted this morning, and I've got my little sticker to show for it, and I couldn't be happier. And just for the record, not everyone on the left side of the fence thinks Hillary Clinton has a likeability issue or will only vote for her while holding their noses. I'm very excited about the choice I made.
posted by Salieri at 8:23 AM on March 1 [13 favorites]


Also there is a guy with Trump signs down the street but also two houses with Hilary signs. As soon as we know who the nom is, we'll be getting signs for them. We're still a red state, but we need to encourage our fellow Dems.
posted by emjaybee at 8:25 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I just want to throw something out there...

So, I've listened to lots of Trump, and also listened to lots of Trump speech in the past. He's always been boastful, but back when he was the Reform Party candidate he really did sound like a different person. His tone and style had much more moderation and nuance to them. Not only did he sounded pretty reasonable, but he had an entirely different personality. Hillary's commented to this effect in her comments on meeting Donald in the past. Some folks are attributing this change to Trump just playing his audience, but I don't think that's it at all. The personality change he displays has a series of worrying traits, with hyper-aggression, the wild opinions, and the disturbing repetition which I think indicate something else entirely.

Donald Trump turns 70 in June. Trump's own father died from Alzheimer's Disease. We know now that dementia is known to manifest itself far earlier than would be indicated by more overt symptoms.

I think Donald Trump is in the early stages of senility.
posted by leotrotsky at 8:26 AM on March 1 [66 favorites]


*The Western Colonies are welcome back into the fold at any time (and we can do a rebranding e.g. rename them Outer Cornwall, or something) but you have to renounce President Trump and swear loyalty to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. Deal?

I'm good with that, I'm good with footie, I *love* real ale, but the u in color is going to be a friction point, I think.


I already spell like a Brit, because I'm just That Kind Of Asshole, so if Old England decides to take back New England, I'll probably be fine. If Canada wants to take us, that's even better. I like the cut of Trudeau's jib. (Maybe I should write him in.)
posted by tobascodagama at 8:26 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


One Muslim likes what he sees in Trump. Farrakhan! Shakes fist at sky.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 8:27 AM on March 1


I think Donald Trump is in the early stages of senility. So was Reagan but no one cared.
posted by emjaybee at 8:28 AM on March 1 [13 favorites]


I think Donald Trump is in the early stages of senility.

hey, it worked for ronald reagan ...
posted by pyramid termite at 8:28 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


jinx
posted by pyramid termite at 8:29 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I mean Ron Paul was a fucktard but at least he seemed to believe at least some of the bullshit that Libertarians try to preach about but thinking populism is somehow compatible with libertarianism is really sketchy snake-oil Jesse is trying to sell.

Ventura is deeply weird. Apparently he thinks "libertarian" and "liberal" are basically the same thing (his words) but doesn't seem to actually be either of them. He's also of the very questionable "social liberal, fiscal conservative" persuasion, which usually just means "fuck poor people anyway."

Last I heard, he was pro-Sanders, and would run against Trump and Hilary as an independent if that's how it goes. But I just don't know. I still think Jill Stein is the one to vote for in that scenario, for those who like Bernie but are disinclined to play the "any Democrat" game.
posted by Foosnark at 8:30 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


So that, if they both won their primaries, someone in their family would be guaranteed to wind up with the job

that's nuts! so glad you did the research. do what you can to keep those yahoos out of power.
posted by nadawi at 8:33 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Surely Trump is America's Berlusconi, not its Hitler or its Mussolini.

Perhaps, but his supporters are America's Brownshirts, and there are a hell of a lot of them.

I honestly don't think it matters whether Trump can pull off the election or not. There are enough monsters out there to give him the GOP nomination. They'll be out there even if Bernie Sanders somehow ends up in the White House. This is America now, and God help us all.
posted by Naberius at 8:34 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


I do like how the 11th commandment has completely incapacitated the GOP. "Well, we can't criticize a Republican!!!!" Between that, and the stupid amount of candidates in the race, Trump has been able to feast.

Meanwhile, both the Clinton and Sanders teams are spending time looking at how to beat Drumpf. They still have their primary yet to run, but it's been clearly those two for basically as long as Sanders has been running. They don't have to worry about splitting the "Not That Guy" vote, which is what the GOP races have been doing.

Again: Drumpf isn't winning because he's getting 51% of the vote. He's winning because he's getting less than 35% of the vote and the rest of them are getting a slice of what's left. Here's the percentages after the first four races -- that is, of *all* votes so far.

Drumpf: 32.73%
Cruz: 20.69%
Rubio: 20.01%
Kasich: 8.35%
Carson: 6.29%
Other: 11.93%

The huge tactical mistake the GOP made was not dragging Cruz and Rubio into a room and doing whatever -- flip a code, play Jenga, pistols at 25', offering the Vice Presidency -- whatever to get one of them to fold a week ago and let the other make a play for those 20%. Then, of course, go tell all the other idiots that they're done. Then, suddenly, you're looking at.

Drumpf: ~33%
Cruz or Rubio: ~20%
UNDECIDED: ~47%

And given that Rubio's supporters are likely to cross to Cruz (and visa versa), you're probably looking at the end of the Drumpf run. However: They didn't do that. They're all still in there, slicing up 2/3rds of a pie, and walking away with less than 1/3rd. And thus, Drumpfageddon.

So: I fully expect both of these to be true.

Drumpf gets about ~33% of the vote.
Drumpf wins most-to-all of the states in play.

Drawing 33% in a multi-candidate first-past-the-post race makes you very strong. Drawing 33% in a head-to-head FPTP race give you an electoral beatdown. There was a time the GOP understood this, but they just don't seem to be able to control the party anymore.
posted by eriko at 8:36 AM on March 1 [13 favorites]


The huge tactical mistake the GOP made was not dragging Cruz and Rubio into a room and doing whatever

The GOP has about as much to do with Cruz as it does with Drumpf. Cruz wouldn't listen to them, and why should he?
posted by jimmythefish at 8:38 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I honestly don't think it matters whether Trump can pull off the election or not. There are enough monsters out there to give him the GOP nomination. They'll be out there even if Bernie Sanders somehow ends up in the White House. This is America now, and God help us all.

This always was America; it's just in the open now.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 8:39 AM on March 1 [12 favorites]


Something to note you're a Minnesota Democrat- even though tonight is a caucus, you can just show up to vote for the presidential candidate at 6:30 and then leave...you don't don't have to stay for the whole thing. So, go vote your conscience! Especially if you're voting for the right candidate and not that other bad candidate.
posted by Esteemed Offendi at 8:40 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Bulgaroktonos: It's the guy who very recently suggested targeting the families of terrorists. I don't love Hillary's connection with Kissinger either either, but the answer to your actual question isn't hard.

indubitable: To me, the distinction here seems to be not whether either of them would do this, but whether they would brag about it afterward.

Wait, this isn't a very clear-cut question either.
posted by Apocryphon at 8:40 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Classy.
posted by Wordshore at 8:42 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I see we're laughing so we don't cry. We're going to have to figure out how to move forward after this. I have no desire in seeing all these people - friends, coworkers, acquaintances - feeling emboldened enough to let their hatred show now that Drumpf's popularity makes them think its okay for them to do so.

Some comfort:

I do not think that anything can keep the Vulgar Talking Yam from the Republican nomination at this point. Fine. The Republican nomination was, after all, always going to someone who wants the Middle East flattened, the Muslims shunned, the fetuses hallowed, the budget slashed, the government flattened and the environment pillaged. Trump may be senile or he may be a savage carnival barker, or both, but he's doing the best job of playing the media game as it exists in TYOOL 2016 and thus he is coming out on top. If I was a 70-year-old billionaire egomaniac I might've done the same just to have some serious fun before I go.

So. We have Hillary vs. a Republican Cartoon Character in the fall as we all pretty much knew we would. About 90% of the eventual vote is in place already because of how polarized this country is; no one is flipping Oklahoma or Massachusetts this year. Those who are somehow still undecided are going to watch debates and see Hillary vs. a yammering demagogue, which reminds me of the last Benghazi hearing in tone. Who came out way ahead in that? That's right.

The "moderates" aren't going to shift to Trump dramatically unless one of two things happens:
1) A Hillary scandal finally sticks because somebody in DC fucks up very very badly.
2) A major terror event involving Muslims that scares the living shit out of America.

#1 is rather unlikely. If they had anything worthwhile they'd have used it by now. So, for MANY reasons, root against #2 and all should end well.
posted by delfin at 8:43 AM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Man the 'Drumpf' low-level xenophobia thing sits really uneasily with me.
posted by shakespeherian at 8:43 AM on March 1 [29 favorites]


I'm very excited to note that here, in the most notoriously red state ever, at my polling station there were two huge lines for the Democrat ballot and you could walk right up for a Republican one. Admittedly, where I live is gerrymandered to hell--the upside of this is that my representatives are all Democrats which is a pretty nice upside actually--but even so I thought it was a great sign.

So, let's turn Texas blue again?
posted by librarylis at 8:44 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


It's highly unlikely, but what if Trump the (potential) President turns out to be much, much more moderate than Trump the candidate? What if he's just saying what he's saying in order to become President? That would be hilarious.

Don't get me wrong: I'm with Sanders all the way. Sometimes, though, you've gotta create fantasy worlds when the real world gets too horrific.
posted by oozy rat in a sanitary zoo at 8:45 AM on March 1


The "moderates" aren't going to shift to Trump dramatically unless one of two things happens:

3) a market correction triggered by Wall Street malfeasance
posted by Apocryphon at 8:45 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


@DinkMagic: Per Jon Oliver: anglosaxon sounding names= reliable, luxurious foreign sounding names= liar, alien bitch
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 8:46 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Man the 'Drumpf' low-level xenophobia thing sits really uneasily with me.

Yeah, making fun of the weird, foreign name isn't a good look.
posted by tobascodagama at 8:46 AM on March 1 [11 favorites]


Anybody willing to vote for Drumpf now is pretty much Drumpf always.

It's interesting for you to say that, when the whole Drumpf thing came out of a John Oliver segment very much directed at persuading Trump voters or potential voters.

Like, Oliver really, really specifically went after Trump, but not by hitting hard on the racism and misogyny and xenophobia like I thought he'd do. Sure, there was the one bit about how Trump is totes OK with war crimes, but Oliver prefaced that by showing how even Fox commentators were shocked. There were a couple jabs about Trump's appearance, but contrast that to how Oliver treated the anti-choicers in his recent abortion segment, for example. There was no fuck you. He didn't go on to mock or yell at them nearly as much as he could have.

Importantly, instead of going on and on about the stupidity of the standards being used by Trump supporters, like he could have done, the bulk of Oliver's segment was showing how Trump didn't didn't come up to their standards. He flip-flops! He is not a successful businessman! He lies! He is petty! He is a hypocrite who does not tell it like it is!

It was really nifty bit of work.
posted by joyceanmachine at 8:46 AM on March 1 [24 favorites]


2) A major terror event involving Muslims that scares the living shit out of America.

I don't know if even this would do it. Republicans don't exactly have a solid lock on this issue anymore.
posted by showbiz_liz at 8:47 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I am a Canadian, and I live in Toronto. Having seen my city elect Rob Ford as its mayor, I am watching all of this with horrified fascination. The interviews with Trump supporters sound exactly like interviews with Ford supporters.

Trump understands the grand-stand politics better than his counterparts - say what will rally the most voters, even if it doesn't hold water and is nigh impossible - but what will he actually do if he wins?

I don't think he's even thought of that. His focus is on the prize, and on having as much of what he thinks of as fun while focusing on it.

Because they're still Americans who will be voting, and at this point, anyone attacking Trump just bolsters his supporters.

Again, recalling the Ford experience: there's likely a hard core of about 30% of voters who identify very strongly with Trump now, and nothing will sway them. But, at general election time, there might be people who strongly object to the Democrat nominee (whoever he or she turns out to be), who might think to themselves, "How bad could Trump be, really?" It is important to point out that a Trump presidency (like the Ford mayoralty) will be an unimaginably awful horror show.
posted by tallmiddleagedgeek at 8:48 AM on March 1 [12 favorites]


when the whole Drumpf thing came out of a John Oliver segment very much directed at persuading Trump voters or potential voters.

How much of John Oliver's audience is likely Trump voters?
posted by Greg Nog at 8:48 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Man the 'Drumpf' low-level xenophobia thing sits really uneasily with me.

Did you watch the segment? It's not xenophobia. It's a satirical play against dog whistle antisemitism.
posted by Talez at 8:49 AM on March 1 [10 favorites]


I can also see voting for Drumpf if you want to see a Gibsonian Dystopia Immanetized in your lifetime. I mean I like Blade Runner and Brazil and Johnny Mnemonic (the book not the film) and Neuromancer and the idea of having go-gangs terrorizing urban centers while the lumpenproles huddle around their Megacorp masters seeking handouts and safety from their corporate masters sounds fun for a Cyberpunk 2020 or Shadowrun game on a friday night but do you really think that you and your family will somehow live at the top layers of an arcology enjoying fresh nouveau cuisine while the rest of humanity eats their soyvat mycoprotein shakes?

Man I've almost talked myself into voting for Drumpf now...
posted by vuron at 8:49 AM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Also: if I were a canny Trump political operative, I would be stroking the egos of potential third-party presidential candidates. If you can split the non-crazy vote, it increases Trump's chances of election.
posted by tallmiddleagedgeek at 8:50 AM on March 1


The GOP has about as much to do with Cruz as it does with Drumpf. Cruz wouldn't listen to them, and why should he?

You offer him the carrot and stick.

The carrot: If he wins the draw, the entire GOP falls in line behind him. This means he has a chance of being the president.

The sticks: He keeps on going, and Trump wins the nomination, and he will never be president. Why? Because the GOP will destroy him. If he gets the Tea Party to split off and hands the entire country to the Democrats, he will never be president either.

His *only* chance at winning, and his only chance at stopping Clinton or Sanders, is to play ball. He wins the draw, he's the candidate. He loses, he's the first one to announce his support for Rubio.

Now, I'm personally hoping he'd say "fuck you" and cause the Tea Party split. But you can't win if you don't make the finals, and 20% is not going to make the final.

But that's the ONLY way the GOP can save itself from Drumpf.

Man the 'Drumpf' low-level xenophobia thing sits really uneasily with me.

It's not xenophobia. It's mocking Drumpf for demeaning Jon Stewart for using a stage name instead of his real name, when his family in fact *did the exact same thing*. It's calling out a hypocrite.

See, I'm not willing to forgo calling out a hypocrite bascially ever, but esp. in a political campaign. And if he's going to demean people for changing their names for whatever reason, I'm going to Drumpf him until his Drumpy Drumpf is Drumpfed.
posted by eriko at 8:52 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


john oliver is a master satirist - everyone repeating the punchline are not. it's a very short trip from satirical xenophobia to actual xenophobia. i trust john oliver with that line, but i squint a little bit more at every repetition from the audience.
posted by nadawi at 8:54 AM on March 1 [31 favorites]


there are other ways to make the point that aren't exactly mimicking the thing you think is terrible.
posted by nadawi at 8:55 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


It's not xenophobia. It's mocking Drumpf for demeaning Jon Stewart for using a stage name instead of his real name, when his family in fact *did the exact same thing*. It's calling out a hypocrite.

Donald Trump was named Donald Trump at birth. His name is Donald Trump. He had nothing to do with the ancestral family name change. I don't see how this makes him a hypocrite.
posted by mpbx at 8:56 AM on March 1 [10 favorites]


Every time I hear "Drumpf" I get an echo of white people saying "no no, it's actually from a Chris Rock bit, he said it, I wouldn't normally say the word"
posted by Greg Nog at 8:56 AM on March 1 [28 favorites]


I suppose Shicklgruber or Jughashvili doesn't have the same ring to it, either.
posted by Apocryphon at 8:57 AM on March 1


Whether it's Clinton or Drumpf, win or lose, I expect neither party will really learn anything from this experience. In the end, each side (especially the losing side) will look back at this and say, "Wow, what a crazy election" and then write the whole thing off as an aberration. They'll decide that no, none of this was a repudiation of the politics of the last 25+ years, that this is just the result of primaries with wacky non-establishment candidates...and they'll go right back to business as usual.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 8:58 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Here's the other thing that puzzles me a bit. People are talking like this is just How The Electorate Is and it won't ever change. But that's not what's happening. We're still moving left as a country. Right now the Right is fired up and everything's gerrymandered and disenfranchised all to hell, but these trends are not random noise.
posted by showbiz_liz at 8:59 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


I voted for Bern and my wife voted for Hillary so you're welcome I guess.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:02 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


DNC Chair Joins GOP Attack On Elizabeth Warren's Agency

The real fight is for the soul of the Democratic party. (Cliché alert, but there it is)
posted by Trochanter at 9:04 AM on March 1 [13 favorites]


I hadn't thought about "Drumpf" being xenophobic, but yes, that is absolutely a valid point.

It doesn't quite seem that way to me because "Drumpf" sounds like an American name just, phonemically speaking, silly sounding.

Glad the xenophobic angle was brought up though.
posted by Tevin at 9:04 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Down here in Texas it's generally about selecting whatever sacrificial lambs we will hopelessly vote for in November who will be crushed by Republicans outspending them 10-1.

Fantasy Theory: Trump is a ruse planted by the Clintons to out maneuver the Koch brothers.
posted by Emor at 9:06 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


We might be moving left as a country as far as how people politically identify, but what it means to be "left" has been moving right in terms of actual economic policy. So I think how this gets flushed out on the ground requires differential equations to figure out.
posted by Seymour Zamboni at 9:06 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


I'm just an interested NZer living in Canada but...
Assuming Trump becomes the nominee it seems to me that the GOP establishment will have no choice but to fall in behind. I think this would make for a very different race than that suggested by the early polling for the general, where so far Trump has been going it alone.
posted by piyushnz at 9:06 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Democrats supporting payday lenders usurers is gross. And electorally counter-productive.
posted by tivalasvegas at 9:07 AM on March 1 [14 favorites]


john oliver is a master satirist - everyone repeating the punchline are not. it's a very short trip from satirical xenophobia to actual xenophobia. i trust john oliver with that line, but i squint a little bit more at every repetition from the audience.

I am reminded of what Chapelle said about his work.
posted by phearlez at 9:08 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


The carrot: If he wins the draw, the entire GOP falls in line behind him. This means he has a chance of being the president.

Not a chance in hell. The GOP isn't getting behind him and Cruz supporters are at least as likely to support Trump as they are Rubio. Cruz is not winning the nom in any scenario, and the establishment hates him. His support is based in evangelicals and Tea Party Republicans.
posted by jimmythefish at 9:10 AM on March 1


The Republicans have always been able to bandage up their divisions before, but each cycle it gets a bit harder for them. Hopefully this is the year they splinter entirely. I would dearly love to see the Democratic Party become the mainstream center-right party that party leaders seem to want it to be, opposed by an actual social democratic party to its left. Like all the other Western nations have. The white nationalists can go have their fringe group by themselves, eat up the carcass of that once great party of Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower.

We need a reasonable conservative party and a reasonable social-democratic party. Right now we have an unholy amalgam of the two in the Democrats, and an even unholier nationalist party to its right. It's fucking up public discourse in this country.
posted by tivalasvegas at 9:12 AM on March 1 [33 favorites]




Move aside, “cellar door,” the new two most beautiful-sounding words in the English language are “dangerous nincompoopery.”
posted by nicepersonality at 9:18 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


This should reappear over and over in this thread.

This is why people are turning to Sanders and Trump.
posted by Max Power at 9:27 AM on March 1 [29 favorites]


John Oliver rightly pointed out that Trump was an ass towards Jon Stewart regarding his choice of (professional) name. Fine, point taken, done.

john oliver is a master satirist - everyone repeating the punchline are not. it's a very short trip from satirical xenophobia to actual xenophobia.

It was funny when the master did it, but now the Drumpf thing has these uncomfortable echoes of when people pointedly still only said "Cassius Clay".
posted by Capt. Renault at 9:29 AM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Can I still insult him for being Orange? I mean he does that to himself.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 9:31 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


If I could verbally abuse Donald Trump directly to his face (and how I would dearly love to do so), this is what I would say:

"You are unlovable. You don't have a single friend in the world. People say that they like you, but they're lying, and they're laughing behind your back. You have sycophants and hangers-on, but they're only in it for the money and the power, and any one of them would betray you in an instant if they thought it would get them one step ahead. All those people who say they want to vote for you? They don't like you. They like the evil, racist, bigoted bullshit you spew from your mouth-hole when you're on the campaign trail, but do you think they'd really give you a hand if the chips were down? They'd sooner rob you blind, and then they'd use your money to buy more guns to take potshots at Muslims and gay people. Even your family hates you. They're waiting for you to die so they can collect their inheritance and never have to look at your worthless face again. You're just a chicken waiting for the plucking. The world doesn't want you, and neither do I. Now get out of my sight."
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:34 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Wow, DWS is running for president?

Look I don't agree with everything that Hillary does or says but let's be clear DWS was chosen by the DNC to be the chair. Want to replace her get your state Chair or Vice chair to speak up against her.
posted by vuron at 9:35 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


This should reappear over and over in this thread.

This is why people are turning to Sanders and Trump.


Those links appear to be identical? Just thought I'd mention it. Unless that was somehow the point EDIT - oh, nevermind, I just got it.
posted by AdamCSnider at 9:35 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Voted this morning in my usually Republican-voting town -- as in most local offices don't even have a Democrat running, just independents, teabaggers, and Republicans. No lines at the polls, which isn't really a good sign, but it may just have been my timing. I did overhear the poll workers say that they had prepared 100 folder/ballot sets for each party's primary, and noticed that the Democrat pile was almost gone, while the Republican pile had apparently gone through a lot less ballots and had about twice as many left, maybe more. An older lady ahead of me dithered a bit between parties, preferring Clinton to be the candidate she'd vote for in the fall, but ultimately getting a Republican ballot so she could vote against Trump. I'm wondering if others in her shoes are voting in the opposing party's primary in the hopes that at least one candidate will be palatable to them later, or if Republican turnout is just low.
posted by Blackanvil at 9:37 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


This is why people are turning to Sanders and Trump.

I can't believe Debbie Wasserman Schultz wasn't fired, after getting caught putting her hand on the scales for Clinton. This payday lender stuff is just icing on the cake, to explain why the Democrat machine has virtually no credibility with anyone on the left.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 9:38 AM on March 1 [43 favorites]


I am looking forward to our caucus like, not at all. Even though it's directly across the street from us, it's already going to be a pretty inconvenient for us to trade off with three kids. Sure, we could drag them there, but that's insane.
posted by odinsdream at 9:39 AM on March 1


Those links appear to be identical?
With one you get autoplaying audio. Surprise yourself!
posted by achrise at 9:39 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I'm wondering if others in her shoes are voting in the opposing party's primary

Stephanie Stradley, a sports blogger and lawyer from Houston tweeted this morning that she does that.
posted by Trochanter at 9:39 AM on March 1


DWS was chosen by the DNC to be the chair. Want to replace her get your state Chair or Vice chair to speak up against her.

Umm, it's perfectly legitimate to complain about the direction DWS is taking the Democratic party. Who cares what the mechanism of her appointment by the DNC was? She's now the leader. She's wrong on this, and perhaps the DNC folks were wrong to select her too. Why should we be limited to criticizing party functionaries?
posted by snuffleupagus at 9:40 AM on March 1 [22 favorites]


Funny thing, I came over to share the Shakesville link and my reactions to it.

Half of me said: this is wise and a well-needed corrective.

Half of me said: oh for Christ's sake. Do you think he and his don't call us fat weak SJWs at every turn? Why play to type?

It is one of them moral dilemmata.
posted by Countess Elena at 9:42 AM on March 1


get your state Chair or Vice chair to speak up against her.

The DNC vice chair from my state resigned to support Sanders.
posted by melissasaurus at 9:43 AM on March 1 [16 favorites]


Why is everybody rewriting Trump as Drumpf? Is this some clever in-joke that I haven't yet heard about?
posted by theorique at 9:44 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Well, it's not clever...
posted by showbiz_liz at 9:45 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


There is no insult sufficiently piercing, no meme dank enough, to do real damage to Trump among the people supporting him.

Pull for whoever ends up running against him, get enthused, get hype, and GOTV
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:46 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


I think it's a legitimate position to show that DWS is in support of payday lenders and should be primaried from the left (which I believe is what is happening with Tim Canova) but that DWS is not Hillary Clinton and that there seems to be a conflation of the two.

Keep in mind that DWS was Obama's pick for the DNC so is he automatically in favor of payday lenders?
posted by vuron at 9:46 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


(It's from John Oliver's latest show, referencing Trump's family's originally-spelled name, and people are perhaps a bit too in love with it)
posted by showbiz_liz at 9:46 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Is this some clever in-joke that I haven't yet heard about?

Metafilter:
posted by Trochanter at 9:46 AM on March 1 [22 favorites]


[One deleted. theorique, seriously do not pick a fight in here or I will ban you.]
posted by LobsterMitten at 9:48 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Since he slaps his name on everything like other animals piss to mark their territory, I feel like poking fun at his name is fair game. But on reflection, I'm more comfortable doing so in a non-ethnicity-specific way.

So, Donald Dumptruck it is.
posted by Foosnark at 9:49 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Why is everybody rewriting Trump as Drumpf? Is this some clever in-joke that I haven't yet heard about?

Last Week Tonight - Donald Trump (Feb 28)
posted by cashman at 9:49 AM on March 1


Obama and DWS are not close:
"Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, whose term has two years to run, is deeply at odds with White House staffers, they say, and has rarely even spoken to President Barack Obama since she took over in 2011. ...

According to people who spoke with [DWS], when she sensed Obama was considering replacing her as chair in 2013, she began to line up supporters to suggest the move was both anti-woman and anti-Semitic. Under fire last fall for her leadership, she took Obama’s decision not to remove her then as evidence of renewed strength and said she was confident no one could get her out of the DNC before her term is over at the beginning of 2017, according to sources who’ve spoken with her."

And besides which, the idea that nobody can criticize Democratic party actions just because Obama liked them is stupid. If Obama was supporting GOP anti-regulation stances in favor of payday lenders, yes, I would be angry with him too.
posted by dialetheia at 9:50 AM on March 1 [20 favorites]


I've voted in every presidential election since 1996 but this morning I voted in my first primary. I live in not Austin, Texas so it was pretty dead in the democratic primary voting place but I am proud that I voted.

GO BERNIE!!!
posted by shmurley at 9:50 AM on March 1 [15 favorites]


Trump has demonstrated that his name alone serves as a racial epithet that one must apologize for using. It should be enough that just stating his name is an insult.
posted by Existential Dread at 9:52 AM on March 1


I think part of the appeal of Drumpf is that Trump literally means a winning move, and that's repulsive to his opponents.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 9:53 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]




Trump, Clinton, Sanders, all around 70 years old. I'm amazed by the energy they have. The campaign has been going for months, it could continue for months and then there's the general, day after day of travel, and speeches, high level decision making. And tweeting. I'm half their ag... Okay, a BIG number younger, and I'm done for the day soon after lunch. Including the tweets.

I don't think they're actually human, honestly.
posted by notyou at 9:55 AM on March 1 [10 favorites]




I'm wondering if others in her shoes are voting in the opposing party's primary in the hopes that at least one candidate will be palatable to them later, or if Republican turnout is just low.

Some people vote in the opposing party's primary for whoever they think will be easier for their party's candidate to beat in the general.
posted by amarynth at 9:58 AM on March 1


I don't think they're actually human, honestly.

Don't be silly.
posted by tobascodagama at 9:59 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


*after results of Suoer Tuesday are called in* So, what role do you wanna do in The Resistance?
posted by The Whelk at 10:00 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]




Let's go back to "Fuckface Von Clownstick" it was funnier and we let it go way too soon.
(and it was working)
posted by Trochanter at 10:00 AM on March 1 [23 favorites]


I don't think they're actually human, honestly.

One out of three ....
posted by Kirth Gerson at 10:00 AM on March 1


Let me make this more realistic, Faint of Butt:

If I could verbally abuse Donald Trump directly to his face (and how I would dearly love to do so), this is what I would say:

"You are unlovable. You don't have a single fri-OW OW OW STOP CHOKING ME AIEEEEEEEEEE[thud]"

posted by phearlez at 10:00 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Voting starts to close in six hours time.
posted by Wordshore at 10:02 AM on March 1


I mean, I don't entertain fantasies of confronting Trump, because it's quite obvious that he's immune to shame. So what would be the point? Getting choke-slammed is merely the shit-icing on the waste-of-time cake.
posted by tobascodagama at 10:03 AM on March 1


Eh, I assumed I already had him duct-taped to a chair at that point.
posted by Faint of Butt at 10:03 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


I mean, I don't entertain fantasies of confronting Trump, because it's quite obvious that he's immune to shame.

Well, get it out of your system now - I give it six months after he's elected it'll be effectively illegal.
posted by Mooski at 10:08 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


OK, we don't want to be xenophobic, but we still want to mock the implicit power of his name?

Donald Bingo. Donald Yahtzee. Donald You Sank My Battleship. Donald Pretty Sneaky Sis.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 10:09 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


He would probably regard at least half of that rant as a compliment.
posted by The Card Cheat at 10:09 AM on March 1


This is why people are turning to Sanders and Trump

Debbie Wasserman Schultz introduced a bill supported by the payday lending industry because it showered her with campaign donations. Elizabeth Warren was in favor of ending the tax on medical devices because she represents a state where a lot of medical device companies are headquartered. Politicians gonna politician.
posted by ultraviolet catastrophe at 10:09 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Um...
posted by Wordshore at 10:11 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


So, what role do you wanna do in The Resistance?

I was thinking we should call our anti-Trump-Occupation resistance movement The Helpers, after Mr. Rogers.
posted by sallybrown at 10:13 AM on March 1 [15 favorites]


Debbie Wasserman Schultz introduced a bill supported by the payday lending industry because it showered her with campaign donations. Elizabeth Warren was in favor of ending the tax on medical devices because she represents a state where a lot of medical device companies are headquartered. Politicians gonna politician.

Right! That's why I'm thrilled to get a chance to vote for someone who is supported by small donations from regular people. Whether he is legit about it or not, many people feel the same way about Trump not taking corporate money, god help us. It's his second biggest talking point after that damn construction scam/"wall" he wants to build.
posted by dialetheia at 10:13 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Um...

The resemblance to Poochie is deliberate, right? There's no way it can't be?
posted by Capt. Renault at 10:14 AM on March 1


Um...

i don't think that account is entirely serious
posted by nadawi at 10:15 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


I assume so. (Sadly, under Poe's law obvious parody account is not in fact obvious.)
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 10:15 AM on March 1


Not that DWS is anywhere near my idea of a great representative, but the fixation with her and venemous flavor of some of the stuff said about her is kind of uncomfortable. I half expect someone to accuse her of being a witch next.
posted by sallybrown at 10:17 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


(Sadly, under Poe's law obvious parody account is not in fact obvious)

I'm suckered again. My apologies. Carry on, everyone.
posted by Capt. Renault at 10:17 AM on March 1


It's impossible to know if @GOPTeens is serious. What would a Republican Twitter account designed for youth outreach actually look like? It's like asking what's in the middle of a black hole.
posted by 0xFCAF at 10:17 AM on March 1 [19 favorites]


Okay FINE I won't use Drumpf.
Mostly I thought he should suffer the pain of having a name that comes off as unwieldy and unusual in English, like mine.

Ugh. Metafilter.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 10:17 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


@GOPTeens is one of my favorite twitter satire accounts, so, no, not serious.
posted by dis_integration at 10:18 AM on March 1


I've been down in Florida for a week, with folks who love to ask waiters, Uber drivers, hotel clerks and golf pro shop clerks about the election. Trump lovers, overwhemingly. Even the ones who like Clinton still look they're drinking a glass of buttermilk when they say so. Trump's got more play with the working class than any Republican since Reagan ... very, very real.
posted by MattD at 10:18 AM on March 1


I'm looking down the @GOPTeens tweets and thinking ... "But a GOP account aimed at teens *would* say that". Repeatedly. #confused
posted by Wordshore at 10:18 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Donald Rump.
posted by gurple at 10:20 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]




There are Democrats and Republicans both retweeting GOPTeens thinking they are helping their respective parties. It's rabbit holes all the way down.
posted by Tevin at 10:21 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Just to be clear, I'm not saying it's sexist to critique DWS. But it seems like there's this compulsion to find literally every single thing she has ever done wrong, and then relentlessly pillory her about it over and over - the nature of the critique is what feels a little sexist to me. The fact that she's become villainous instead of just a bad politician to some people.
posted by sallybrown at 10:21 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


waiters, Uber drivers, hotel clerks and golf pro shop clerks

If I was a service industry worker and I had customers hassling me about who I was voting for I'd probably go with the one least likely to get me berated
posted by prize bull octorok at 10:21 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Ugh, I just figured out that DWS does not stand for Dancing with the Stars. That makes more sense now.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:23 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Can i just say I would have loved to hear what HST would have to say about this election?
posted by entropicamericana at 10:23 AM on March 1 [17 favorites]


I half expect someone to accuse her of being a witch next.

Well, can you prove that she's not?

The fact that she's become villainous instead of just a bad politician to some people.

I agree, and I feel the same way about Clinton, frankly. And the same in reverse about Sanders. There's no Kind and Virtuous Saviour, there's no Malevolent Evil Witch, it's just a bunch of people who want political power for one reason or another.
posted by tobascodagama at 10:24 AM on March 1 [14 favorites]


Not that DWS is anywhere near my idea of a great representative, but the fixation with her and venemous flavor of some of the stuff said about her is kind of uncomfortable. I half expect someone to accuse her of being a witch next.

Oh for crying out loud. She's the chair of the Democratic National Committee, one of the most important people in the party. The "fixation" makes a lot more sense in that context. I don't like the idea of shutting down political criticism of someone who just today came out in support of scummy payday lenders - it's not like people are digging stuff up, she did this today - and I don't think it's at all fair to imply that it's sexist. If anything, it's sexist for people like her to support the exploitation of poor women who are forced to use those places.
posted by dialetheia at 10:24 AM on March 1 [44 favorites]


Can i just say I would have loved to hear what HST would have to say about this election?

HST would commit suicide all over again, so it's probably just as well he isn't around.
posted by tobascodagama at 10:25 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Hunter S. Thompson? DWS HRC NSA JFK!
posted by dis_integration at 10:26 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Sadly, the reaction of lots of sexist assholes to a woman being criticized for legitimate reasons is OH BOY, FREE PUNCHING BAG

I am not calling anyone in this thread a sexist asshole
posted by prize bull octorok at 10:28 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Hunter S. Thompson? DWS HRC NSA JFK!

It's like the 2016 version of We Didn't Start the Fire.
posted by Talez at 10:28 AM on March 1 [11 favorites]


Hunter S. Thompson? DWS HRC NSA JFK!

NBD.
posted by tobascodagama at 10:28 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I keep thinking it's going to be about sock puppets, but then there are shoes. Election season is confusing.
posted by theora55 at 10:28 AM on March 1


Sadly, the reaction of lots of sexist assholes to a woman being criticized for legitimate reasons is OH BOY, FREE PUNCHING BAG

I am not calling anyone in this thread a sexist asshole


Yeah, I don't think anybody here is calling out DWS for anything other than legitimate reasons. But there's this whole undercurrent of "Little Debbie" shit that just gets my fuckin' goat, regardless of what "side" it's coming from.
posted by tobascodagama at 10:29 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Just don't be so fucking terrible. That's all I ask. Just everybody person up and act like a decent goddamned human being, for fuck's sake.
posted by tobascodagama at 10:31 AM on March 1 [18 favorites]


I don't like the idea of shutting down political criticism

Not asking for shutting down, just consideration of the fact that women in power are critiqued very differently -- and often with a lot more venom -- than men would be in their places, and asking people to chew on that a little.
posted by sallybrown at 10:31 AM on March 1 [20 favorites]


Noticing that the odds for Ted Cruz to be the GOP candidate have been gradually lengthening through today. Diehard Cruz supporters can now get 50-1 (!) on him being their candidate. Only 2 of the bookies on there offer conventional odds shorter than 40-1 now.

Is this really Cruz's last stand, today? Could he be out of the race in a day or two? Tempted to have a few quid on the 2-1 Ladbrokes are offering that he's out of it by March 8th.
posted by Wordshore at 10:35 AM on March 1


Just don't be so fucking terrible. That's all I ask. Just everybody person up and act like a decent goddamned human being, for fuck's sake.

If HRC (<g>) said this, do you think she'd get some Trump-esque credit for telling it like it is? I'd love to hear this come out of her mouth when Trump starts spewing his nonsense in the first general election debate.
posted by dis_integration at 10:36 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


As a counterpoint, I think women's political actions should be subject to just as much legitimate criticism as men's - to do otherwise is to treat them as if they can't hold up to the political process without special protection. For example, I'm a woman scientist, and if anyone tried to protect my work from legitimate criticism just because I was a woman I would take it as grave insult to my work. It can stand on its own. So can Debbie Wasserman Schultz's record. There are definitely a lot of gendered elements to this and lots of people say explicitly sexist shit, certainly! And I wouldn't be surprised if there was plenty of that about Debbie Wasserman Schultz, too, and I don't think any of that would be right or fair. But that isn't what's happening here. To protect her from substantive criticism maintains this idea that we have to be protected from legitimate criticism because we can't take it. Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a very powerful politician - I'm pretty sure she can withstand substantive criticism on her policy choices.
posted by dialetheia at 10:36 AM on March 1 [19 favorites]


Remember, just before Cruz drops out of the race, he changes into his final demon form. You have to jump over his triple fireballs and keep hitting him in the head with your fully upgraded whip until he concedes. If you have holy water, use it.
posted by prize bull octorok at 10:37 AM on March 1 [53 favorites]


Trump, Clinton, Sanders, all around 70 years old. I'm amazed by the energy they have. The campaign has been going for months, it could continue for months and then there's the general, day after day of travel, and speeches, high level decision making. And tweeting. I'm half their ag... Okay, a BIG number younger, and I'm done for the day soon after lunch. Including the tweets.

I don't think they're actually human, honestly.


There are a lot of people behind the scenes. I mean, it's still massively stressful and enegy-intensive, but there's a whole support infrastructure designed to make sure they only have to do the stuff that they really have to do because none of the staff can. And they have been doing this (or a variant of it, in the case of Trump) for decades. Being able to be on, on on when you need to be is a skill like anything else.

And it's not going to get any easier from Inauguration Day onwards, so in that sense, whatever else can be said (and there ain't a lot of good) about our crazed eighteen-month election extravaganza, it is something of an endurance test to see who can really take the heat.
posted by AdamCSnider at 10:37 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


I say this as someone who regularly thinks how much he'd like to throw a molotov cocktail through the window of payday loan/title loan shops - I'm not sure how much point there is in judging any candidate/office holder on this issue anymore.

Carter signed the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act, nobody stepped up and passed some federal usury legislation after Marquette, and year later we'd have the massive giveaway with bankruptcy "reform" in the 2000s.(which 17 Ds voted for; Clinton was a no-show) The idea that borrowers should be protected by some remotely sensible limits on how big the vig should be is long dead on both sides of the aisle.
posted by phearlez at 10:37 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Steve Benen: Paul Ryan gets stuck in the Republican Party’s dilemma
“Today I want to be very clear about something, if a person wants to be the nominee of the Republican Party, there can be no evasion and no games, they must reject any group or cause that is built on bigotry. This party does not prey on people’s prejudices. We appeal to their highest ideals. This is the party of Lincoln,” Ryan said.
It all sounded quite encouraging, right up until the end of the Republican leader’s appearance with reporters. Asked specifically about Trump and Ryan’s general election plans, the House Speaker conceded he plans “to support the nominee” in the fall, no matter who it is.

And this, in a nutshell, helps capture one of the Republican Party’s principal dilemmas.

Ryan’s posture, while heartening at first blush, is burdened by flaws. The Speaker said all the right things about rejecting bigotry and appealing to Americans’ highest ideals, but this is the same Republican leader who’ll make no effort to restore the Voting Rights Act, and who continues to support Steve Scalise’s leadership post despite the Louisianan’s highly controversial background on race.

But more to the point, while Ryan seems uncomfortable with Trump’s approach to race, the Wisconsin congressman isn’t yet prepared to take meaningful action. Ryan said this morning that anyone who expects to be the Republican nominee must renounce bigotry, but in practical terms, what exactly does Ryan intend to do about it?
posted by zombieflanders at 10:38 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Welp, we voted!
posted by kyrademon at 10:40 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


I say this as someone who regularly thinks how much he'd like to throw a molotov cocktail through the window of payday loan/title loan shops - I'm not sure how much point there is in judging any candidate/office holder on this issue anymore.

The legislation she's supporting would explicitly gut the CFPB protections that people like Elizabeth Warren worked so hard to build. It's not like she's just signing onto some foregone conclusion bill - she's actively pushing for the gutting of consumer protections that other Democrats worked hard to build: "Wasserman Schultz is co-sponsoring a new bill that would gut the CFPB's forthcoming payday loan regulations. She's also attempting to gin up Democratic support for the legislation on Capitol Hill"
posted by dialetheia at 10:40 AM on March 1 [31 favorites]




the DWS thing could maybe go in another thread, maybe?
posted by angrycat at 10:44 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Why, it's almost like establishment Democrats don't actually represent the people, but rather represent the moneyed interests who give them scads of money. That can't be right, though, because I was told the establishment candidate is a progressive who will work for me!
posted by entropicamericana at 10:44 AM on March 1 [27 favorites]


Yeah I'm not disagreeing that it's garbage and should be stopped. But I'm saying it's not remotely unfamiliar territory for democrats anymore, so talking about DWS being a bad dem party leader because she would do such a thing... it's not a position the party has been good on for most of my lifetime.

It would be great it they WERE good on it and I'd love to see some ursery protections that say maybe 10% over prime per year should be plenty good enough for almost any purpose. But that would be a big move for the party.
posted by phearlez at 10:45 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


This letter to the editor may be the least persuasive case for Donald Trump
Electing the standard-bearer of the Democratic Party seems purposeless. The neanderthal Republicans barely respected the legitimacy of Bill Clinton’s or Barack Obama’s election, let alone that of Hillary who would arrive tainted with scandal and the email lapses hanging over her head. We would get four years of gridlock and "hearings". The Republican tribunes, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, are backward, foolish and inexperienced. John Kasich, a moderate with extensive governmental experience and a willingness to compromise, is an also-ran. That leaves The Donald, really a moderate in wolf’s garb, who would owe nothing to either party and might strike deals, for instance on tax reform. Yes, we could be like the good citizens who voted for a "tameable" Hitler in 1933 to get things back on track. But the alternatives look worse.
posted by 0xFCAF at 10:45 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Asking people to consider (not even change! Just consider) their tone when discussing DWS is not shutting down substantive critique, unless you interpret the request as a bad faith way to stop people from talking about her. I assure you, I'm making the request in good faith.
posted by sallybrown at 10:47 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


One reason that I am in favor of "Drumpf" is because Trump is a brand. His name appears in giant gold letters on nearly every piece of real estate he owns. We've probably all heard of Trump Tower, Trump Plaza, etc... without trying to seek it out. Every time his name appears in an article headline, it's essentially free advertisement for his business/brand. Not to mention his last name, as a verb, literally means "to excel; surpass; outdo." Interesting, since he appears to be doing just that as the Republican nominee.

I honestly wasn't aware of the xenophobic connotations, but it is not why I'm preferring to refer to him as Drumpf. Renaming him is a way of dismantling his power a.k.a. the Drumpf brand.
posted by joeyjoejoejr at 10:48 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Renaming him is a way of dismantling his power a.k.a. the Drumpf brand.

Intent does not equal impact. Please don't use that name.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:49 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


It would be great it they WERE good on it

I mean, that's my point - they were in the process of "being good on it" via these new CFPB regulations, and now she wants to stop other Democrats from doing that. It is an especially bad look for the party leader, and is just one more point of evidence to help explain why so many Democrats are fed up with the party this year.
posted by dialetheia at 10:49 AM on March 1 [14 favorites]


(It's from John Oliver's latest show, referencing Trump's family's originally-spelled name, and people are perhaps a bit too in love with it)

Ah, got it. I mean, Drumpf is kind of odd sounding in English, but the joke is kind of ... meh?

(To me, it sounds a lot like "Schtroumpf", the original French nonsense word for what became "Smurf" in English. I thought people were obliquely calling Trump a Smurf.)
posted by theorique at 10:49 AM on March 1


Perhaps, but his supporters are America's Brownshirts, and there are a hell of a lot of them.

We don't call them Brownshirts here. They're Red Shirts.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:50 AM on March 1


there is so much horrible awful evil easy to mock shit that trump has actually done - resting on the punchline of easily the least hitting part of that entire piece and clinging to it seems silly at best.
posted by nadawi at 10:52 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Renaming him is a way of dismantling his power a.k.a. the Drumpf brand.

Well, you can do that without dragging his family (or people who happen to share a name) into it. Every comedian misfires once in a while, this was just weak humor on Oliver's part.
posted by Dr Dracator at 10:53 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Hahaha, wow. Trump on his small hands: "“He said I have small hands — actually I’m 6-3, not 6-2 — but he said I had small hands. They’re not small, are they?” Mr. Trump said, referring to a joke Mr. Rubio said on the campaign trail two days ago. He raised his hands, staring at them and turning them over, before waving them at the crowd. “I never heard that one before. I’ve always had people say, ‘Donald you have the most beautiful hands.'”"

I especially love the "I never heard that before" part in light of the thoroughly documented small-hand correspondence between Trump and Graydon Carter from Spy Magazine/Vanity Fair.
posted by dialetheia at 10:54 AM on March 1 [13 favorites]


I'm open to other renames. Donald Poopface isn't quite as catchy.
posted by joeyjoejoejr at 10:55 AM on March 1


sock shoe sock shoe

what

posted by cortex
So, looks like the first hour of the next podcast is already set!

I mean, to suddenly discover a hidden schism in the MeFi community is one thing. But when such a difference is previously unknown by the Mods -- well, even ignoring how definitionally wrong the "SoShSoSh" crowd are, seeing that the Cabal was unprepared for this is unsettles me.
posted by wenestvedt at 10:56 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


I voted for "Donald Yahtzee" over in the other thread.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:57 AM on March 1


look I will scream into a pillow for two hours if Trump is elected but the whole calling-people-by-the-names-they-want-to-be-called thing has p much been litigated and settled on MetaFilter already sooooo
posted by prize bull octorok at 10:57 AM on March 1 [8 favorites]


I'm so sick of Donald Trump and the people who can't shut up about him that I would like to hibernate until this is all over. His opinions and the support for them makes me physically and emotionally pained.
posted by chonus at 10:57 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


serious query: is all the short-fingered shit penis size related? because although I'm delighted by the gold-sharpie tinged email correspondence, i really don't get this emphasis on his fingers.
posted by angrycat at 10:58 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I'm inclined toward "Got Rump" and "Tornado of Bigotry" but there's so many treasures to choose from!
posted by Tevin at 10:58 AM on March 1


Intent does not equal impact. Please don't use that name.

It's kind of a dumb "joke", but is the negative impact anything other than hypothetical at this point?
posted by Jpfed at 10:58 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


fuckface von clownstick is still my winner.
posted by nadawi at 10:58 AM on March 1 [12 favorites]


I'm no fan of Trump, but it seems just as shitty to make fun of his appearance as it would anyone else. He's said and advocated plenty of things you can attack him on.
posted by Sangermaine at 10:59 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I'm open to other renames. Donald Poopface isn't quite as catchy.

In the last days of Spy they tried to make "Donald Mayonnaise" happen. It never caught on at the time.
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 11:00 AM on March 1


Why is everybody rewriting Drumpf as Drumpf? Is this some clever in-joke that I haven't yet heard about?

Heh.

Heh. heheh.
posted by odinsdream at 11:01 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


"fuckface von clownstick" is good for pure vitriol but it smacks of bitterness and cynicism with a hint of desperation. The name must have a bit of insouciance and point to one of his many insecurities to really be a dig.*

*a dig at whom, I'm not really sure, but whatever
posted by Tevin at 11:01 AM on March 1


I would argue that making fun of Trump for anything other than his terrible ideas at this point is just playing into the bitter resentment of all the jackwagons who love him.

People spent eight years posting memes of GWB looking like a monkey, but the only thing that substantially hurt his popularity was his fucking abysmal response to Katrina, followed by a grudging acknowledgement that everything he said about Iraq was a total lie. Obama won in 2008 because he spoke to people's pain and offered them a way out, and he was classy as fuck toward his opponents.

Sneering down your nose at "NASCAR dads" or "low-information voters" or whatever is now and has always been a losing proposition.
posted by tobascodagama at 11:02 AM on March 1 [32 favorites]


serious query: is all the short-fingered shit penis size related? because although I'm delighted by the gold-sharpie tinged email correspondence, i really don't get this emphasis on his fingers.

I cannot speak to the original intent behind the term, but my take is that it's meant to show how insecure he is. Having someone call you short-fingered in borderline meaningless, but when it's leveled against him, Trump starts showing his hands off and taking about how beautiful they are. It'd be like calling him pointy-elbowed and him only donning short sleeves for a while to "disprove" it.
posted by defenestration at 11:02 AM on March 1 [11 favorites]


i don't view fuckface von clownstick as a comment as his appearance, instead more of his entire aura of being. he personifies the clownstick fuckery.
posted by nadawi at 11:03 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


You could always call him Biff Tannen.
posted by Foosnark at 11:03 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


In the last days of Spy they tried to make "Donald Mayonnaise" happen.

Because he's white, rich, oily, and smells faintly of egg?
posted by Faint of Butt at 11:03 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Also, I think the Spy writer literally thought he had short fingers. Could be misreading the whole situation, though.
posted by defenestration at 11:03 AM on March 1


ooohhh about the fingers. that makes more sense. i view that one as free game because he's been so weird about it for decades now. it could just as easily be the pointedness of his shoes or shape of his ear lobes.
posted by nadawi at 11:04 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I'm going to call him Don T. As in Don'T. Please, just don't vote for him.
posted by melissasaurus at 11:04 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Why is everybody rewriting Drumpf as Drumpf? Is this some clever in-joke that I haven't yet heard about?

Heh.

Heh. heheh.


< high-school-style social anxiety intensifies >
posted by theorique at 11:04 AM on March 1


I'm not a big fan of silly names, but those saying "Drumpf" is xenophobic --- are you claiming John Oliver, who isn't American himself, is against foreigners? Including himself? Or just that _other_ people are using it in a xenophobic way?
posted by thefoxgod at 11:06 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


xenophobic or not, "Drumpf" peaked too high, too soon, and the sun has melted its wings. are there any exit polls coming in yet or something?
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:08 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Personally, I think that people continuing to legitimize the use of schoolyard-level taunts as an appropriate way to refer to political opponents is ultimately going to end up helping Donald Trump's campaign rather than hurting it.
posted by kyrademon at 11:09 AM on March 1 [21 favorites]


(Also it's gross.)
posted by kyrademon at 11:09 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Also, something to keep in mind is that Oliver specifically intended for people to use Drumpf outside of the context of his show. So it's not just people mimicking a satirist and losing the satire along the way. He wants people to use the name.

Not saying that makes it good or bad or anything. It's just a fact that has been missing from the discussion here.
posted by defenestration at 11:10 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


This is all too much for me. Gonna go stock up on some Brawndo and hope for the best
posted by localhuman at 11:11 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


I just want tell you all good luck. We're all counting on you.
posted by schmod at 11:11 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I haven't seen the John Oliver segment, but I doubt a schoolyard level taunt will push anyone over the edge and make them vote for Trump.

A silly joke does not turn you into a racist asshole.
posted by Tarumba at 11:13 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


I think people are primarily amused that a guy whose family hails from Bavaria would import the ideas of a guy that is famous for trying to seize control over Bavaria through a populist uprising and failing.

As the cool kids on the 4chan would say it's like pottery.
posted by vuron at 11:13 AM on March 1


thefoxgod: “I'm not a big fan of silly names, but those saying 'Drumpf' is xenophobic --- are you claiming John Oliver, who isn't American himself, is against foreigners? Including himself? Or just that _other_ people are using it in a xenophobic way?”

It's totally possible for non-Americans to be xenophobic. And to be selective about their xenophobia. Not sure why it wouldn't be.
posted by koeselitz at 11:14 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


(Personally I'm not using "Drumpf" either as I think its better to concentrate on the many, many horrible things he says and does, but I just saw it as silly / taunting stuff not xenophobic, and I think I didn't even consider it that way partially because John Oliver is clearly positioned as an outsider commenting on the US)
posted by thefoxgod at 11:14 AM on March 1


Just checked when my primary (DC) is.

June 14th. A week after the next-to-last primaries. Nothing quite says that the DNC takes DC for granted like scheduling our primary so late as to make it virtually impossible for our votes to matter.
posted by schmod at 11:14 AM on March 1 [12 favorites]


It's totally possible for non-Americans to be xenophobic

Looking up the definition, I guess you're right, though I usually think of it in terms of "I don't want foreigners in my country" which would be a weird position for someone whose comic identity is a foreigner commenting on US culture/politics.

But having watched the segment I don't see it that way, nor do I see it being used that way. But I'm not a fan of the silly names thing and don't do it with any politicians, so meh.
posted by thefoxgod at 11:16 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Based upon how well Hillary Clinton does with AA voters you'd think that a primary in DC would be very favorable to her.
posted by vuron at 11:16 AM on March 1


Personally, I think that people continuing to legitimize the use of schoolyard-level taunts as an appropriate way to refer to political opponents

That's been his whole campaign. He did it to the freaking pope.
posted by Trochanter at 11:17 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


FYI: There's an open FanFare thread on the John Oliver episode. Maybe some of the Drumpf/is-Oliver-xenophobic commentary fits better over there.
posted by melissasaurus at 11:18 AM on March 1 [11 favorites]


I would argue that making fun of Trump for anything other than his terrible ideas at this point is just playing into the bitter resentment of all the jackwagons who love him.

On further reflection, I agree with this and retract my previous comments about calling him some other name.

I think maybe there should be an exception for the short-fingered trolling thing though, because it is just so bizarre that this weird little thing gets under his skin like it apparently does.

I'm for anything that gets under his skin, throws him off his game and reveals him for the insecure, egotistical, dangerous fool that he is. I'm picturing a parody pharma ad:

(voice-over)

"Do you have trouble hitting a fifth on the piano? Do you find yourself wearing mittens in summer to keep people from looking at your hands? Have people ever mistakenly asked you what kind of an industrial accident caused your fingers to be cut off?

"IF SO, you may be suffering from Small Digit Syndrome, or SDS. SDS affects millions of Americans, impacting their ability to easily grab shiny objects hidden in tree knots. Prosthetic fingers are now available which can dramatically increase your quality of life. Talk to your doctor about whether prosthetic fingers are right for you.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:18 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


I suspect this has something to do with the DNC taking its "reliable" demographics for granted.
posted by schmod at 11:18 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


> "That's been his whole campaign. He did it to the freaking pope."

That was my point.
posted by kyrademon at 11:19 AM on March 1


In the last days of Spy they tried to make "Donald Mayonnaise" happen.

I take offense to that!
posted by mayonnaises at 11:19 AM on March 1 [11 favorites]


Via projects
posted by The Whelk at 11:19 AM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Then we can start a campaign to send prosthetic fingers to Trump's campaign headquarters.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:20 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


It's totally possible for non-Americans to be xenophobic. And to be selective about their xenophobia.

Continuing my DC politics derail, this happens all the time in our local elections. (See also: Marion Barry)
posted by schmod at 11:20 AM on March 1


If I was a service industry worker and I had customers hassling me about who I was voting for I'd probably go with the one least likely to get me berated

Yeah, as someone who works retail, please don't ask people in those jobs about their opinion on anything other than the product they sell. Especially not politics or religion. There are so many many ways that it could go badly for them.
posted by Gygesringtone at 11:21 AM on March 1 [12 favorites]


You can't teach people to be cool. Or smart. I think Democracy proves this. If we end up with a reality show president, then, well, ratings win. Right?
posted by valkane at 11:25 AM on March 1


Embarrassing? Most voices here are encouraging or choosing the high road. Hell, I've conceded the point and won't use the name. Metafilter definitely has its ugly moments, but this isn't one of them.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 11:25 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Well, it's not really America's finest hour. I think we're just tired and frustrated and anxious.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:25 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


“At a rally on Sunday in Roanoke, Va., Rubio took the low road. Acknowledging that Trump has taken to calling him 'Little Marco,' Rubio said, 'he's like 6'2, which is why I don't understand why his hands are the size of someone who's 5'2.' He added: 'You know what they say about men with small hands.' He paused. 'You can't trust them.' So here we are, a penis joke and on the Lord's Day, with kids in the audience. It was only a matter of time before all the candidates started playing by the front-runner's rules... Unlike Trump, the slapdown isn't Rubio's natural medium. He is more comfortable inhabiting the persona of the optimistic young senator telling us the sun will come out tomorrow. But he's growing — or regressing, depending on how you see it. ‘Donald is not going to make America great. He's going to make it orange,’ or ‘Donald Trump likes to sue people. He should sue whoever did that to his face.’ Next Rubio will say his mom wears combat boots.” Margaret Carlson at the Chicago Tribune: By going nuclear, Rubio may only strengthen Trump.
posted by koeselitz at 11:25 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


The full SPY Magazine insult was "short-fingered vulgarian", so the message was rather classist.

Anyway, Trump has fire hands: long palms, short fingers:
The palm is long and rectangular and the fingers short by comparison. Most people with this hand are outgoing, persuasive and have a tendency to always be the life of the party. They excel when on the go and thrive on it, but do not realize that this can cause burnout and incomplete undertakings. They are usually fun to be around; however, they can turn on a dime. They also can be extremely impatient. This hand shape corresponds to the astrological signs of Aries, Leo and Sagittarius.
posted by maudlin at 11:27 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


whoa at the hand phrenology man
posted by angrycat at 11:29 AM on March 1 [26 favorites]


(To me, it sounds a lot like "Schtroumpf", the original French nonsense word for what became "Smurf" in English. I thought people were obliquely calling Trump a Smurf.)

Oompa Loompa, surely.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 11:30 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


This hand shape corresponds to the astrological signs of Aries, Leo and Sagittarius.

See, if we're gonna have a bloody weird election season, we really need to go all out exactly like that. Debates over interpretations of astrological charts. Dire prognostications from the reading of entrails. Divination rituals taking place on national television. Literal augury.
posted by tobascodagama at 11:33 AM on March 1 [26 favorites]


Y'all, I live in small town Texas. I just went to the polling place at the local library, and it was a two hour wait. There were hundreds of cars. The overflow parking lots were full, and volunteers were shuttling people back and forth from the next closest parking. It was madness. They had to open a second polling location, and the only reason I got out of there in under 30 minutes is because the Dems line was waaaay shorter than the R line. Polling place worker said we were on target to match 2008 turnout.

I talked to a lot of folks while I was killing about trying to figure out where the secondary polling place was, and if this little rural burb is anything to judge by, Cruz is getting his ass handed to him. Everyone I talked to was either Trump or Bernie.

The Dem political machine is freaked out enough that they cancelled the caucus after polling that determines delegates. They rescheduled it for the middle of the day in a week or two. Which, I gotta tell you, smacks of collusion, the machine really wants Hillary, and it seems an underhanded way to get what they want.
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 11:34 AM on March 1 [33 favorites]


Does the White House even have an official Augur? If not, why not? Surely, the auspices must be taken before every State of the Union.
posted by tobascodagama at 11:34 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Trepanation.
posted by Faint of Butt at 11:34 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


...i had recently considered rebuying the tarot deck i bought as a baby-pagan in the 90s...maybe i can get an election show on msnbc.
posted by nadawi at 11:34 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


At a rally on Sunday in Roanoke, Va., Rubio took the low road. Acknowledging that Trump has taken to calling him 'Little Marco,' Rubio said, 'he's like 6'2, which is why I don't understand why his hands are the size of someone who's 5'2.' He added: 'You know what they say about men with small hands.' He paused. 'You can't trust them.' So here we are, a penis joke and on the Lord's Day, with kids in the audience. It was only a matter of time before all the candidates started playing by the front-runner's rules...

Like I said, this all reminds me of a WWE match. (Admittedly, I wouldn't mind seeing one of those chuckleheads smacked with a folding chair.)

(Never thought I would be concerned about the coarsening of culture in America. Then again, I never thought presidential candidates would be trading insults about genital size, either.)
posted by entropicamericana at 11:36 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


> "Debates over interpretations of astrological charts. Dire prognostications from the reading of entrails. Divination rituals taking place on national television. Literal augury."

13 bald eagles found mysteriously dead near Washington, DC
posted by kyrademon at 11:36 AM on March 1 [22 favorites]


The stars are right!
posted by The Whelk at 11:38 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


13 bald eagles found mysteriously dead near Washington, DC

WAKE UP SHEEPLE.
posted by tobascodagama at 11:38 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


And of course there was that super blood moon last fall. There may also have been dragons.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:39 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]




Iä! Trump-Niggurath! Iä! Trump-Niggurath!
posted by zombieflanders at 11:40 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]


KEEP BEACH CITY WEIRD
posted by nadawi at 11:40 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]


The great part about this is that nobody is going to cut and run until the convention if Trump can't crack 50% - Mike Leavitt on NPR this morning already has the gameplan laid out. Cruz and Rubio and Kasich steal juuuuust enough votes from Trump to send it to a brokered convention where party leadership will pick whoever the hell they want to fill the ticket (He bluntly said it would be Rubio and Kasich, to cement FL and OH and to bring in the conservative Latino vote) and send Trump third party and Cruz back to whatever rock he scuttled out from under.

Look to Colorado, where Republican voters are not allowed to caucus, only delegates. The winners there will be the nominees after the convention.

It will blast apart the party. Voters don't like to be told their vote is worthless because they are stupid.
posted by Slap*Happy at 11:40 AM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Is Trump the Beast from Transmetropolitan? I think it was implied the Beast was a Republican.
posted by Sangermaine at 11:41 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


The Dem political machine is freaked out enough that they cancelled the caucus after polling that determines delegates. They rescheduled it for the middle of the day in a week or two.

Huh, how is that possible? I thought all Super Tuesday voting/caucusing had to be done by today?
posted by kyp at 11:42 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Is Trump the Beast from Transmetropolitan? I think it was implied the Beast was a Republican.

The Beast was Clinton. The Smiler was Dubbya. Warren Ellis is scarily on point sometimes. We're into a new realm of electoral sci-fi horror.
posted by Slap*Happy at 11:43 AM on March 1 [6 favorites]




Slap*Happy: “It will blast apart the party. Voters don't like to be told their vote is stupid and worthless.”

Well, Democrats seem to put up with it pretty well.
posted by koeselitz at 11:43 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


It will blast apart the party. Voters don't like to be told their vote is worthless because they are stupid.

Totally agree, especially in light of that RAND link above that indicated that the single best predictor of a Trump supporter (at least alongside their penchant for authoritarianism) is feeling like they have no say in what happens in government. What could possibly go wrong with proving them right on a grand scale in front of the entire country?
posted by dialetheia at 11:44 AM on March 1 [5 favorites]


"Being able to be on, on on when you need to be is a skill like anything else. And it's not going to get any easier from Inauguration Day onwards..."

Tons of vacation. I look forward to the days of the Summer White House at the Trump National Golf Course in Bedminster, and the Winter White House at Trump International Hotel and Tower Fort Lauderdale. All the news reports will be infomercials.
posted by Capt. Renault at 11:44 AM on March 1


Look to Colorado, where Republican voters are not allowed to caucus, only delegates.

What? Is this a recent change or has it always been that way?
posted by Tarumba at 11:44 AM on March 1


What? Is this a recent change or has it always been that way?

Recent change. They're allowed to caucus. The caucus just won't have a presidential preference poll and will have no effect on the CO presidential nomination.

Another reason I'm supporting efforts to change the CO caucus to a primary vote for presidential nominations.
posted by audi alteram partem at 11:46 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]




Don't underestimate how many working class white Democrats are going to vote for Trump in the general.

Or the lack of enthusiasm for Clinton. Hell, my mother has been the one reliable Democratic vote in Bedford County, Virginia, for decades now, but she swears she won't vote for Hillary. I don't know why, but something about her really sets my mom off. I don't think she votes for Trump, but I'm thinking she sits this one out, so don't assume Clinton gets everybody that doesn't want Trump.

I'm really not joking when I say, start organizing resistance cells now. That Klan march in Anaheim is going to look like a garden club outing by the time this is over, no matter who wins the White House.
posted by Naberius at 11:48 AM on March 1 [7 favorites]


The Dem political machine is freaked out enough that they cancelled the caucus after polling that determines delegates. They rescheduled it for the middle of the day in a week or two.

Huh, how is that possible? I thought all Super Tuesday voting/caucusing had to be done by today?


I tried looking for info on this, and it seems like the Texas Democratic Party did away with the caucus entirely last year? I don't know what caucus is even happening down there unless it's something purely ceremonial that doesn't affect the appointment of state delegates.
posted by tobascodagama at 11:50 AM on March 1


Colorado Independent run-down on this year's CO caucus process.
posted by audi alteram partem at 11:50 AM on March 1 [3 favorites]




Austin radio station flooded with reports of voting machines switching votes from Trump to Rubio

Story credited to infowars, which means I have a zit on my right shoulder that has more journalistic cred.
posted by item at 11:53 AM on March 1 [12 favorites]


The Beast was Clinton. The Smiler was Dubbya.

I'm not sure if you mean that literally, but it can't be true: the Smiler storyline started in 1998.
posted by Sangermaine at 11:53 AM on March 1


Austin radio station flooded with reports of voting machines switching votes from Trump to Rubio

It's never too early to come up with an excuse for why you lost. But even if it were true, how would anyone know unless they either pulled some of the machines out of service early and knew how people had voted or waited until the morning of election day to test the machines?

ETA: Ah, now I see. Their machines give a digital receipt.
posted by dances with hamsters at 11:54 AM on March 1


man, i get that people might disagree with Clinton's policies and tendencies, but it's the visceral reaction i do not get. she was a feminist hero a while ago, but not like, eons

i say this not to vote shame anybody anywhere but to express my bemusement at the intensity of some (not pointing to anybody in this thread, really, don't hate me) the anti-clinton crowd
posted by angrycat at 11:55 AM on March 1 [12 favorites]


If Transmet's characters are to be taken as historical figures at all, then the Beast was Nixon and the Smiler was Reagan. I didn't realise there was any doubt about this?
posted by tobascodagama at 11:56 AM on March 1 [12 favorites]


I'm really not joking when I say, start organizing resistance cells now.

There's got to be a better use of your time than Trumpsday prepping.
posted by knuckle tattoos at 11:56 AM on March 1 [1 favorite]


she was a feminist hero a while ago, but not like, eons

But you're talking decades, which is more than a generation. Young women by and large do not support her, necessarily.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:57 AM on March 1 [4 favorites]


But more seriously (and more on-topic): what is the strategy for defeating Trump in the fall?

I think a lot of it will come down to the question of how he got this far. I'm hoping that the Republican primary has mostly been a case of an opportunistic infection in a body that has been deeply compromised by decades of pandering. I also know that a lot of people are not really paying attention yet, or have just started paying attention in the last few weeks. So it's still entirely possible that Trump has a ceiling in the broader electorate, even if it's as high as 40 - 45% he is probably not going to get anywhere close to defeating the Democrat.

If that turns out not to be the case, though, conventional political strategy may or may not work. It may be that running a standard campaign will be fine and that low-information voters who aren't particularly ideological don't respond well to Trump's antics. We should have a better idea about this as the race narrows down to a two-person face-off this summer.

Democrats understand how to run a race against an ideological opponent. But how do you race against someone who's not particularly ideological? Attacking Trump's proposed policies may not help because people are not supporting him based on his policies but based on his tone and posture. Democrats (and progressives, and everyone who is anti-Trump) need to do a lot more thinking about how to handle this.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:57 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Yes, I will vote for Bernie and I don't love Hillary, but I have heard a lot of really extremely unpleasant opinions about her and I just don't get it.

Also, from that article about Liberals voting for Rubio:

Numbers aren't exact," wrote Cox, "but the bottom line is I'd have to be like 99 percent sure that Hillary would beat Trump to be OK with a Trump nomination. I'm pretty sure she'd win, but an indictment, a recession, a terrorist attack, etc. leave Trump with way too many winning possibilities."

It is interesting to think that anything panic worthy would make people vote for Trump. My gut would tell me to do the exact opposite.
posted by Tarumba at 11:58 AM on March 1 [2 favorites]


The Dem political machine is freaked out enough that they cancelled the caucus after polling that determines delegates. They rescheduled it for the middle of the day in a week or two. Which, I gotta tell you, smacks of collusion, the machine really wants Hillary, and it seems an underhanded way to get what they want.

Delegate counts are entirely decided by the primary. They killed the old, weird Texas system last year.

This stuff is confusing but the best I can tell is that there is still an event called the Texas Democratic caucus but the only decisions it can make are to determine which X people pledged to Clinton and which Y people pledged to Sanders to send to the next convention up.

...so you couldn't do it today even if you wanted to. You need the primary results to be definitively in before you can run the caucus.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 12:01 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


she was a feminist hero a while ago, but not like, eons

90s feminism suffered from a lack of intersectionality, a lack of sex positivity, and, in some (Clinton-specific) cases, an endorsement of rape culture. Luckily, 2016 feminism aims to do better.
posted by melissasaurus at 12:01 PM on March 1 [18 favorites]


Voted on the way to lunch, yay! Then promptly ate a large plate of nachos.
posted by jet_pack_in_a_can at 12:02 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


Super Tuesday is Taco Tuesday but nachos are allowed too.
posted by Tarumba at 12:03 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


i've seen quite a bit of weird vitrol for clinton - and while there is lots to legitimately critique - it's hard to ignore that in a lot of irl places (here in her home state), there's a strong current of misogyny to it.
posted by nadawi at 12:03 PM on March 1 [18 favorites]


PLATE OF NACHOS 2020
posted by Faint of Butt at 12:04 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


Don't underestimate how many working class white Democrats are going to vote for Trump in the general.

Or the lack of enthusiasm for Clinton. Hell, my mother has been the one reliable Democratic vote in Bedford County, Virginia, for decades now, but she swears she won't vote for Hillary. I don't know why, but something about her really sets my mom off.


Yeah. My mom was a Reagan Democrat, then she became an Obama Republican. I was talking with her on the phone the other day, and she will very reluctantly be voting for Clinton in the general but I think she would stay home if the choice were between Clinton and someone who was reasonably moderate.

A lot of people just do not trust Hillary Clinton. I'm not saying this as a Bernie Sanders supporter, I'm just saying it as a thing that I've observed my whole life. Doubtless some of this is latent sexism, and some of it is the massive anti-Clinton propaganda campaign that happened in the 90s. But whatever the reasons, the result is scary. She has a hard time connecting with middle-aged white Midwesterners and that is the very demographic that Democrats absolutely need to connect to in the fall.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:04 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]




> The Speaker said all the right things about rejecting bigotry and appealing to Americans’ highest ideals, but this is the same Republican leader who’ll make no effort to restore the Voting Rights Act, and who continues to support Steve Scalise’s leadership post despite the Louisianan’s highly controversial background on race.

Speaking of the VRA: 16 States Face New Voting Restrictions in First Election in 50 Years Without Full Voting Rights Act
posted by homunculus at 12:05 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


but it's the visceral reaction i do not get

To give one perspective,

My visceral reaction has almost everything to do with how she (and other establishment politicians) are funded. The current state of campaign finance is tantamount to soft corruption.

I can also acknowledge at the same time that she has made some good decisions, and some bad decisions, and that how she is perceived has a lot to do with being female.
posted by kyp at 12:09 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


As a data point I have two millennial daughters, both big Hillary supporters one to the point of being super sensitive to the Bernie support that surrounds us as she sees it as knee jerk misogyny. I am trying to get her to chill, I don't quite see it that way. There's a bit of zealotry that comes with insurgency.
(also have one Bernie supporter among the offspring)
posted by readery at 12:12 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


It's pretty ridiculous to say that Robert Reich is "endorsing" Bernie Sanders just this week. He's basically been campaigning for him for months, since at least January, and telling everyone who would listen that Sanders is better than Clinton as far as he can tell. It seems like trotting out his "endorsement" now is mostly strategic.
posted by koeselitz at 12:13 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


I was actually thinking last night that if legislators were serious about campaign finance reform they would relabel it Anti-Corruption Act or something with "corruption" in the title. That's what it is, really, and much sexier sounding than campaign finance reform.
posted by Tevin at 12:13 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


Mike Huckabee Hearts Donald Trump, How Donald Trump won over a former Baptist minister — and millions of people like him.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:14 PM on March 1


Works for me, Tevin.
posted by Trochanter at 12:16 PM on March 1


I feel silly (for not knowing sooner), but an email from Amanda Palmer came through, and when I opened it, she told me that GA was an open primary state - I thought I had to be a registered Republican to vote in the Republican primary.

So I am going to go and vote after work for someone who is not Trump. Hillary is showing a greater than 99% change of winning the Democratic Primary here, and I was thinking of not voting at all, since a vote for Bernie wouldn't make much of a difference at this point.
posted by needlegrrl at 12:16 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Unfortunately until we can get an unassailable majority on the SCOTUS Citizens United is here to stay. I pretty much think a campaign finance amendment is doomed to failure, I mean if the right can't even pass an anti-flag burning amendment what chance in hell does a campaign finance amendment have.

So yeah pillory Clinton for her connections to corporations but realize that there is going to be billions of dollars spent in this election cycle and trying to avoid even the appearance of corporate favoritism is like being the one-legged man in a butt-kicking contest. Vote for Sanders in the primary as a repudiation of campaign financing and a need for reform but realize the only way you are going to get that reform is under a Democratic president putting forward liberal justices.
posted by vuron at 12:18 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Mike Huckabee Hearts Donald Trump, How Donald Trump won over a former Baptist minister

Worst. Romcom. Ever.
posted by dinty_moore at 12:18 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


now now, lets use his official title, close friend of multiple pedophiles mike huckabee.
posted by nadawi at 12:18 PM on March 1 [15 favorites]


I tried to vote for Taco Tuesday but the corrupt voting machine here in Austin instead cast my vote for Meatball Monday
posted by item at 12:18 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


"Are Donald Trump’s fingers weirdly short? An investigation" attempts to quantify the issue with charts, graphs, and photo analysis.
posted by exogenous at 12:20 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


As I was idly poking around on Gallup today I saw this:

What woman that you have heard or read about, living today in any part of the world, do you admire most? And who is your second choice?


There aren't any options given, this is just off the top of peoples' heads. HRC has topped this thing for 20 of the the past 23 years! And two of those other years were Mother Theresa!

Like, obviously this doesn't mean all that much, hell it probably means there just aren't enough women in positions of power, but man. It is clearly not the case that no one will be genuinely excited to vote for her.
posted by showbiz_liz at 12:20 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]




I just bought a purrnie sanders mug to remember how cool it was when that was a possibility.

;_;
posted by Tarumba at 12:23 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Anna Palmer: Top Rubio adviser preparing donors for dismal Super Tuesday
Sullivan responded to multiple questions from attendees on everything from the campaign's floor strategy to how do they deal with Ohio Gov. John Kasich not dropping out of the race.

"A vote for Kasich is a vote for Donald Trump," Sullivan said, according to multiple sources.

The campaign also continued to assert that Ted Cruz winning Texas would be a high water mark for the campaign, given that so much of his strategy is based on doing well in the South.

Sullivan also got several inquiries about Florida and how Rubio would deal with a loss there. Sullivan said that he thought Jeb Bush would ultimately endorse Rubio and that he would win the state.

Not everyone who attended left the meeting thinking the campaign had a workable plan to dethrone Trump as the party's expected nominee.

"It was a presentation that defied reality," said one Rubio backer. "They said their convention strategy was not contingent on winning any states... Even if you go to the [second ballot] why would anyone say Marco Rubio is the guy to give it to?"
posted by zombieflanders at 12:24 PM on March 1


Unfortunately until we can get an unassailable majority on the SCOTUS Citizens United is here to stay.

We could also start by pushing back on party hacks who removed Obama's rules against taking donations directly from lobbyists. Campaign finance corruption might be inevitable, but we don't have to escalate it on our side. It makes us look like gigantic hypocrites - everyone knows Republicans are supposed to be the big business party, but Democrats are not credible on those issues as long as we keep changing things to keep the corporate firehose pointed in their direction.
posted by dialetheia at 12:24 PM on March 1 [26 favorites]


When people talk about the problem of campaign finance they wrongly tend to focus on the Presidential election, and wring their hands over who gave money to which Presidential candidate.

The influence of SuperPACs and corporate donations is overstated, at least at the Presidential level, otherwise Jeb! would have the R nomination.

The problem of campaign finance is much greater in the legislative and state-level races that much fewer people think about. Though even then, as Meg Whitman showed in California, despite popular opinion you can't just buy a race.
posted by Sangermaine at 12:25 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


Taylor Megon-Rose Thompson went 2 vote in TX today. Name spelled Tayllor Megan Rose Thompson on voter reg card. Disenfranchised by TX ID law

And it looks like the poll worker may have broken federal law by not providing her with a provisional ballot.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:25 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


So I am going to go and vote after work for someone who is not Trump. Hillary is showing a greater than 99% change of winning the Democratic Primary here, and I was thinking of not voting at all, since a vote for Bernie wouldn't make much of a difference at this point.

Just a reminder that the Democratic primaries are proportional not winner-take-all, so even if Clinton "wins," Bernie will get a portion of the delegates, provided he gets at least 15% of the vote.
posted by melissasaurus at 12:26 PM on March 1 [14 favorites]


I think it's actually quite likely that Bernie will not break 15% in most Southern states, since he's basically not campaigning in them at all.
posted by tobascodagama at 12:28 PM on March 1


I just bought a purrnie sanders mug to remember how cool it was when that was a possibility.

;_;


Thump! Thump! Puff! Puff! DON'T YOU DIE ON ME!!
posted by Trochanter at 12:28 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Also a reminder to check if you have any important or competitive down ballot races before pulling the ballot for the "other" party. I'm not giving up my chance to vote for progressive, reform Democrats in local races just to vote for/against Trump.
posted by misskaz at 12:34 PM on March 1 [20 favorites]


Re Texas Dem convention nee caucus, I stand corrected, in that I didn't know the caucus rules had changed.
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 12:36 PM on March 1


Also a reminder to check if you have any important or competitive down ballot races before pulling the ballot for the "other" party. I'm not giving up my chance to vote for progressive, reform Democrats in local races just to vote for/against Trump.

Or any at all. In Virginia the only office on the ballot is president.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:37 PM on March 1


The influence of SuperPACs and corporate donations is overstated, at least at the Presidential level, otherwise Jeb! would have the R nomination.

I think this is stating the problem backwards. The issue isn't that corporations and SuperPACs can buy elections, it's that they can buy elected officials. If Jeb! had won the nomination and then the general, it's reasonable to assume he'd be beholden to those donors.
posted by shakespeherian at 12:38 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


Bernie will get a proportional share of the votes and with the fundraising numbers he put up in February will still likely be able to campaign heavily throughout this month. However he's looking at being in more or less the same position that Clinton was 8 years ago where the gap in terms of delegates is simply unsurmountable.

Without winner-take-all primaries the Democratic nomination process is really predictable because once a leader locks in a significant lead (100+) it's damn near impossible for that to change because there simply aren't enough states with big delegate totals that will be blowouts for the opposing candidate.

Clinton is projected to be up by close to 200 delegates after today and 3/15 isn't looking much better for Sanders. Yes he can continue to campaign but increasingly the media will tend to ignore him because there just isn't any drama present and there is still a 20 car pile-up on the Republican side.

Sanders staying in might actually be a decent thing for Clinton as it will keep some of the Republican Super PAC money from flowing and it should help for fundraising.
posted by vuron at 12:38 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I'm not giving up my chance to vote for progressive, reform Democrats in local races just to vote for/against Trump.

Exactly. Let the Rs figure out how to feed this tiger they've been riding - I've got my own house to get in order.
posted by eclectist at 12:39 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


If we eliminate the money corruption in politics, that's like one-third of our economy.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 12:44 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


See, I read HST as Harry S Truman and I was wondering how we could try to map late-1940s politics onto the current situation.

Or, because I am Canadian, I also pondered whether Harnonized Sales Tax might have political views.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 12:49 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Sounds like Bloomberg isn't going to run (I believe the filing deadlines to get on the ballot have already passed for a number of states anyway).
posted by dialetheia at 12:49 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Sounds like Bloomberg isn't going to run

I'm thinking he was only going to do that if Hillary got in serious trouble. Gotta have a candidate who's willing to stand up for those poor poor corporations.
posted by Gaz Errant at 12:53 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


See, I read HST as Harry S Truman and I was wondering how we could try to map late-1940s politics onto the current situation.

That's who I thought it was. What does HST actually mean?
posted by Radiophonic Oddity at 12:57 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I'm not even sure who would get hurt more by Bloomberg running as a third-party

Presumably he'd win over some Democrats that are in the "Hell No to Clinton" camp but it also seems like he'd win over a huge number of fiscal conservatives that look at the Republican party and it's obsession with identity politics and say "This sort of nuttiness is bad for business". Because at the end of the day fiscal conservatives want the status quo maintained and are playing the game for the long haul.

From a business perspective Clinton sounds a fuckton more reliable as a President than a Republican candidate that is inexplicably anti - free trade. I actually wouldn't be shocked if there are some Republican Super PACs that will actually run attack ads against Trump but for the most part I think they'll be focused on down ballot races and Trump is radioactive for a lot of Senators.
posted by vuron at 12:57 PM on March 1




> I think this is stating the problem backwards. The issue isn't that corporations and SuperPACs can buy elections, it's that they can buy elected officials. If Jeb! had won the nomination and then the general, it's reasonable to assume he'd be beholden to those donors.

But those donors exert their influence on candidates based on the perception that donors' support matters for winning elections. If SuperPACs can't buy elections, then they'll only wield influence if they can convince candidates that the opposite is true.

I would argue that large donors can turn the tide in some elections, but clearly not this one. To argue “if X were true, Y would happen, and since Y hasn’t happened, X must be false” is to live outside of the messy, multivariate real world. Politics is too complex for axioms.
posted by savetheclocktower at 12:58 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Radiophonic Oddity: “What does HST actually mean?”

Presumably Hunter S Thompson, whose best book (in my humble opinion) was a piece on a campaign cycle, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72.
posted by koeselitz at 1:03 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Radiophonic Oddity: What does HST actually mean?

Hunter S. Thompson, the originator of "gonzo journalism" and writer of books like "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72."

I loved him when I was 15. *shrug*
posted by wenestvedt at 1:03 PM on March 1


(Since the Democrats in '72 did what many are saying the Republicans are likely to do now: they imploded, and went to egregious lengths to try to avoid nominating a candidate many saw as unelectable, ultimately essentially sabotaging what could have been a good campaign if the party had gotten behind it.)
posted by koeselitz at 1:04 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Obviously, YMMV. Jinx, koeselitz! :-)
posted by wenestvedt at 1:04 PM on March 1


Oh! I too read Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72 in my early teens, I guess my heart and brain agreed to ignore the datum of his passing.
posted by Radiophonic Oddity at 1:05 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


From a business perspective Clinton sounds a fuckton more reliable as a President than a Republican candidate that is inexplicably anti - free trade. I actually wouldn't be shocked if there are some Republican Super PACs that will actually run attack ads against Trump but for the most part I think they'll be focused on down ballot races and Trump is radioactive for a lot of Senators.

This is why 2016 is so crazy, because it's just as polarized over personalities as it is about actual policies. If the realignment was between less controversial figures, there would be pro-business Chamber of Commerce R's crossing over to vote for the Dem, and working class protectionist Mom and Pop D's crossing over for the Repub. Hillary can probably win over some amount of centrist/pro-status quo Rockefeller Republican types, but not as many as she would have, if she wasn't the demonized boogeyman they've been ranting against for decades.
posted by Apocryphon at 1:06 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


"This sort of nuttiness is bad for business"

Is there any chance that this mess will go so badly for Republicans that it'll drive a fatal wedge between their fiscal conservatives and their social conservatives? Because I really have to believe that deep down, a lot of Republican politicians and donors truthfully could not give a damn about abortion and school prayer and all that, but know they have to play along with that crowd for the sake of maintaining a winning coalition.

Or, to paraphrase Chris Rock, less "burning cross" racist and more "sorority" racist.

I keep wondering if this might finally be the election where the Republican party realizes they can't stand their fellow Republicans. Or maybe I'm just a dreamer.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 1:06 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


(Since the Democrats in '72 did what many are saying the Republicans are likely to do now.)

On that note, I really liked this recent article: What Democrats still don't get about George McGovern
posted by dialetheia at 1:07 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


or what would DFW write about it
posted by angrycat at 1:07 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


The music business Politics is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side.”

-- ( with apologies to ) Hunter S Thompson
posted by mikelieman at 1:07 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I'm thinking he was only going to do that if Hillary got in serious trouble.

He explicitly threatened as much, didn't he?
posted by tobascodagama at 1:09 PM on March 1


or what would DFW write about it

Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport?
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:10 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


No, Debbie Fasserman Wultz.
posted by prize bull octorok at 1:12 PM on March 1 [14 favorites]


David Foster Wallace, presumably.
posted by tobascodagama at 1:14 PM on March 1


Is there any chance that this mess will go so badly for Republicans that it'll drive a fatal wedge between their fiscal conservatives and their social conservatives?

That's been happening since the end of the Bush era. Bush was the crest of the social conservative wave that began in the late 70s. The Republicans have been fracturing since then, the Tea Party movement being a particularly visible symptom. The social conservatives have seen their power ebb nationally, and have also seen that they've largely been duped by the other factions of the Republican Party. Even under Bush when they basically had one of their own in charge they didn't really make much progress on the social goals they had.

They've made some progress on the abortion front, but otherwise? Homosexual rights have only continued to expand, the "culture war" was lost ages ago, etc. What do they have to show for all their efforts? The social cons get the boots on the ground at the polls, but they get jack shit when the Rs win. The neocons got their war, the fiscal cons got lower taxes and less regulation, what did the social cons get?

This election is the fatal wedge that was already there making its way through the party. They can't pretend to be a monolith in lockstep behind a single motivating ideology any more.
posted by Sangermaine at 1:16 PM on March 1


I'm not sure that it will happen this election cycle or if the Republicans will pretend it was all a bad dream and go back to business as usual.

But yeah I know a pretty large number of fiscal conservatives and in public they are all "Rah, rah go team Republican" but they could not give a shit about 99% of the social conservative issues. Abortion isn't that big of a deal because they can always fly a teenager out to a clinic in some liberal oasis, Muslims/Blacks/Latinos are fine as long as they don't get any ideas about joining the country club, etc.

They just smile and pretend and let the social conservatives do all the GotV activities while they write checks with their country friends and drink a couple of scotches. Casual sorority/fraternity racism is extremely prevalent and some of them might even profess to be really good friends with a couple of black people (you know some lawyers or doctors) but they generally aren't the cross burning types. They definitely would be uncomfortable with their daughter dating a black man though, just saying.

These are the type of Republicans that look at someone like Trump and get freaked the fuck out because what he's saying is bad for business. You know when you have a meeting with an international client and suddenly you have to explain why Trump wants to go to war with China or something stupid.
posted by vuron at 1:16 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


I loved him when I was 15. *shrug*

sick burn brah
posted by entropicamericana at 1:17 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


entropicamericana: sick burn brah

Lighten up, Francis. I mean that I hadn't been particularly engaged with politics before I read it, and reading HST as the entree into thinking seriously about the whole topic (maybe any topic) was…perhaps a poor choice. When I knew more about history and had listened to the people involved say stuff and then deliver on their promises (or not), I was able to reconsider the book actually in context.
posted by wenestvedt at 1:24 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]




[One comment deleted. markkraft, don't start.]
posted by LobsterMitten at 1:27 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


He explicitly threatened as much, didn't he?

Not to my knowledge, but I easily could have missed him saying that.
posted by Gaz Errant at 1:33 PM on March 1




Honestly a non-endorsement from Larry Summers is like a prediction from William Kristol. You take the opposite of what it says and assume that's the truth. What I mean by this is: I agree with Larry Summers. The whole world has gone mad.
posted by dis_integration at 1:43 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Counterpoint: Larry Summers is also a serious threat to American democracy
posted by dialetheia at 1:43 PM on March 1 [16 favorites]


So, does that mean there is some non-American democracy that Donald Trump isn't a threat and we can just unleash him there?
posted by FJT at 1:46 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Is there any actual news at this point? Should we not expect dependable data until later tonight?
posted by chonus at 1:48 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Is there any chance that this mess will go so badly for Republicans that it'll drive a fatal wedge between their fiscal conservatives and their social conservatives?

This is happening in small town politics in Connecticut. In Brookfield, population 16000, there's a not so civil war between mainstream and tea party conservative elements over who controls the town Relublican party, with extremist elements currently in control and ejecting insuffiently politically pure members from the party rolls.

The mainstream is fielding a huge slate of candidates to take the party back.
posted by zippy at 1:48 PM on March 1


Hillary's scandals bother me, but not enough that I wouldn't vote D. The reason I would never vote for Hillary (if I were allowed to) is simply that dynasties scare me. It's the same reason I refused to support Justin Trudeau even though he is objectively wonderful. Surely there is someone else out there who would be just as good at the job without stinking of dynasty?
posted by 256 at 1:50 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Bernie Sanders?
posted by Naberius at 1:51 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


The Washington Post has a decent-looking page for monitoring returns, if you want an alternative to the Bloomberg link in the FPP.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 1:52 PM on March 1


The pro-impeachment hashtag (#DumpTrump) writes itself. That's gotta count for something.
posted by Lyme Drop at 1:52 PM on March 1


I don't think Bernie Sanders is eligible to be Prime Minister of Canada.
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:52 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


"dynasties scare me."

I highly recommend you listen to this episode of Decode DC. Really interesting.
posted by Tevin at 1:53 PM on March 1


I don't really buy the 'dynasty' argument. Two married people running for the same office is lightyears away from the same thing as a parent and child running for the same office.
posted by showbiz_liz at 1:53 PM on March 1 [17 favorites]


So, does that mean there is some non-American democracy that Donald Trump isn't a threat and we can just unleash him there?

Iran.
posted by Apocryphon at 1:54 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Maybe light-minutes.
posted by 256 at 1:54 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


It's the difference between "two likeminded people finding each other" and "being groomed from birth."
posted by showbiz_liz at 1:55 PM on March 1 [28 favorites]


So, does that mean there is some non-American democracy that Donald Trump isn't a threat and we can just unleash him there?

He would do excellently as the successor to Kleptocrat and all-around capo di tutti capi Vladimir Putin.
posted by dis_integration at 1:55 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Two married people running for the same office is lightyears away from the same thing as a parent and child running for the same office.

Exactly. This is a "power couple" or whatever. The Bushes are a multi-generation family dynasty whose success is explicitly built upon previous generations of Bushes.

I hope/suspect we will see more couples like Bill and Hillary, since if women are truly equal and able to be politicians its natural to see some amount of "good at politics" people find each other and get married, like you see in other industries. I think its rare largely because women being successful at that level of politics is still relatively new.
posted by thefoxgod at 1:57 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Neil deGrasse Tyson @neiltyson: Who would Jesus vote for? To him walls, wealth, & torture are non-starters, so probably the Jewish New Yorker from Vermont.
posted by Room 641-A at 1:57 PM on March 1 [21 favorites]


Why all of a sudden, unlike 4 years ago, are we pretending that super delegates have already voted.? They don't vote until the election and it is really frustrating to me that reputable news source, like the Washington Post are acting like their 'votes' are set in stone.
posted by goneill at 1:58 PM on March 1 [15 favorites]




So, does that mean there is some non-American democracy that Donald Trump isn't a threat and we can just unleash him there?

As much as Europeans enjoy looking down at us stupid Americans, there is a wave of right-wing populism sweeping the Continent right now, from UKIP in the UK to Poland's Law and Justice party that just won an absolute majority in their Parliamnt in October.

Trump may be a particularly loud and flashy specimen, but the factors that put him where he is in the US are in play all across the West right now.

I feel like we're going to keep on laughing at guys like Trump until we wake up one day and they're all in charge.
posted by Sangermaine at 2:00 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


I don't think Bernie Sanders is eligible to be Prime Minister of Canada.

Oh, but Stephen Harper is? Is that really the world you want to live in?
posted by Naberius at 2:01 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Why all of a sudden, unlike 4 years ago, are we pretending that super delegates have already voted.?

I think it's because this year they're using superdelegates for what Debbie Wasserman Schultz admitted is their intended purpose: "Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists."
posted by dialetheia at 2:02 PM on March 1 [21 favorites]


Why all of a sudden, unlike 4 years ago, are we pretending that super delegates have already voted.? They don't vote until the election and it is really frustrating to me that reputable news source, like the Washington Post are acting like their 'votes' are set in stone.

Because, despite the hope & change thing, Obama was still a mainstream, establishment candidate. This other guy is talking about real change, and that could be bad for ConglomCo Media's bottom line.
posted by entropicamericana at 2:04 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Oh, I get that, but it's still seems like a perversion of American democracy to let Bill Clinton have his two terms and then decide: well, since we can't vote for him any more, let's vote for his wife. I get that two people with similar levels of skill and ambition are likely to find each other and hit it off, but I still think that electing two people from the same family to the highest office in the country is a gross contradiction of democracy, whether they are family by blood or choice.

I will personally not vote for someone whose candidacy is in any large part based on who they are related to, regardless of party affiliation, and regardless of how important the election may be.

And, yes, I recognize that precedent goes all the way back to POTUS #6
posted by 256 at 2:04 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


It's hilarious on the Politico data that in states reporting 0% for both Clinton and Sanders, they show for example 18 delegates for Clinton.

Shit, I apologize. Who needs to hack the computers with shit like this going on?
posted by mikelieman at 2:04 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Polling stations start to close in two hours. Currently, in the bunker on MetaFilter island, the mods are drawing straws to see who has to moderate this thread when the results start coming in.
posted by Wordshore at 2:04 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


By "hilarious" I mean, "I'm going to refill my bourbon glass"....
posted by mikelieman at 2:04 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Heading home from work, will sip dahlwinie as the returns come in...
posted by vrakatar at 2:07 PM on March 1


FDR was a pretty cool guy and arguably the best US president ever. I would hate to see him ineligible to run simply because he had a cousin who got into Office before he did. Granted Teddy Roosevelt was a pretty impressive figure but I still prefer FDR.

And I'll be honest I would vote for Michelle Obama in a fucking heartbeat if she wants to run a decade from now.
posted by vuron at 2:07 PM on March 1 [17 favorites]


> "I will personally not vote for someone whose candidacy is in any large part based on who they are related to ..."

Hillary Clinton was a U.S. Senator, and the Secretary of State.
posted by kyrademon at 2:07 PM on March 1 [48 favorites]


Is there any chance that this mess will go so badly for Republicans that it'll drive a fatal wedge between their fiscal conservatives and their social conservatives?

One of the peculiarities of the American system is that it's very winner take all. So whoever wants to be the winner and take all needs to have these odd big-tent coalitions in which there's a lot of different views grouped under a large umbrella.

In parliamentary, proportional-representation systems such as in Israel, you get a lot of odd little parties (ethnic parties, single-issue parties, etc) that win one or two seats and then a lot of horse trading after an election so that one of the major parties can form a government in coalition with a group of allies.

If you had this in the US, the Republicans would fragment: you'd get the Tea Party constitutional conservatives, the anti-abortion crew, the evangelicals, probably a Catholic conservative party, a few regional secessionist parties, the Second Amendment party, the III-percenter/prepper party. None of these are "obviously" linked together - why should a Constitutional conservative automatically be devoutly religious? Yet because of this Republican umbrella, they inevitably get bundled together in US electoral politics.

On the Democratic side, you'd see fragmentation into a variety of ethnic-identity parties (black, latino, etc), an environmental lobby, a pro-choice party oriented toward women, an gun-control party, some social democrats, some more radical Leftist parties (antifa, anarchist, etc), etc.

On the whole, it would probably be more interesting and heterogenous, compared to the way things coalesce around two major, centrist parties now.
posted by theorique at 2:09 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


Bernie Sanders' Plan to Survive Super Tuesday

Is this just pie-in-the-sky stuff, or could any of it be true?
posted by chonus at 2:10 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


As a Native New Yorker, even though she got herself elected to the seat from New York, she never represented *me*, and I would use the word "carpetbagger" to describe her fulfillment of the residency requirements for that office.
posted by mikelieman at 2:10 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Yeah, her husband's presidency gave her visibility and certainly made it possible for her to run for the Senate.

But I doubt/hope many people are voting for her as President based on her time as FLOTUS, given that she had 8 years in the Senate and 4 years as Secretary of State to judge her on...
posted by thefoxgod at 2:10 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


kyrademon:
"> "I will personally not vote for someone whose candidacy is in any large part based on who they are related to ..."

Hillary Clinton was a U.S. Senator, and the Secretary of State.
"
Yeah, that's kind of the definition of 'power couple'. They're both competent in their own rights. The Clinton name helps, but it isn't the largest part of who she is.
posted by charred husk at 2:10 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Because, despite the hope & change thing, Obama was still a mainstream, establishment candidate. This other guy is talking about real change, and that could be bad for ConglomCo Media's bottom line.

Or, Obama actually did his job. He did change things and he managed to shift the window for more leftward movement for the Democratic Party. The Establishment is really a catch all term for a number of different forces and actors that are out there and not all of them are even working towards the same objectives.
posted by FJT at 2:12 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]




Bernie Sanders' Plan to Survive Super Tuesday

Is this just pie-in-the-sky stuff, or could any of it be true?


The article is sticking to the facts of Sanders' plan, which is to literally ignore every state he doesn't poll well in. So, that part is definitely true.

Whether Sanders can actually win the nomination by ignoring the South (read: non-white voters) entirely, despite the extremely racially-charged context of this election... He's banking on it, but I have my doubts.
posted by tobascodagama at 2:13 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


A remind to people operating cells, using your Mefi name as a code name is considered sloppy tradecraft
posted by The Whelk at 2:14 PM on March 1 [14 favorites]


Yeah, her husband's presidency gave her visibility and certainly made it possible for her to run for the Senate.

That's enough for me.

But I doubt/hope many people are voting for her as President based on her time as FLOTUS, given that she had 8 years in the Senate and 4 years as Secretary of State to judge her on...

EVERY dynastic candidate has their own personal track record that you can judge them on. But there are enough people whose relatives have not been head of state that I feel okay choosing my candidate only from that pool.
posted by 256 at 2:14 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


The fact that she's married to Bill Clinton is a huge barrier to me voting for her in the general (note: not living in a swing state, though I guess anything is possible this year). Not because of a dynasty or her qualifications or anything, but because he's a rapist and I don't want to see his face ever again, particularly in the White House. I know divorcing Bill would be bad for her in many demographics but it would win the melissasaurus demographic.
posted by melissasaurus at 2:15 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


I'd feel better about Clinton if she had held any elected office before her husband was elected President.
posted by Faint of Butt at 2:16 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


It seems pretty unfair to judge her by his actions.
posted by Sangermaine at 2:16 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


mikelieman: “It's hilarious on the Politico data that in states reporting 0% for both Clinton and Sanders, they show for example 18 delegates for Clinton. Shit, I apologize. Who needs to hack the computers with shit like this going on?”

I'm not sure whether you're actually asking why Clinton has 18 delegates with 0% reporting, but: Hillary Clinton starts with 18 delegates because she's already won a few states. The delegate count isn't just for today; it's for the race overall.
posted by koeselitz at 2:17 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


The Beast was Clinton. The Smiler was Dubbya.

I'm not sure if you mean that literally, but it can't be true: the Smiler storyline started in 1998.

Yeah, I thought Warren Ellis pretty obviously based the Smiler on Tony Blair.

The Beast is an amalgamation of multiple shitbag politicians, but the scene where Spider uses the bowel disruptor on him is a clear homage to Hunter S. Thompson's apocryphal restroom chat with Richard Nixon in Where The Buffalo Roam.
posted by Strange Interlude at 2:18 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Honestly Chonus it's pretty pie-in-the-sky stuff even ignoring some of the recent polling coming out of Massachusetts that show Clinton significantly up. I think even the most ardent Sanders supporters know today is going to be a bloodbath and 3/15 is going to be very similar. I think the idea is that they can keep the delegate total reasonable and then come from behind in states that are more favorable to Sanders from a demographic perspective.

I think what's interesting is that there is a significant portion of the Democratic base that wants a more progressive figurehead to rally behind (Sanders/Warren/etc) while there is still very much a dominant faction that is more risk adverse based upon past election failures. The question mark will be whether progressives can forge a new coalition based around progressive policies that wins over older voters and minorities.

As the Boomers start exiting the demographic snake and are increasingly replaced by millenials at the other end you'll see a more significant shift in Democratic policies but right now we have what is in effect a generational conflict that is being largely decided by minority voters that have been decidedly cool on Sanders.
posted by vuron at 2:18 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


It seems pretty unfair to judge her by his actions.

I have separate thoughts about her statements with respect to his victims, on which I judge her. I am not judging her for him being a rapist, but I will not vote to have a known rapist be a figurehead (i.e., F[L]OTUS) of my country. If a vote for her was no longer a vote for Bill to be first man (I will not call him a gentleman), then I could consider voting for her.
posted by melissasaurus at 2:19 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


initial poll reports coming in
intense wailing from voters higher up
those who have slid down returning mostly moans
few voters on the bottom opt to answer polling questions
based on that i am calling it for pleas to end this misery
posted by robocop is bleeding at 2:20 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


"I will personally not vote for someone whose candidacy is in any large part based on who they are related to ..."

1. She's vastly more qualified for the office than anyone else in the running except, argruably, Bernie Sanders. Arguably.
2. With all the flaws and problems and scandals to detract from Hillary...that's the deal-breaker for you? Seriously?
posted by scaryblackdeath at 2:21 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Just to be clear, I am not the DWS that everyone is talking about.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 2:22 PM on March 1 [36 favorites]


Also, its completely unfair to me for people to say "Hillary only got to be Senator because of Bill". Its just as real to say "Bill only got to be Governor/President because of Hillary", as both he and outside accounts show she did have a huge presence/influence in his political life. They are a team, not a dynasty.
posted by thefoxgod at 2:23 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


I feel like the First Gentleman should have a mandatory outfit consisting of a fedora, anime t-shirt, cargo shorts, long coat, socks, and sandals. There would be monthly Mountain Dew and Doritos consumption quotas.
posted by Sangermaine at 2:23 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


Sweet, the Eagles signed Sam Bradford. I can celebrate one good decision our nation made today.
posted by Drinky Die at 2:25 PM on March 1


Of all the reasons not to vote for Hillary Clinton "she is married to a former President" has got to be the worst.
posted by Justinian at 2:26 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


Hello M'SCTOUS, I know this is awfully forward but you mind terribly to send your favor my way? I'd be so grateful xD
posted by Tevin at 2:26 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Monarchy really wasn't that bad of a system guys.
posted by Drinky Die at 2:26 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


"I will personally not vote for someone whose candidacy is in any large part based on who they are related to, regardless of party affiliation, and regardless of how important the election may be."

Yeah... screw you FDR. You suck(ed)!
posted by markkraft at 2:26 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


People vote for candidates based on incomprehensible reasons all the time. So this dynasty thing isn't the only strange one.

Case in point, Trump.
posted by qcubed at 2:27 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Move aside, “cellar door,” the new two most beautiful-sounding words in the English language are “dangerous nincompoopery.”

Right up there with “bulbous salutation”.
posted by acb at 2:27 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Is this the corner where the best view of the train wreck can be seen?
posted by infini at 2:28 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


They are a team, not a dynasty.

Consider for a moment: Barack Obama without Michelle's influence.
Does he go as far professionally, or as fast?
Is he still cool?
Does he still win elections?
Some first ladies are far more relevant than others, and any good marriage is a team.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 2:29 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Move aside, “cellar door,” the new two most beautiful-sounding words in the English language are “dangerous nincompoopery.”

Understandably, the time for "Jiggery pokery" has come and gone.
posted by delfin at 2:30 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I am scared we will run out of comments by the time things start happening.
posted by mazola at 2:31 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Exit polls must look pretty one-sided...

CNN now has a headline saying "How Big Will Their Wins Be?" with pictures of Clinton and Trump underneath.
posted by markkraft at 2:31 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Sigh.

Nation of Islam leader hails Trump for resisting ‘Jewish money’
Louis Farrakhan claims GOP front-runner is only candidate to stand up to ‘those who con­trol the politics of Amer­ica’

posted by Joe in Australia at 2:33 PM on March 1


mazola this is just the warmup.
posted by Tevin at 2:33 PM on March 1


I am scared we will run out of comments by the time things start happening.

Are you tired of Chinese commenters taking all the comments that used to be made by good honest American commenters? Vote for me and make MetaFilter great again!
posted by Sangermaine at 2:33 PM on March 1 [14 favorites]


The three party system - "There are three major political forces in contemporary politics in developed countries: tribalism, neoliberalism and leftism (defined in more detail below). Until recently, the party system involved competition between different versions of neoliberalism. Since the Global Financial Crisis, neoliberals have remained in power almost everywhere, but can no longer command the electoral support needed to marginalise both tribalists and leftists at the same time. So, we are seeing the emergence of a three-party system, which is inherently unstable because of the Condorcet problem and for other reasons."

[cf. shirky on 3rd party candidates, viz. "So here we are, with quasi-parlimentarianism. We now have four medium-sized and considerably more coherent voter blocs. 2 rump establishment parties, Trump representing 'racist welfare state' voters, and Sanders representing people who want a Nordic system."]

Democrats always prove the commies right - "Lucy will never let you kick that football."
My commie friends said it was all a smokescreen for business as usual. Obama immediately proceeded to give people like Larry Summers and Tim Geithner, who had a hand in the creation of the financial crisis, seats of power in his administration. That’s the definition of business as usual. I pushed hard for Obamacare, arguing against left-wing critics that the reforms were worthwhile even while they were inadequate. My Democrat friends assured me that we would get a public option in through the back door. My commie friends said that the bill was a way to give even greater control over our medical system. Today reforms that go beyond Obamacare look less possible than ever. My Democrat friends said that 2016 would be the year of a truly emboldened left-wing within the Democratic party, that even if Bernie Sanders didn’t win, Hillary would feel such pressure to move left that we’d win either way. The commies said that Hillary was the epitome of the Democrat’s embrace of the affluent and powerful. Hillary has spent the primary denouncing cherished left-wing goals like single payer health care, universal access to higher education, meaningful reform of investment banks, and similar. Her campaign has also worked tirelessly to drive a wedge between the traditional constituencies of the left, engaging in vicious smear tactics against Sanders and his supporters, playing feminism against the campaign for economic justice and treating any concern for class as ipso facto racist and sexist. All of this before her inevitable hard-right turn in the general election.

This is the kind of post that inspires the most intense pushback I get — posts that question whether people of a left-wing persuasion have an obligation to support the Democratic party no matter what — and yet no amount of invective can change the fact that the paragraphs above are accurate. All of that stuff happened and has continued to happen. The Democrats prove the commies right. Every time.

It’s essential to understand: the purpose of the scorched-earth campaign waged against Sanders and his supporters by the Democratic establishment and its mouthpieces at Vox, the Daily Beast, the Washington Post, etc., is not merely to prevent a Sanders nomination. The point is to so tar Sanders supporters with slurs and empty accusations of bigotry as to ensure that they gain no appreciable influence within the party in the future. And the purpose of that is to reassure the donor class that all of the populist talk going on within the party is just that: talk, a way to try and revive the dormant enthusiasm of the 2008 election and secure the presidency. The attitude of career Democrats is that the left should simultaneously be subject to constant ridicule and marginalization, and yet should be expected to vote in lockstep along party lines with unerring fidelity. That’s the Democrat message to the left: “we get your votes; you get nothing.” And nothing is precisely what we have to show for it... history demonstrates that the party has consistently been a tool of establishment power and an impediment to changing the class hierarchy of our society.
"We Must & Can Aim High": Former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich on Endorsing Bernie Sanders

Why I'm Voting for Bernie Sanders on Tuesday - "if we want to move our party and our country in a certain direction, we have to start off by aiming in that direction"

also btw...
I wonder why people are so angry - "One of American liberalism’s many abundant problems is an ingrained sense that the people it most needs to convince are somehow not worthy of the effort. Well, it’s a terrible mistake to support Trump. But in democracy, your job is to convince the people who believe terrible things to stop. Merely judging them makes you feel better. Convincing them makes the world better."
posted by kliuless at 2:34 PM on March 1 [42 favorites]


Yeah... screw you FDR. You suck(ed)!

I'm sure Justin Trudeau will be awesome too, but I still wish we had elected someone else.
posted by 256 at 2:35 PM on March 1


Farrakhan is a clown. I remember seeing him going on a diatribe about jewelry.

Or, as he said it JEW-el-ry.
posted by markkraft at 2:35 PM on March 1


Gotta admit, if nothing else I'm kind of impressed that Trump may be the first and only person on earth to snag endorsements from both Louis Farrakhan and the KKK.
posted by Itaxpica at 2:36 PM on March 1 [50 favorites]


We're here all day twiddling our thumbs while kliuless diligently gathers material for more incredible sub-posts.

*slow clap*
posted by Tevin at 2:36 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


CNN now has a headline saying "How Big Will Their Wins Hands Be?" with pictures of Clinton and Trump underneath.

FTFY
posted by Itaxpica at 2:37 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Ugh mellissasaurus, I was a 10 year old kid living in another country when Bill Clinton was president so I had no idea. I just did some research and I must admit he sounds like a total pig.

I can't find info on what Hillary's reaction to these allegations were, did she attack the women involved? How did she handle these issues?
posted by Tarumba at 2:38 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


CNN now has a headline saying "How Big Will Their Wins Hands Be?" with pictures of Clinton and Trump underneath.

Imma let you finish, but Ben Carson has the best hands of all time. "These hands... several years ago, someone made a movie about these hands!"
posted by dialetheia at 2:39 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Attacked the women involved... It was all very ugly and classist.
posted by goneill at 2:40 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]



Is Trump the Beast from Transmetropolitan? I think it was implied the Beast was a Republican.


IIRC, the Beast was Nixon, and the Smiler was modelled primarily on Tony Blair.
posted by acb at 2:41 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


That Rolling Stone article posted above refers to Colorado as a Midwestern state. Whaaat.
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:44 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


It's awful how bad the Nation of Islam has become. I've never been a big fan of the organization but it seems like they did have a place in presenting an alternative image of African-Americans with things like the Million Man March but Farrakhan has seriously gone way the fuck off into the deep end with hardcore anti-semitism and all the weird-ass Scientology stuff.
posted by vuron at 2:45 PM on March 1


I really liked this thoughtful piece in the Guardian about how some young women feel about Clinton and Monica Lewinsky in particular. I'm probably about the same age as the author and remember having a lot of similar feelings at the time.
posted by dialetheia at 2:46 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]




I can't find info on what Hillary's reaction to these allegations were, did she attack the women involved? How did she handle these issues?

This is a decent/quick overview: ’90s Scandals Threaten to Erode Hillary Clinton’s Strength With Women

Seconding dialethia's link -- very similar to my experiences/thought process.
posted by melissasaurus at 2:48 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]




Worth remembering: Trump will throw everything and the kitchen sink at Hillary, and that includes Bill's alleged crimes. The issues around those alleged crimes & how Hillary handles them are real. It's a conversation worth having.

The notion that it should give Donald Trump of all fucking people some sort of traction in an election is nauseating as hell. Do not think for a second that it will somehow improve the situation of survivors of sexual abuse or assault.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 2:53 PM on March 1


A remind to people operating cells, using your Mefi name as a code name is considered sloppy tradecraft

Fuck.
posted by mikelieman at 2:53 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I don't have much to predict, but I have been wondering if this is going to be Cruz's swan song. I see him dropping before Rubio making strategic sense, but his odious and vain personality could very well keep him in the running well past eligibility. If Cruz does drop, then that gives Rubio a fighting chance, right? Rubio would get the firehose of "not Trump" money, would possibly be able to win Florida, and could fight DT down to the convention.
posted by codacorolla at 2:54 PM on March 1


"Let's be done with wiggle and wobble."
posted by CincyBlues at 2:54 PM on March 1


Remember when "Life Imitates The Onion" used to be, like, news of the weird-type "Cat Fends Off Alligator" stories?
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:55 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


The notion that it should give Donald Trump of all fucking people
Also a rapist.
posted by melissasaurus at 2:55 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Let's all not forget that Vermin Supreme is still in the race.

Inside the Boot with Vermin Supreme
posted by homunculus at 2:55 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


I'd feel better about Clinton if she had held any elected office before her husband was elected President.

Her husband was running for (in '78) and then was Governor of Arkansas from '79 through '91. Was she supposed to run while he was Governor? That seems like it would invite the same criticism.

Before that, Hillary only graduated law school in '73. That's a pretty narrow window -- maybe five years -- in which she could possibly have both run for and been elected to office before her husband was, but, realistically, she had just gotten her JD.

So I'm not sure how to read this. Would people feel better if she had...not have had the life she had? Not have married Clinton? Had run while he was Governor? Somehow have run and been elected fresh out of law school, with minimal work experience? What, exactly, is the criticism here?
posted by cjelli at 2:57 PM on March 1 [17 favorites]


Remember when "Life Imitates The Onion" used to be, like, news of the weird-type "Cat Fends Off Alligator" stories?

Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over' Jan 17, 2001.

So, no.
posted by mrnutty at 2:57 PM on March 1 [26 favorites]


"The neanderthal Republicans..." I ask respectfully you keep the ancestors out of this. They don't deserve the comparison. The others also are not worthy.
posted by Oyéah at 2:58 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


It seems pretty unfair to judge her by his actions

Absolutely. It is however fair to judge her on the policies she advocated for at the time.
posted by Lyme Drop at 3:00 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Would people feel better if she had...not have had the life she had? Not have married Clinton? Had run what he was Governor? Somehow have run and been elected fresh out of law school, with minimal work experience? What, exactly, is the criticism here?

"She's just not that likeable."
posted by qcubed at 3:01 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Meet the Press' twitter has released some exit polling.

Looks like only 35% of white Democratic voters in Virginia want a candidate more liberal than Obama.

Meanwhile, 50% of GOP voters sampled across all the Super Tuesday states want a leader who is outside the establishment.
posted by markkraft at 3:04 PM on March 1


For some reason I've had 'Gay Bar' by Electric Six going through my head all day.
posted by Jessica Savitch's Coke Spoon at 3:04 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


CNN now has a headline saying "How Big Will Their Wins Hands Be?" with pictures of Clinton and Trump underneath.

Imma let you finish, but Ben Carson has the best hands of all time. "These hands... several years ago, someone made a movie about these hands!"


Trump: "Big, Masculine. My hands tell a story... of greatness!"
posted by dhens at 3:06 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


That is only because you aren't aware of the best, classic version of 'Gay Bar'.
posted by markkraft at 3:07 PM on March 1 [17 favorites]






Trump: "My hands tell a story... of greatness!"
It is SO telling that Trump's hissy fit over the "short fingered vulgarian" quote was NOT about being called a "vulgarian". THAT he apparently liked.
posted by oneswellfoop at 3:11 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


That is only because you aren't aware of the best, classic version of 'Gay Bar' .

This has made my day SO MUCH BETTER.
posted by chainsofreedom at 3:12 PM on March 1


Iimma let you finish, but Ben Carson has the best hands of all time. "These hands... several years ago, someone made a movie about these hands!"

Manos!!

Trump's new theme song

Seriously, how is Crazy Train not his theme song already?
posted by Room 641-A at 3:12 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Duh, his song is clearly Cocaine and Toupees by MSI.
posted by chainsofreedom at 3:14 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Obviously, you're both wrong. This is Trump's song.
posted by entropicamericana at 3:17 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


...aaaaaaand I see that joke's been done.
posted by entropicamericana at 3:17 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]






Vote Torgo
posted by Drinky Die at 3:20 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Last orders, please!
posted by markkraft at 3:22 PM on March 1




Last call , everyone!

Last call for your freedom of speech.
Drink up. Happy hour is now enforced by law.
Don't forget our house special, it's called a Trickie Dickie Screwdriver.
It's got one part Jack Daniels, two parts purple Kool-Aid,
and a jigger of formaldehyde
from the jar with Hitler's brain in it we got in the back storeroom.
Happy trails to you. Happy trails to you.
posted by entropicamericana at 3:27 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Is it worth it to watch Fox News election returns tonight, given a very likely Trump Trouncing?
posted by codacorolla at 3:30 PM on March 1


I thought Fox News was officially Anti-Trump, has that changed in the last couple weeks?
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:33 PM on March 1



I thought Fox News was officially Anti-Trump, has that changed in the last couple weeks?


No, that's what would make it funny and worth watching.
posted by codacorolla at 3:34 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Murdoch needs to wire FoxNews pundits with electrical implants to make sure they smile this time around.
posted by markkraft at 3:37 PM on March 1


Remember when "Life Imitates The Onion" used to be, like, news of the weird-type "Cat Fends Off Alligator" stories?

"Bin Laden called for Americans to rise up over climate change", Reuters

Osama bin Laden wrote a letter calling on the American people to help President Barack Obama fight "catastrophic" climate change and "save humanity", in the latest evidence of his worries about environmental issues, newly released documents show

The letter was among materials that were seized in the May 2, 2011, U.S. raid on bin Laden's hideout in Pakistan that killed the al Qaeda chief and which were released on Tuesday by the Obama administration.

The undated, unsigned letter "to the American people," which U.S. intelligence officials attributed to bin Laden, appeared to have been written shortly after Obama began his first term in 2009, based on the letter's references to events.

Bin Laden's preoccupation with climate change also emerged as a theme in the first tranche of documents from the raid that was declassified in May 2015, as well as in an audio recording released via the al Jazeera network in January 2010.

In the rambling letter made public Tuesday, bin Laden blamed the 2007-8 U.S. financial crisis on corporate control of capital and corporate lobbyists, and the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

He called on Americans to launch "a great revolution for freedom" to liberate the U.S. president from those influences.

That would enable Obama to make "a rational decision to save humanity from the harmful gases that threaten its destiny," bin Laden continued.

In a separate letter, bin Laden urged a close aide to launch a media campaign for the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that included a call for cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

Bin Laden contended that the world would be better off fighting climate change than waging what he claimed was a war against Islam.

"...the world should put its efforts into attempting to reduce the release of gases," said the undated, unsigned letter to someone identified as Shaykh Mahmud that U.S. intelligence officials said they believed was written by bin Laden.

"This is a struggle between two of the largest cultures on Earth, and it is in the shadow of catastrophic climate conditions."

(Reporting by Jonathan Landay; editing by Stuart Grudgings)


uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
posted by Apocryphon at 3:39 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Is it worth it to watch Fox News election returns tonight, given a very likely Trump Trouncing?


Ann Coulter vs Sean Hannity twitter war
posted by yertledaturtle at 3:43 PM on March 1


The "Sock sock shoe shoe versus sock shoe sock shoe" controversy that exploded in this thread earlier has now become a MetaTalk thread.
posted by Wordshore at 3:43 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Tomorrow's GOP talking point:
"When we fight global warming, the terrorists win!"
posted by markkraft at 3:45 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


MSNBC has a scroll that Trump will be holding a press conference tonight at 9pm rather than giving any speech. Interesting.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 3:45 PM on March 1


that taibbi piece is some grade-a bile like the stuff we used to enjoy back in the 90s. it's like somebody found an previously unreleased suck.com post.
posted by entropicamericana at 3:46 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


the press conference is gonna be about his hands
posted by prize bull octorok at 3:47 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


I would love for Trump to get on stage and say "Take a look at these hands! The hand speaks! The hand of a government man".
posted by downtohisturtles at 3:49 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


Maybe he's decided to drop out of the race.
posted by mazola at 3:49 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Hopefully at the press conference he pulls off the mask to reveal... it's actually Al Gore. "Take that, Republicans!, he shouts. Now me and ZOMBIE OSAMA will band together to implement a CARBON TAX!!!!!"
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:50 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


Maybe he's decided to drop out of the race.

I can't understand a single thing that's happened in this election cycle, but what would even happen if he did?
posted by codacorolla at 3:50 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Ten minutes till the first polling stations today close.
posted by Wordshore at 3:51 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


"I proved my point, America"

drops mic and walks away, toupee carries him off majestically into the sunset
posted by Tevin at 3:51 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


Eight minutes left, until polls close in a lot of the EST states... and then the detailed exit polls and election results start to drop.
posted by markkraft at 3:52 PM on March 1


Hillary Clinton’s campaign has been “reminded” not to solicit votes near polling sites after President Bill Clinton ventured into a polling location in Boston on Tuesday, the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s office said.

Look, I'm all for defeating Trump, but I'm also really deflated by the thought of 4 years of people reminding the Clintons not to break the rules.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 3:52 PM on March 1 [19 favorites]


Keep your eyes on Texas. If Fuckfacce Clownyguy can't win that tonight he'll drop out by Florida.

Bernie will lose but do well in some places and demographics.
posted by vrakatar at 3:52 PM on March 1


I can't understand a single thing that's happened in this election cycle, but what would even happen if he did?

Cruz and Rubio would tear each others' throats out. Maybe literally.
posted by showbiz_liz at 3:53 PM on March 1


Keep your eyes on Texas. If Fuckfacce Clownyguy can't win that tonight he'll drop out by Florida.

You're going to have to be more specific because there's a lot of Fuckface Clownyguys in this race.
posted by entropicamericana at 3:54 PM on March 1 [60 favorites]


Oh come on. That's just basic rules; even here in Chicago, home of the dirty tricks, people know not to do electioneering past the orange cones in front of the polling entrance.
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:54 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


wow. a press conference is super weird, especially given his relationship with the press these days.
posted by angrycat at 3:55 PM on March 1


I hope that The Rube and Crude-io stick it out to the bitter end, and try to form a unified anti-Trump ticket at the convention.

It wouldn't work, mind you... but really, the longer they spend their money attacking each other, the better.
posted by markkraft at 3:56 PM on March 1


Ten minutes till the first polling stations today close.

This is my first major election since moving from NYC to Hawaii. One of the unexpected benefits is that the mainland polls start closing at 2pm (Hawaii time) and the delegate count is more or less determined well before dinnertime. Same thing with the debates -- most start around happy hour and finish before dinner. It's so much better than attempting to stay up past 10pm (something I have a very hard time doing).
posted by melissasaurus at 3:56 PM on March 1


Cruz and Rubio would tear each others' throats out. Maybe literally.

Then it would just be Kasich standing between DR Ben Carson MD and the nomination!
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:57 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Cruz and Rubio would tear each others' throats out. Maybe literally.

And then Jeb and Romney trip over each other on the stairs to the convention for the failed fortunate son spot.
posted by Apocryphon at 3:57 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Just when Jeb thought he got out, they pull him back in!
posted by Elementary Penguin at 3:58 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Exit polls regarding political experience and outside establishment. 16% of Dems said outside establishment, compared to 50% of Republican voters today.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 3:58 PM on March 1


> "One of the unexpected benefits is that the mainland polls start closing at 2pm (Hawaii time) ..."

I moved from Hawaii to Europe.

Gonna be a late night.
posted by kyrademon at 3:58 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


I'm hoping the GOP convention turns out like the ending of Reservoir Dogs.
posted by markkraft at 3:59 PM on March 1 [18 favorites]


It's time.
posted by Wordshore at 4:00 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Maybe this is his way of controlling the narrative? Perhaps someone dug up some really damaging dirt on him and is threatening to put it out; so he has no choice but to drop out!?!?

Not getting my hopes up, though.
posted by yertledaturtle at 4:00 PM on March 1


In Bridge no-trump is more powerful than trump.
posted by Bistle at 4:01 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


NBC: Georgia for Clinton and Trump, Virginia for Clinton and too close to call (Trump/Rubio), Vermont for Bernie and either Kasich or Trump.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:01 PM on March 1


Oh yeah, I guess the candidates who have dropped out technically "suspended" their campaigns, so they could get back in?
posted by tivalasvegas at 4:01 PM on March 1


Ann Coulter vs Sean Hannity twitter war

This more than anything makes the world of politics feel upside down to me. Ann Coulter is now trolling Sean Hannity instead of liberals.
posted by Drinky Die at 4:01 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Mr. Pink '16.

It's time we had a professional
posted by cmfletcher at 4:01 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


maybe he's going to announce the successful completion of his god-emperor sandworm apotheosis
posted by prize bull octorok at 4:02 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


GA and VA to Clinton, VT to Sanders
posted by zombieflanders at 4:02 PM on March 1


As a non-Democrat looking from the outside in, if Sanders loses the nomination, I'll be very sad to lose his contribution to the national stage as a candidate; but I think I'm even more dreading the months of vote-shaming by people who for some reason think my vote is their birthright and who actually believe that the real problem is a handful of stubborn leftist voters, not half the country being Nazis
posted by threeants at 4:02 PM on March 1 [26 favorites]


This more than anything makes the world of politics feel upside down to me. Ann Coulter is now trolling Sean Hannity instead of liberals.

2016 - The year 4chan ./pol pwned the GOP.
posted by yertledaturtle at 4:03 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


ABC just called Vermont for Sanders, Virginia and Georgia for Clinton.
posted by markkraft at 4:03 PM on March 1


Maybe this is his way of controlling the narrative?

He's going to announce his new reality TV show, to be carried on all the networks and cable TV, called: "Who Wants to be POTUS?" with Trump and Hillary as the two contestants.
posted by ennui.bz at 4:03 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Jeff Weaver (Bernie's CM) just told CNN they're going all the way to the convention. Good on him.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:04 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Are they calling the states based on exit polls?
posted by localhuman at 4:05 PM on March 1


"Take a look at these hands! The hand speaks! The hand of a government man".

this is a concept album on the 2016 election. "Facts continue to change their shape"; "She has messages for everyone ... She is moving by remote control ... She is only party human being"; "This isn't the time-So nothing was done"; "He wonders if he too might have made a similar mistake."; "THE CENTER IS MISSING THEY QUESTION HOW THE FUTURE LIES"

"And you may ask yourself-Well...How did I get here?"
posted by andrewcooke at 4:06 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


> "I'm even more dreading the months of vote-shaming by people who for some reason think I owe them my vote and who actually believe that the real problem is a handful of stubborn leftist voters, not half the country being Nazis"

I understand your dread and sympathize, but if it helps, I suspect that part of the reason it happens is that people are operating under the assumption that you are probably a rational human being with good intentions who might listen to sincerely meant argument, whereas the Nazis are ... probably not.
posted by kyrademon at 4:09 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Yes. Apparently, they were pretty overwhelming in GA, according to a GA exit poller. Absentee and early votes in Georgia were about double what they were in the last election.

The fact they would call Virginia so early surprises me.
posted by markkraft at 4:10 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


MSNBC says there will be some sort of "surprise" at the press conference.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:10 PM on March 1


Mayhaps an endorsement -- any guesses?

Probably not Jeb!
posted by notyou at 4:12 PM on March 1


I don't like "surprises".
posted by daq at 4:12 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


hah, that is genuinely unsettling!
posted by prize bull octorok at 4:13 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Trump will shed his faux human skin and eat a guinea pig.
posted by delfin at 4:13 PM on March 1 [15 favorites]


Can Trump preemptively select a vice presidential candidate before the RNC even happens?
posted by Apocryphon at 4:13 PM on March 1


Good lord. Do I even want to know? Unless he declares that it was a social experiment all along and "I edged towards saying the KKK is okay and you fuckers still voted for me! lol enjoy your party of Nazis, GOP! Peace out," I'm not interested.
posted by yasaman at 4:13 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Yeah, I am also quite done with surprises.
posted by tivalasvegas at 4:13 PM on March 1


> "MSNBC says there will be some sort of 'surprise' at the press conference."

Free cookies?

VP announcement?

Cage match?

I swear to God, I have no idea what to expect anymore.
posted by kyrademon at 4:13 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


MSNBC says there will be some sort of "surprise" at the press conference.

Donald trump sucking up all the air in the room again. Perhaps the media should hold a strike today and tell him to broadcast his own press conference.
posted by yertledaturtle at 4:14 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


> "Donald trump sucking up all the air in the room again."

Yeah, on reflection, that sounds like the most likely "surprise".
posted by kyrademon at 4:15 PM on March 1


This "calling" states stuff kind of annoys me, what with this being the primaries where (for the most part) the actual breakdown of votes/delegates makes a real difference.
posted by uosuaq at 4:15 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


This "calling" states stuff kind of annoys me, what with this being the primaries where (for the most part) the actual breakdown of votes/delegates makes a real difference.

Actually, because of the shiate that happened in 2000, the prediction desks are nowhere near anyone actually broadcasting, and these are done in a vacuum with actual data.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:17 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I just got a Bernie call here in Massachusetts, 45 minutes before the polls close. That's pretty impressive.
posted by benito.strauss at 4:17 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Maybe he'll reveal the classified 28 pages of the 9/11 Commission.
posted by Apocryphon at 4:17 PM on March 1


MSNBC says there will be some sort of "surprise" at the press conference.

Wait, this is all wrong! Trump needs to wait until after he's officially the Republican nominee to reveal that he's been trolling us this whole time and that actually he's a socially liberal reality TV star who just wanted to prove how crazy the Republican party is.
posted by litera scripta manet at 4:18 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Is there anywhere to watch results on line that has a grid or list of states that is updated every few minutes? I feel like everybody's switched to live blog format this year so all the updates from all the states (and a bunch of commentary) are all mixed into the same stream. Ughhhhh.
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 4:19 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I dunno, the mad frenzy of the remaining candidates to claim the prize as it is lowered back into the pit might be fun to watch until June.
posted by prize bull octorok at 4:20 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


joey: http://www.decisiondeskhq.com/super-tuesday-dem/
posted by joeyh at 4:20 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


A result grid (NYT).
posted by kickingtheground at 4:21 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Is there anywhere to watch results on line that has a grid or list of states that is updated every few minutes? I feel like everybody's switched to live blog format this year so all the updates from all the states (and a bunch of commentary) are all mixed into the same stream. Ughhhhh.

NPR has you covered, although their system is a little weird. (Calling Virginia for Clinton with "<% of precincts reporting"? Seriously?)
posted by fifthrider at 4:21 PM on March 1


I have this theory that Trump is basically an inferior version of Nathan Jessup. Inferior in that he has much less control than Jessup. But the same ego, the same sense of invincibility, the same arrogance and the same compulsion and lack of self-control around saying what he really wants to say. Except he has even less control than Colonel Jessup and I think he's gotten lucky so far in that his lack of a filter has found a receptive audience so far, but I don't think it can last forever, especially with Trump. He's already shown bad judgement with things he's said multiple times, most recently in his refusal to disavow the David Duke endorsement and I kind of think he's going to start running up against the limits of what kind of bullshit he spout before he starts to slide backwards. He may not lose his true believers, but I think he has some support that he can lose with a Romney-style 47% type of comment.

If he wins the nomination, the scrutiny on him and pressure to slip up will be intense - not just from the Democrats but likely from his own party. He is remarkably vulnerable to being shaken on stupid shit like the size of his hands, and him being off-center like that is I think what hurts him with his supporters, who seem to like his confident, aggressive arrogance. Because it seems powerful. But he doesn't look powerful when he's left stuttering on stage after a little needling from Marco Rubio. He loves to spout off, seems to have little self-control and doesn't seem to have great judgement on things. Rubio was able to turn him into a flustering idiot at the debates the other night for a few minutes and while he might not be able to do that again on the same issue, I think it's easy to do it, if they can find what other kinds of things shake him up. Whether it's making him lose his aura of power by catching him off guard or goading him into saying something that actually offends his supporters, I tend to think it's only a matter of time before he slips up.
posted by triggerfinger at 4:21 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Is there anywhere to watch results on line that has a grid or list of states that is updated every few minutes? I feel like everybody's switched to live blog format this year so all the updates from all the states (and a bunch of commentary) are all mixed into the same stream. Ughhhhh.

At the top of this page you can use the little arrows to look at the polling results for all the primaries and just ignore all the commentary below it.
posted by litera scripta manet at 4:21 PM on March 1




Can you imagine if, after all the sturm und drang, the race ended up being Clinton v. Bush? Poetic, that.
posted by tivalasvegas at 4:22 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


CNN calls GA for Trump.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:23 PM on March 1


Can you imagine if, after all the sturm und drang, the race ended up being Clinton v. Bush? Poetic, that.

I would also accept Biden vs. Romney.
posted by Apocryphon at 4:24 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Mordor is definitely Cruz territory. I think Trump does better among the dwarves, actually. And he might play surprisingly well in more rural, economically depressed areas of Rohan.
posted by tivalasvegas at 4:24 PM on March 1 [15 favorites]


Clint Eastwood's not looking so crazy now, huh?
posted by Room 641-A at 4:25 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Trump to announce he's realy running for Veep, will swap with last surviving runner-up candidate.
posted by joeyh at 4:25 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


"(Calling Virginia for Clinton with [very small percentages] reporting? Really?)"

How journalists "call" races with very few precincts reporting.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 4:27 PM on March 1


I have my air horn ready to blast for each state where the Nimble Navigator stumps the opposition. I predict I will fire off at least ten blasts tonight. I've started with Georgia. *BLAST*
posted by Tanizaki at 4:27 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


we all know the ents are feeling the bern
posted by prize bull octorok at 4:28 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


My expression improved slightly when I learned that Trump would for sure not be on the property.
posted by phearlez at 4:28 PM on March 1


If Rubio manages to squeak by in Virginia at least we won't have to listen to yet another THIRD PLACE VICTOOOORY! speech.
posted by Justinian at 4:28 PM on March 1


Mordor is definitely Cruz territory. I think Trump does better among the dwarves, actually. And he might play surprisingly well in more rural, economically depressed areas of Rohan.

Bernie's push for medical pipe weed and a less interventionist foreign policy definitely puts him ahead in the Shire.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:29 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


Bah everyone knows Rivendell fixes these things, they are like an elegant unwordly Tammany Hall.
posted by vrakatar at 4:31 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


The NYT is "calling" Vermont for Sanders with ZERO precincts reporting. I'm rooting for Sanders but that kind of not-even-trying faux-reporting burns me up.
posted by threeants at 4:31 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Thanks, all. That NPR link didn't work and threw me into a live radio listener...? Anyway the other links are great.
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 4:32 PM on March 1


If they know that Sanders won Vermont how is it faux-reporting?
posted by Justinian at 4:32 PM on March 1


no yeah, hobbits definitely have that social-democratic tendency with a strong isolationist streak
posted by tivalasvegas at 4:32 PM on March 1


It would be pretty startling if Sanders didn't win Vermont. I assume the exit polling was so overwhelming that they feel confident in the assumption that it couldn't possibly be wrong.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 4:33 PM on March 1


this just in, gondor going for clinton
posted by pyramid termite at 4:34 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


no yeah, hobbits definitely have that social-democratic tendency with a strong isolationist streak.

The Shire is basically New Hampshire. The problem is Saruman's been selling everyone copies of Atlas Shrugged ever since he showed up.
posted by leotrotsky at 4:34 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


People have been counting ballots and keeping a running total, I imagine. You know, so they won't be there all night.
posted by vrakatar at 4:35 PM on March 1


"The NYT is "calling" Vermont for Sanders with ZERO precincts reporting. I'm rooting for Sanders but that kind of not-even-trying faux-reporting burns me up."

They probably got the "zero hour" report with early (and absentee, probably) votes totalled up. No precincts have reported yet but they have a chunk of numbers from early ballots they can make their prediction off. "Zero percent of precincts reporting" may also mean one or two precincts out of a couple thousand, and that may well be enough to make the prediction.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 4:35 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I am not unaware that it is extremely unlikely that Clinton will win Vermont. I'm honestly just sick of the relentlessly deterministic bent of the mainstream media. It's suffocating.
posted by threeants at 4:35 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


everyone knows Rivendell fixes these things

Bullshit, Rivendell isn't half as powerful as it used to be, it's really limited nowadays to moral persuasion. They barely even coordinate actions with Lorien anymore.
posted by tivalasvegas at 4:35 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


A result grid (NYT).

Is this new that the NYT is breaking out the super delegates separately?
posted by Room 641-A at 4:35 PM on March 1


Gondor has no democracy.

Gondor needs no democracy.
posted by dragstroke at 4:36 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Sure, math is deterministic. Reality is like that sometimes.
posted by Justinian at 4:36 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


News outlet "calls" state 1 for candidate A (at 60%) over B (at 40%). "Calls" state 2 for candidate C (at 60%) over B (at 40%). If both those states have the same number of delegates, candidate B is now ahead, despite "winning" neither state.
posted by uosuaq at 4:36 PM on March 1


Is Shelob a superdelegate?
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 4:36 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


yes, and so are the nazgul
posted by entropicamericana at 4:37 PM on March 1


Sanders would lock down the Radagast endorsement, as he's definitely the candidate most likely to have a bird living in his hair.
posted by Atom Eyes at 4:38 PM on March 1 [15 favorites]


I don't care if he has no chance at the nomination. Bombadil or bust.
posted by downtohisturtles at 4:38 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


I know this is a bit off topic of the results streaming in... but why do states like TX or GA get so many Democratic delegates when they haven't voted for a D presidential candidate in the past 30 years?
posted by localhuman at 4:38 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


I am not unaware that it is extremely unlikely that Clinton will win Vermont. I'm honestly just sick of the relentlessly deterministic bent of the mainstream media. It's suffocating.

That's just reality. Doesn't change based on how you feel.

What's bad is when the media pushes a false "it's a real horse race, anything can happen!" narrative.
posted by Sangermaine at 4:38 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Frodo is basically the archetype of a faithless delegate, so there's that.
posted by tivalasvegas at 4:38 PM on March 1


Orcs are suprisingly prone to vote Sanders, while elves are fickle and vote for whoever tells them they're the best and prettiest. They're in a snit because Trump isn't doing that, plus he's terribly crude.
posted by emjaybee at 4:40 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


No, Shelob is a SuperPAC, pumping poison into the body politic in order to consume it.
posted by leotrotsky at 4:40 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


but why do states like TX or GA get so many Democratic delegates when they haven't voted for a D presidential candidate in the past 30 years?

Assigning delegates based on how likely a state is to vote Democratic is also problematic. Really, you'd want the states which are closest to 50/50 in terms of likelihood to vote Democratic to get the most delegates. But that's hard to arrange and justify.
posted by Justinian at 4:40 PM on March 1


Appropos of nothing, Mrs. Sanders seems like a genuinely excellent person.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:40 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


I'm honestly just sick of the relentlessly deterministic bent of the mainstream media.

Whether the media reports the results as the polls close or two hours after the polls close, the votes have already been cast. The time the media reports the results won't change the votes. Not really sure what the media is doing wrong here.
posted by GhostintheMachine at 4:40 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


grima wormtongue is expected to win georgia and virginia i guess
posted by entropicamericana at 4:41 PM on March 1


"By the end of tonight, we are going to win many hundreds of delegates." -- Bernie Sanders, reminding the crowd that this isn't a general election, and he's going to be going to the convention.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:41 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


I know the LoTR jokes are funny, but I fear this thread is going to get long enough without people going through every single location/person in the books and how they would vote...
posted by lesbiassparrow at 4:41 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]




I'm honestly just sick of the relentlessly deterministic bent of the mainstream media. It's suffocating.

I know what you mean, though. I work with statistics a lot and have always wondered how e.g. Nate Silver deals with the fact that his own reporting impacts the phenomenon he's trying to describe through statistics - it would be a big methodological problem for me in my work. Amy Goodman had some great comments about polls influencing opinion instead of just measuring it on CNN recently: “People should just count the times that every network flashes the polls,” she remarked. “Are we telling people what to think?”
posted by dialetheia at 4:42 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Bombadil is like Cincinnatus, the best candidate to lead because he has literally no interest in power.
posted by leotrotsky at 4:42 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


> "I know this is a bit off topic of the results streaming in... but why do states like TX or GA get so many Democratic delegates when they haven't voted for a D presidential candidate in the past 30 years?"

I assume that the reasoning is that the many democrats living in those states would actually like a proportional voice in selecting the candidate that is supposed to represent them.

In fact, this is perhaps ESPECIALLY true since they have little chance of affecting things in the general once the nominations are over.
posted by kyrademon at 4:42 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


[Folks, it's going to be a long night and a long thread - can we lay off the LoTR jokes for a while? Thanks. ]
posted by restless_nomad at 4:43 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


I was going to vote and run but my precinct lines are LONG AS HELL so I guess I just get to stand here and read mefi.
posted by triggerfinger at 4:43 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Pennyworth to Obama "You crossed the line first, sir. You squeezed them, you hammered them to the point of desperation. And in their desperation, they turned to a man they didn't fully understand"
posted by lalochezia at 4:43 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


triggerfinger, thank you for staying in line.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:44 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


Booooo, let's not let the lamestream palantir set the narrative of the thread.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:44 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Sure, math is deterministic. Reality is like that sometimes.

If "math" were truly sufficient to determine the outcome of an electoral contest, the actual voting part wouldn't be necessary. I am not disputing the existence of likelihoods. I am positing the unhealthiness of our mainstream discourse's deep faith in foregone conclusions, and the suspicious extent to which it collaborates with forces that suppress dissension and exchange of ideas.
posted by threeants at 4:45 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Do you suppose the press conference "surprise" might be that Trump plans to release some or all of his tax returns?
posted by carmicha at 4:45 PM on March 1


Re: votes and the media calling the election. There was a lot of debate about that in the Presidential Elections in 2000.

We report. You decide. Does President Bush owe his controversial win in 2000 to Fox cable television news? -Washington Post
posted by yertledaturtle at 4:46 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]



Is this new that the NYT is breaking out the super delegates separately?


No, I've seen most places doing that. Which is good, since pledged delegates are fixed and superdelegates are not, so they're not at all the same thing. I'm pretty sure the NYT has been doing it in at least some of its presentations this whole cycle.
posted by thefoxgod at 4:47 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Voted in Tejas and was pleasantly surprised at how busy the polls were. Democrats vastly outnumbered Republicans and there was a YUGE number of latino voters.

No hope of Texas turning blue but some local races will be very interesting. Maybe the sleeping giant of Latino voters will finally awaken to their true electoral potential.

That would be worth thanking Trump for. Maybe I can send him a steak or maybe some bricks for his wall
posted by vuron at 4:47 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I was going to vote and run but my precinct lines are LONG AS HELL so I guess I just get to stand here and read mefi.

Stick with it. In socialistic Celcius, it's -5 where you're at. Not crazy cold by MN standards, but still chilly. Stay warm. Rock the vote.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 4:47 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


If "math" were truly sufficient to determine the outcome of an electoral contest, the actual voting part wouldn't be necessary.
Ok, but voting has been over for nearly an hour in Vermont. They're not going to change the outcome. If they call it incorrectly, the only thing that happens is that they look stupid.

I can see an argument when the media calls elections before the polls are closed.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 4:49 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I think this "calling the winner" stuff the news media is doing is both nonsense and extremely misleading. They need to be predicting delegate counts, not winners of states. How many supporters of various candidates didn't bother to go to the polls because they knew their candidate was going to "lose", but didn't understand that it was proportional allocation?
posted by zug at 4:50 PM on March 1 [18 favorites]


There is the matter of polls being closed in some states and not others. People like to vote for a winner, so it wouldn't surprise me if states on the east coast being called influences states further west.
posted by downtohisturtles at 4:51 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


I have no problem with the media "calling" the race, but I do think the narrative they've been using implies that it's winner take all, when (for the Dems) it's not.
posted by melissasaurus at 4:52 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


>There is the matter of polls being closed in some states and not others. People like to vote for a winner, so it wouldn't surprise me if states on the east coast being called influences states further west.

Exactly. A big part of me thinks that public polling of candidates pre-election should be illegal - it unfairly influences elections.
posted by zug at 4:52 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


This is a derail but ..
I don't believe that math is necessarily deterministic. I could be wrong, though. This is a philosophy of math question I lack expertise in.
posted by yertledaturtle at 4:53 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I was really excited about attending my first caucus tonight (as an observer, since I didn't register as a party affiliate in time) but turns out the regular city council meeting is still on as usual, at the same time as the caucus. There's going to be a presentation about converting the city's street lights to LED -- I can't miss that! I have to make sure they're including light pollution reduction as a criterion!

Civic involvement is hard.
posted by asperity at 4:54 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


50 ways to insult Donald Trump that aren't ablist, looksist, name-mocking, eliminationist, or gendered.

… that also aren't very compelling and often fall to the same nominal problems — Nogoodnik? Ooh, sweet Boris and Natasha burn, based on anti-Soviet stereotypes!

As a German-American with a changed name, fuck it, Drumpf works if you think "Short-fingered Vulgarian" is too patrician or long. It echoes Drunk in English, as well as being onomatopoeically reminiscent of a fart.

All that Shakesville post did is highlight that yes, some progressives should eschew matching insults because they're not actually very good at insults.

Counterpoint: Larry Summers is also a serious threat to American democracy

game recognize game
posted by klangklangston at 4:54 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


the press conference is gonna be about his hands

It'll just be the Rock Biter's speech, and then he'll break down sobbing before The Nothing consumes them all
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 4:54 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Well, why shouldn't voters be allowed to take a candidate's general popularity into account? That's a perfectly valid factor to consider in considering your vote. Who are you to tell voters they can't know that?
posted by Sangermaine at 4:55 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I have to go somewhere tonight, but it will be possible to look at my phone discretely. What app do you like for getting regular bulletins? Is there an app like "Team Stream" but for politics?
posted by carmicha at 4:55 PM on March 1


I dunno, I'm thinking Trump's press conference will be about "I'm a winner" and not much else.
posted by Short Attention Sp at 4:55 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


A big part of me thinks that public polling of candidates pre-election should be illegal - it unfairly influences elections.

Why is that unfair? Strategic voting is a perfectly reasonable option and is helped when you have at least some idea how people are leaning. If O'Malley was still in the race and I hypothetically supported him as my "first choice", I would want to know he had no real chance and pick a winner between Clinton and Sanders.
posted by thefoxgod at 4:56 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Lt. Governor of Texas is on MSNBC getting booed by a crowded bar for saying that if Trump wins the nomination, the party needs to back him.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:56 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I could do without the gendered Trump insults. A really gross one was deleted here earlier.

We can be better than that.
posted by zarq at 4:56 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


andrewcooke: “this is a concept album on the 2016 election”

yep – but somehow you forgot the most relevant part
posted by koeselitz at 4:56 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


pledged delegates are fixed and superdelegates are not, so they're not at all the same thing.

Yeah but I don't think it's a secret ballot at the convention and a superD that votes against the machine better plan on changing parties at the very least.
posted by sammyo at 4:57 PM on March 1


If we had IRV I would be more OK with the idea of not having polling, since it would reduce the need for strategic voting in the way I described. I would love to have that, but its not going to happen anytime soon.
posted by thefoxgod at 4:58 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Maybe the sleeping giant of Latino voters will finally awaken to their true electoral potential.

We already do that by voting for the candidates of our choice on election days.
posted by Tanizaki at 4:58 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


can someone explain why american samoa isn't include in the nyt results page? am i just missing something in front of my eyes?

also, i see restless_nomad drew the short straw :)
posted by andrewcooke at 4:59 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I know there is going to be endless analysis of these results, and there has already been a lot of talk about Sander's weakness with black voters, but I knew yesterday that Sanders was going to get blown out of the water in Georgia. I didn't have to look at any polls or do any sort of detailed analysis, I just had to drive home yesterday.

There, on the corner of one of the busiest intersections in Atlanta, were some nice, well-meaning white people stumping for Bernie. They had signs, were handing out flyers, and had the whole "honk for Bernie!" thing going on. And people were were honking! And taking flyers! And generally being amenable as anyone can be towards people on street corners pushing a political candidate.

I knew, however, at that moment, that Bernie gonna get Super Smashed on Super Tuesday. Prominent among the signs being held by the Bernie supporters was one comparing the minimum wage to slavery. In a city that is 2/3 black, there were white people comparing a minimum wage to slavery. It really crystallized everything that has been said about how tone deaf the Sanders campaign (though not Bernie himself, I would say) has been towards race in the US, and drove home why his campaign has really not gotten any traction among black people.

I still voted for him. I am one of those white liberals which form his base, and I genuinely believe he is what this country needs. Then again, I also voted for Nader in 2000, so maybe my voting record shouldn't be held up as an exemplar of pragmatism and victory. Not that my presidential vote has ever matter in the general election anyways, thanks to the electoral college.
posted by Panjandrum at 5:00 PM on March 1 [45 favorites]


It's the difference between "two likeminded people finding each other" and "being groomed from birth."

Being born in the purple carries a significant vassal opinion bump.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 5:00 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


MA, Alabama, and Tennessee are all being called for Trump. Looks like Clinton is winning all of them too.
posted by Justinian at 5:01 PM on March 1


NBC: Mass for Trump (Dems too early to call), Alabama for Trump and Clinton, Tennessee for Trump and Clinton and Oklahoma too early to call on both sides.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:01 PM on March 1


The press conference will be to announce his big match against Hillary Clinton at Wrestlemania in the general.
posted by Drinky Die at 5:03 PM on March 1


congrats to hil for pulling a page from the republican playbook and getting people to vote against their own self-interests
posted by entropicamericana at 5:03 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


5pm PST, finally time for me to join the whiskey brigade. Ah, sweet Old Weller, make the Trump pain bearable.
posted by Gaz Errant at 5:05 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


There's going to be a presentation about converting the city's street lights to LED -- I can't miss that! I have to make sure they're including light pollution reduction as a criterion! I saw a new technology in Bargara, Australia: red LEDs. They were installed to help sea turtles, but they really helped with the light pollution too.
posted by carmicha at 5:05 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


congrats to hil for pulling a page from the republican playbook and getting people to vote against their own self-interests

Did you read Panjandrum's comment? You're doing the thing.
posted by Justinian at 5:05 PM on March 1 [23 favorites]


Maybe the sleeping giant of Latino voters will finally awaken

I'm reminded of Clive Barker's "In the Hills, the City" and now I'm terrified.
posted by Atom Eyes at 5:05 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Yeah but I don't think it's a secret ballot at the convention and a superD that votes against the machine better plan on changing parties at the very least.
There are a few (not a whole lot) of super-delegates who have said they'll vote for Bernie. Actually, I'm pretty sure that Bernie himself is a super-delegate.

Maybe the sleeping giant of Latino voters will finally awaken to their true electoral potential.


We already do that by voting for the candidates of our choice on election days.
Latinos actually have pretty low rates of voting. One of the things that terrifies Republicans about Trump is the potential for him to convince non-voting Latinos to vote and to vote for Democrats. In places like Texas, that could change things significantly.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:06 PM on March 1


"We already do that by voting for the candidates of our choice on election days."

You already overcome the relatively low turnout of Latinos that diminishes their ability to win policy preferences by continuing to vote at relatively low levels?

Are you perhaps an eight-foot-tall narcoleptic Cuban-American confused by the difference between a metaphorical sleeping Latino giant and a literal one?
posted by klangklangston at 5:07 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Did you read Panjandrum's comment? You're doing the thing.

i'm really not.
posted by entropicamericana at 5:08 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


congrats to hil for pulling a page from the republican playbook and getting people to vote against their own self-interests

Well, good for you that you know whats good for other people. It is, however, possible that they actually know what is important to them better than you do, despite your psychic powers.
posted by thefoxgod at 5:09 PM on March 1 [15 favorites]


congrats to hil for pulling a page from the republican playbook and getting people to vote against their own self-interests

Did you read Panjandrum's comment? You're doing the thing.
I agree it is presumptuous.

If this is going to be a rule, though, would it be preferable if the rule is applied in an egalitarian manner? So, say when poor white people - who people derisively call rednecks vote for Trump then should it not be said that they are voting against their self-interest?

I don't know- just throwing it out there.
posted by yertledaturtle at 5:10 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


No, I am a 5'11" Basque-American. I have to wait until Super Tuesday II to cast my vote for the Nimble Navigator but I am already getting hype!
posted by Tanizaki at 5:11 PM on March 1


I doubt anybody knows what's good for them. Least of all us. That's the trouble with life.
posted by koeselitz at 5:11 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Yeah can we not generalize people who voted for Clinton. I understand that people are feeling a sense of loss but this isn't r/politics and we should be better than that.
posted by vuron at 5:11 PM on March 1 [19 favorites]


Re Sanders, Clinton, and "the black vote" (a term I really dislike): I would like to note that as with people of any race, the demographics of the Black votership differ from the demographics of the Black citizenry. The significant impediments to voting that disparately affect low-income working people-- which are rightfully pointed out time and time again when it comes to Democrat vs. Republican contests-- don't magically disappear when it's a primary.
posted by threeants at 5:12 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


If this is going to be a rule, though, would it be preferable if the rule is applied in an egalitarian manner?

Absolutely it should. Its a terrible strategy for changing peoples minds, and its wrong to boot, as you don't actually know what is important to people.

In the classic Republican example, some people really do value the social factors over economic ones. Thats the kind of choice everyone gets to make.
posted by thefoxgod at 5:12 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


this isn't r/politics

I dunno, I think I just saw a centipede
posted by prize bull octorok at 5:12 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


I've got a HILLARY TAKE MY ENERGY queued up and ready to go if things get hairy
posted by prize bull octorok at 5:14 PM on March 1


Hilarious that the same Republican establishment who jizzed their pants when Palin claimed NVa wasn't "Real Virginia" is outright praying that they save Rubio.
posted by zombieflanders at 5:14 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I wonder what colours the NYT chose for the other Republican candidates. I guess we may never know...
posted by acb at 5:17 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


How long before we see some kind of delegate estimates?
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:17 PM on March 1


No, I am a 5'11" Basque-American.

This makes you significantly more European Caucasian than most Americans.
posted by zombieflanders at 5:17 PM on March 1


It's also not "Latino," as the Basques are neither Latin American nor a significant portion of the European colonists of same.
posted by zombieflanders at 5:18 PM on March 1


They're using the background colors from the photos on the left. For a while we saw a purple box for Rubio.
posted by blurker at 5:19 PM on March 1


I think the best way to do this is to have an alcoholic beverage, grab a coloring book, and sit back to watch the newscasters struggle to use their technology. Then they get told off by Brian Williams: "This is why we can't have nice things!"
posted by jet_pack_in_a_can at 5:19 PM on March 1


MetaFilter: onomatopoeically reminiscent of a fart.
posted by kirkaracha at 5:19 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


congrats to hil for pulling a page from the republican playbook and getting people to vote against their own self-interests

I've always been a bit skeptical of this criticism and I think it's ultimately condescending and an excuse to write off the opinions of people you disagree with. Consider the following:

(1) It's not just an evil / dumb conservative thing. People do it on "our side" too - for instance, me. My wife and I are not exactly "the 1%" but we are relatively high-income property owners who derive most of that income from salaried work (i.e., not capital gains). This means we are in almost the highest marginal tax bracket and almost any Republican tax plan would be in our economic best interest. So are we some kind of clueless morons for supporting democrats anyway? "Ha ha, you're voting against your best interest, idiots!" I mean, I guess you can think that but obviously I disagree. I tend to think that affirmative action, access to abortion, less racism, and so many other policy issues are more important than whether my taxes go down. Hell, I think that low income people getting better services is more important than whether my taxes go down! I must be a real idiot. What persuades you that low-income republicans (or even low-income moderate dems) are making any less of an intelligent decision simply because that decision might not seem to favor them financially?

(2) there is a thing called altruistic punishment. (That link goes to a contemporaneous, and accordingly very angry, post about the Freddie Gray situation in Baltimore, if you choose to click through). Basically "this is going to hurt me more than it hurts you" writ large. It's a self-sacrificial approach to making a statement when the situation is really desperate. When a certain societal norm simply must be enforced even at great cost to the enforcer. I can't help but think that anti-establishment people supporting Trump are motivated at least in part by something akin to this. It scares the hell out of me that they are willing to go to the mat in favor of such racist demagoguery, but I am beginning to understand the desperation that leads to it, after they have been left out in the cold so many times by the mainstream republican party.

I know point #2 doesn't really apply so much to the "Hillary supporter" scenario, but it's a powerful reason why people, in general, might be willing to act "against their own self-interest." It doesn't mean they're being irrational - not at all.
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 5:21 PM on March 1 [26 favorites]


So glad I early voted, lots of griping about computer systems having problems/long lines.

I think every time Clinton wants to rattle Trump in a debate she mentions fingers.
posted by emjaybee at 5:21 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


this isn't r/politics
oh god, here we go with that reddit shit

quick pony request: since it's going to be a very long thread and some of us never read reddit, could we all try to avoid in-jokes and references to things that happen over there so that the rest of us can follow along? I have no idea what r/politics is like, or what "that reddit shit" is (and I'm assuming from the reply chains that the centipede thing and... something about being Basque?) but I would love to talk about the primaries
posted by cobra_high_tigers at 5:22 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


It's also not "Latino,"

You can take that up with the US Census Bureau, which made up the weird category in the first place and has applied it to those descended from Europe or the Americas. If it helps you, I have approximately one billion cousins in Puerto Rico.

Basques are neither Latin American nor a significant portion of the European colonists of same.

Simon Bolivar would like a word with you.

You seem low energy. Get high energy!
posted by Tanizaki at 5:23 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Just decided I want a soundtrack to my Super Tuesday. First track, in honor of The Donald: CCR's "Fortunate Son" (apologies to the youths, I'm old). Suggestions?
posted by Lyme Drop at 5:24 PM on March 1


I think the best way to do this is to have an alcoholic beverage, grab a coloring book

Not necessarily relaxing.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:24 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Taking a cue from an adjacent thread, JUST SAY THE WORD, OH! RU-RU-RUBIO!
posted by prize bull octorok at 5:25 PM on March 1


I think the best way to do this is to have an alcoholic beverage, grab a coloring book, and sit back to watch the newscasters struggle to use their technology.

Well I'm pounding the Lillet Blanc and working on my resume. Maybe I should do it in crayon...
posted by great_radio at 5:27 PM on March 1


cobra_high_tigers: “quick pony request: since it's going to be a very long thread and some of us never read reddit, could we all try to avoid in-jokes and references to things that happen over there so that the rest of us can follow along? I have no idea what r/politics is like, or what "that reddit shit" is (and I'm assuming from the reply chains that the centipede thing and... something about being Basque?) but I would love to talk about the primaries”

Agreed completely.

"Nimble navigator" is a redditism for Donald Trump stemming from the beginning of this "CAN'T STUMP THE TRUMP" fan video of Donald's sick burns.

Tanizaki: “You seem low energy. Get high energy!”

where's my downvote button
posted by koeselitz at 5:27 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


How late do I have to stay up to see who wins in American Samoa?
posted by peeedro at 5:27 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Ohh boy The_Donald dank memes have arrived in force to Metafilter. This truly is the darkest timeline
posted by vuron at 5:27 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


YAAAAY STAV IS HERE HI STAV!!!!!!!!!!
posted by vrakatar at 5:28 PM on March 1


As a non-political aside, picking color schemes for plots of this sort is a difficult task when you're dealing with 4 or more sets, and an audience that processes colors differently (such as minorities of different classes of color blindness). Colorbrewer palettes are one approach. Selecting from a color space is another, with the aim to maximize distance between subsequent colors, once a starting "seed" color is picked.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 5:29 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Looks to be a real nailbiter so far on the Dem side here in Mass.
posted by threeants at 5:29 PM on March 1


Taking a cue from an adjacent thread, JUST SAY THE WORD, OH! RU-RU-RUBIO!

I can feel it Trumping in the air tonight
Hold on

YAAAAY STAV IS HERE HI STAV!!!!!!!!!!

Heyo. It is good to be around friends during dark times...
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:30 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


The moderator in charge of this thread deserves our admiration and a paid vacation
posted by vuron at 5:30 PM on March 1 [27 favorites]


(51.4% Clinton / 47.7% Sanders at the time of posting this.)
posted by threeants at 5:30 PM on March 1


I wonder what colours the NYT chose for the other Republican candidates. I guess we may never know...

Looks like a nice pus-evoking yellow for Ted Cruz.
posted by fifthrider at 5:32 PM on March 1


Question! As expected, Cruz is leading in Texas at the moment. Could someone give me some idea of the realistic percentage he would need to to arguably stay viable? Like, he's not going to pull 50%, but would any plurality be a win in his book? (Take "win" to mean whatever you want, in this case. He probably will.)
posted by Salieri at 5:33 PM on March 1


Mass seems to have gone trumpy on the gop side, if he loses okla I will have to compute that people in okla are smarter than massholes does not compute error error
posted by vrakatar at 5:34 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


This means we are in almost the highest marginal tax bracket and almost any Republican tax plan would be in our economic best interest. So are we some kind of clueless morons for supporting democrats anyway?

Only in the naive sense that ignores the economic benefits from paying taxes, which provide benefits such as roads, fire, police and emergency services, legal and social infrastructure that protect your larger economic interests (like the physical property you own, your bank accounts), etc.

What persuades you that low-income republicans (or even low-income moderate dems) are making any less of an intelligent decision simply because that decision might not seem to favor them financially?

To some extent, because they do not benefit from paying higher taxes (such as when Republicans dismantle or reduce progressive taxation rates) for services that are intended to benefit wealthy people.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 5:35 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


How late do I have to stay up to see who wins in American Samoa?

Clinton won American Samoa
73% to 27%
posted by melissasaurus at 5:35 PM on March 1


Trump is ahead of Rubio by 7 points in VA, which of course means that Rubio will be declaring victory.
posted by zombieflanders at 5:35 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I can't believe at least 78 people still voted for O'Malley in MA so far.
posted by TwoStride at 5:35 PM on March 1


Mass seems to have gone trumpy on the gop side

AskMe: I have a Mass in my fridge. It looks a little trumpy on the gop side. Can I eat this?
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 5:36 PM on March 1 [36 favorites]


Only if voting for Ted “Republic of Gilead” Cruz is smarter than voting for Trump. And I'm not entirely convinced that it is; while Trump's actual agenda beneath the kayfabe can only be speculated about, Cruz' ideology is simple and harshly fanatical.
posted by acb at 5:37 PM on March 1


I can't believe at least 78 people still voted for O'Malley in MA so far.


Littlefinger is a wily one.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:38 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


For whoever asked about American Samoa, NPR says "American Samoa and Democrats Abroad also vote today. AP is not providing live results."
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:42 PM on March 1


"I dunno, I'm thinking Trump's press conference will be about "I'm a winner" and not much else."

To be fair, no matter what the results are, even if he's not the GOP nominee in November, I expect Trump to declare that he won and is the president.
posted by klangklangston at 5:42 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Wow, Hillary trounced Bernie in Virginia. i haz a sad :-(
posted by indubitable at 5:42 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


30% margin w/ 78% reporting
posted by indubitable at 5:43 PM on March 1


I feel you. I'm in Richmond and I also haz a sad.
posted by Tarumba at 5:44 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Cruz is leading in Texas at the moment. Could someone give me some idea of the realistic percentage he would need to to arguably stay viable?

538's pacetracker (?) already has Cruz behind on what he needs to be viable. For Texas, they put him as needing to win 104 Texas delegates.
posted by Panjandrum at 5:44 PM on March 1


I am taking a hit for every state the Nimble Navigator wins. Good thing I have a lot of pizza rolls in the freezer!
posted by Tanizaki at 5:44 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Tanizaki: “You seem low energy. Get high energy!”

I will say:

It's not a terrible surprise for me, finding out how big the centipede brigade of Trump supporters has gotten on Reddit; and it's not a terrible surprise to me that a lot of otherwise-rational conservatives I know are now pulling for him, even though he's diametrically opposed to all the ideals they've ever espoused. There's something liberals don't get about Trump, and often don't get about themselves: we liberals can be terribly haughty, and sometimes it can be very pleasurable to troll us, to get our goat, to mock us and to see us sigh in defeat. Trump is a rarified, pure form of this pleasure. He has absolutely no goals, no ideals of his own; even his ridiculous blather about building a big wall is really just trolling, as everybody can tell (he said it so he'd get attention, he got attention – it worked, and he's happy with that.) Milo Yiannopoulis is a huge Trump fan, and it figures: he's in exactly the same business. They're both just trolling liberals; they don't care how they do it, they just want goats gotten.

Donald Trump really is an ideal candidate in this light, of a purity that has never been seen before and may never be seen again. If you don't really care about politics in the United States; if you don't really care about history; if you don't really think any of this stupid bullshit matters; if literally the only thing you care about is pissing off liberals – then Trump is a godsend, because he stands for exactly that, nothing more and nothing less. He is a candidate unencumbered by pesky moral dignity or opinions about what's right or ideas about justice of any of that bullshit. He's just there to knock the fuck out of everybody, particularly liberals.

So, Tanizaki: I have to say I get it, and I respect your purity of vision. Nihilism makes it hard to stand behind anybody, but once in a great while even nihilism gets its hero.
posted by koeselitz at 5:46 PM on March 1 [72 favorites]


The New York Times Upshot is the best tracker of delegate pickups in real time. Let's hear it for dynamic infographics.
posted by humanfont at 5:46 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Looks like the Sanders insurrection has been put down, and the coronation can proceed as planned. I wonder whether it'll be reflected in the Dow Jones.
posted by acb at 5:46 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


I have no idea what r/politics is like, or what "that reddit shit" is (and I'm assuming from the reply chains that the centipede thing and... something about being Basque?)

Yeah, I was not expecting to see references to Can't Stump The Trump here.

Then again, I wasn't expecting a lot of what's been happening in this primary.
posted by theorique at 5:46 PM on March 1


Super excited to see Sanders keeping it so close in Oklahoma and Massachusetts. Even if the polling was close, he had been sliding in MA and most people didn't really seem to expect him to do as well as he seems to be doing in those states.

It's kind of hilarious that Rubio is putting up such a strong fight in Virginia. It's probably the crucial thinkpiece/pundit vote that could push him over the top - truly, his strongest base.
posted by dialetheia at 5:48 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


TwoStride, I'm trying to figure out who got 8% of the vote in OK. O'Malley?
posted by joeyh at 5:51 PM on March 1


He is a candidate unencumbered by pesky moral dignity or opinions about what's right or ideas about justice of any of that bullshit. He's just there to knock the fuck out of everybody, particularly liberals.

In that, Trump is less the successor to Bush, and more the successor to Matt Stone and Trey Parker.
posted by Apocryphon at 5:51 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Does anyone know where I can see the Green-Rainbow votes come in for Mass? Like I know nobody else cares about this but presumably the data is coming in, from the same sources we're seeing numbers for Dems and Reps? Or is it the party infrastructure rather than local government that reports precinct results?
posted by threeants at 5:51 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


That Taibbi article is wonderful.
posted by persona au gratin at 5:51 PM on March 1


GO TEXAS GO!
posted by vrakatar at 5:51 PM on March 1


Wait. TX has one poll reporting already? There's ten minutes to go.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:52 PM on March 1


I guess it's good that a Trump supporter showed up h here. It's a nice to change from the ongoing debate as to whether Sanders is the greatest man who ever lived or whether a vote for him is the equivalent of voting for Nader in 2000. But there's nothing nimble about that talking yam.
posted by dis_integration at 5:52 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Caucusing in MN. Lots of people for a small district. Lots of youngin's. Lots of older folks. Omg it's hot in here. Open a damn window. And jeez DFL, provide pens!!!!!
posted by ian1977 at 5:53 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Am I reading this thread wrong or do people actually feel like Trump is worse than the other GOP candidates? I'm not saying he's better at all. But he isn't any worse. Any one of them would be a complete catastrophe for the nation if elected president.
posted by great_radio at 5:54 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Koeselitz, I like the cut of your jib and favorited your comment. Milo had a great AMA today - one of my favorite people! If I don't eat all my pizza rolls tonight, I will send you one in the mail if you favorite my comment on this web zone.

And I think I am going to need a bigger air horn.
posted by Tanizaki at 5:54 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Durn, threeants, thanks for reminding me. Could I have voted for Bernie today and the greens?
posted by vrakatar at 5:54 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


And jeez DFL, provide pens

You millennials, always wanting free stuff!
posted by dhens at 5:54 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


How the hell does Trump take MA, one of the most highly-educated and Catholic states in the US?
posted by middleclasstool at 5:54 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


TwoStride, I'm trying to figure out who got 8% of the vote in OK. O'Malley?

Maybe it was that Roque “Rocky” De La Fuente" person on the ballot?
posted by TwoStride at 5:55 PM on March 1


uh, there are a lot of um, ignorant angry white people in MA.
posted by zutalors! at 5:55 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Because those people vote in the Democratic primary, middleclasstool.
posted by Justinian at 5:55 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


How the hell does Trump take MA, one of the most highly-educated and Catholic states in the US?

Well, without being too terribly snarky about it, the smart ones are probably in the other party.
posted by Mooski at 5:56 PM on March 1 [14 favorites]


Durn, threeants, thanks for reminding me. Could I have voted for Bernie today and the greens?

No, you can only take the ballot of one party. If you're unenrolled with a party you can take any party's ballot, and if you're enrolled you can only take that party's ballot.
posted by threeants at 5:56 PM on March 1


How the hell does Trump take MA, one of the most highly-educated and Catholic states in the US?

MA is very rural outside of Boston, and there is a lot of resentment towards those Cambridge elites
posted by dis_integration at 5:56 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


How many rats do you think Cruz is sullenly swallowing whole tonight?
posted by The Whelk at 5:56 PM on March 1 [28 favorites]


Any one of them would be a complete catastrophe for the nation if elected president.

While all of them would indeed be awful, I think that there are two things that propel Trump to greater depths of terribleness:
1. His unpredictability would be more disastrous in the foreign arena than that of other candidates.
2. I fear that his election would be interpreted as license for his supporters to start enacting more vigilante "justice" on the hated minority of the day.
posted by dhens at 5:57 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


I wonder how many Bernie supporters were registered independents who therefore could not participate in states with closed primaries.
posted by Tanizaki at 5:57 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


> "How the hell does Trump take MA, one of the most highly-educated and Catholic states in the US?"

Exit polls are showing him winning a majority of the Republican Catholic vote in MA.

In fact, he's doing better there among Catholics than he is among Protestants.

Don't ask me, man.
posted by kyrademon at 5:57 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


How the hell does Trump take MA, one of the most highly-educated and Catholic states in the US?

He "took" Republican voters in Massachusetts. He appeals to Republican voters. He says all the shit they want to hear from their presidential candidate. How is anybody surprised by his popularity any more?

Yes, even in Massachusetts, there are racist fucks who want a wall between us and Mexico and all the Muslims kicked out of the country. Lots of them.

Liberals keep forgetting that white supremacy is a foundational value of American democracy, and it keeps biting them in the ass.
posted by tobascodagama at 5:57 PM on March 1 [17 favorites]


"How many rats do you think Cruz is sullenly swallowing whole tonight?"

as many as will fit in his vacuous gullet

or is this a riddle?
posted by Tevin at 5:57 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Hey now, let's be fair. The measure is education, not smarts. Republican voters in MA are more likely to be low income and less educated.
posted by yasaman at 5:58 PM on March 1


Am I reading this thread wrong or do people actually feel like Trump is worse than the other GOP candidates?

There's been some debate about that. He's the frontrunner so he gets the heat regardless.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:58 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Personally I would not bet money on the claim that Republicans in Massachusetts are less educated than the general population. I literally don't know-- but my hunch is that Republicans are either more educated on average or the difference is not very significant.
posted by threeants at 5:58 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Yeah, its kind of like Nevada where there was talk about Trump "winning" the Hispanic vote, when the number of who voted in the Republican primary was tiny so it means he won like 5% of Nevada Hispanics.
posted by thefoxgod at 5:59 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]




The Whelk: "How many rats do you think Cruz is sullenly swallowing whole tonight?"

He just absorbs them using his Zero Matter powers.
posted by octothorpe at 5:59 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Oh right, like my idiot cousin, and that trainwreck of a line cook i know.
posted by vrakatar at 5:59 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]




Hillary Clinton can do a relatively good Bernie Sanders impression when she puts her mind to it.
posted by Glibpaxman at 5:59 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


Don't forget that Tom Brady is a huge Trump fan. Ugh.

(Also, MA is a state that briefly sent Scott "I Drive a Truck" Brown to the Senate, so...)
posted by TwoStride at 6:00 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


> "Am I reading this thread wrong or do people actually feel like Trump is worse than the other GOP candidates?"

No, not at all, Cruz and Rubio terrify me. But Trump also terrifies me, so I've been tending to point out that he's just as nightmarish when people say things like, "Isn't he just a centrist businessman type, really?", as if he isn't talking about barring people from the U.S. based on their religion.
posted by kyrademon at 6:00 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Am I reading this thread wrong or do people actually feel like Trump is worse than the other GOP candidates?

Trying to pick which of them is worst is like trying to compare which is the smelliest turd in a septic tank. You can make a convincing case for any of them.
posted by Drinky Die at 6:00 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I don't think that's right at all, threeants, at least from my experience living in MA for seven years (mostly college).
posted by zutalors! at 6:00 PM on March 1


so I'm thinking hard about the appeal of Trump himself — not the white supremacist movement he's found himself as a figurehead for, but Trump himself, Trump the man.

I mean, obviously, to me he reads as a dangerous incompetent, visibly insecure about himself, with the sort of out-of-control temper that would quickly land a poorer man in jail. And the trappings of wealth he surrounds himself with all seem tacky and fake no matter how expensive they are; I can't remember who described him as a "stupid man's idea of what a rich man is like," but that's what I keep coming back to when thinking about him.

And I could just assume that all of his supporters are dumb, that they actually fall for his passing-off-tacky-as-classy schtick, that they believe it... but I think that would be equivalent to thinking that wrestling fans think that wrestling is real.

There's something about Trump's kayfabe life that is more appealing to his supporters than any genuine quality, intelligence, or style would be. I don't get it. But I think my inability to get it indicates a hole in my worldview, a misunderstanding of how people work.

All I have is:
  1. A lot of people in America are looking for a movement where they get to kick the everliving shit out of people who aren't them — Black people, immigrants, Muslims, the poor, whatever.
  2. That movement has coalesced around a whited sepulcher of a man, a man who's a shell of kayfabe bravado and kayfabe success (and the most halfassed kayfabe parody of Christianity possible) pasted over a morass of moral, physical, and financial failure and rot.
The best I can guess is that the leadership of a rotten man makes other rotten people feel better about themselves; if Trump can declare himself classy and powerful despite how he's so obviously classless and weak, then other rotten people can keep being rotten but feel good about themselves, covered by the reflected glow of Trump's patina of bravado.

Or something. I honestly don't get it at all.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 6:01 PM on March 1 [20 favorites]


The "Cambridge elites" don't really do a good job of hiding their scorn for the rest of the state. This really jumped out at me today, having lived in Western Mass during grad school:

"Tom Paquin, a resident of Cambridge, Mass., said in an email that his decision to back the Florida senator “might be the only Republican vote in this part of town.”

“Given Trump’s support in my state among the Neanderthals in western Massachusetts, I doubt it’ll make much of a difference,” Paquin added. “But I’m hopeful enough common-sense conservatives will rally behind the establishment choice, as vague a choice as it is with such a diluted field.”"

WaPo
posted by permiechickie at 6:01 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Hillary Clinton can do a relatively good Bernie Sanders impression when she puts her mind to it.

Wall Street vanquishes Socialism, wears its skin.
posted by acb at 6:01 PM on March 1 [24 favorites]


Trump is a rarified, pure form of this pleasure. He has absolutely no goals, no ideals of his own; even his ridiculous blather about building a big wall is really just trolling

The one friend* of mine that I know has voiced support for Trump fits perfectly into this. He is, for most part, profoundly apolitical on a party basis, but has very strong personal opinions on things that directly effect him. It gives him a view on issues that does not easily map onto the party platforms of either the Dems or the GOP. He holds that these idiosyncratic positions make him smarter than the average sheeple who just votes the party ticket.

I would argue (and have argued with him) that such positions actually just make him someone who is simply making kneejerk reactions with no thought to their effects on the larger society. This is not an argument that really has any sway with him though. This is someone who has identified in their life as everything from socialist to libertarian, from wiccan to born again. He's not looking for a coherent party platform or social milieu, he's looking for a reaction, and he is voting Donald Trump, running on the Troll Party USA ticket.

Of the "we have known each other since we are children, even though we now have very very very little in common as adults" variety.
posted by Panjandrum at 6:03 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


TX called for Cruz, with Rubio in 3rd. The nomination is within his grasp!
posted by zombieflanders at 6:03 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


And jeez DFL, provide pens!!!!!

For those not familiar with the Democratic Party affiliate in Minnesota - the Minnesota DFL.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:04 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Who told Clinton's audience to boo and cheer like they are on a 50s sitcom?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:04 PM on March 1


Another glorious third place victory!!!
posted by Justinian at 6:04 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I keep wondering, seriously: "Is Trump that bad or do I just feel as unjustifiably scared as conservatives felt in 2008?"

Rationally, I think he is that bad but ... I don't know. It's veering into existential angst territory.
posted by Tevin at 6:05 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Has Trump announced his surprise yet?
posted by melissasaurus at 6:05 PM on March 1


can't wait to see how quickly clinton does a 180º on the speech once she's in office.
posted by entropicamericana at 6:05 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Trump cant win texas.
posted by vrakatar at 6:05 PM on March 1


I don't think that's right at all, threeants, at least from my experience living in MA for seven years (mostly college).

I've got a bit under thirty years logged here (not to try and trump you [heyo! see what I did there]) and my impression has been that the prototypical Republicans are wealthy, educated people in Metro West-ish and the Cape-ish. Of course it is a bit silly that we're hunching over info that presumably is readily accessible as real data (not casting aspersions, as I'm doing it equally).
posted by threeants at 6:06 PM on March 1


It took me forever to tell Cruz and Rubio apart. Maybe other people also think they're too similar, which is why neither has really broken away from the pack.
posted by girlmightlive at 6:06 PM on March 1


Well, I just learned a new word:

kayfabe /ˈkeɪfeɪb/ is the portrayal of staged events within the industry as "real" or "true," specifically the portrayal of competition, rivalries, and relationships between participants as being genuine and not of a staged or pre-determined nature. Kayfabe has also evolved to become a code word of sorts for maintaining this "reality" within the direct or indirect presence of the general public.
posted by great_radio at 6:06 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Who told Clinton's audience to boo and cheer like they are on a 50s sitcom?

This is what crowds do. They boo and cheer.
posted by zarq at 6:06 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


I appreciated the meticulously chosen rainbow of ethnicity in the crowd. Like the solitary burka girl and the hastily written Spanish sign.
posted by Glibpaxman at 6:07 PM on March 1


> can't wait to see how quickly clinton does a 180º on the speech once she's in office.

You've reached that point, the point where you wish for bad things to happen so you can be proven right.
posted by benito.strauss at 6:08 PM on March 1 [42 favorites]


Trump, in Massachusetts and elsewhere, is the "raised middle finger" vote.

Lots of people voting for him like seeing the stuffed-shirt, establishment Republican professional pundits and consultants (Rick Wilson, Matt Walsh, etc) left spluttering for words and punching ineffectually at the air.
posted by theorique at 6:08 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Am I reading this thread wrong or do people actually feel like Trump is worse than the other GOP candidates?

I do think he is worse, although thats partially because if people elect him it means they've given up any pretense of not being racist authoritarians. While most Republicans have racist policies, I still am worried about where the country will go if people decide its OK to just be openly, unapologetically racist.

Also, I think his foreign policy of "bully everyone into submission" could backfire spectacularly in a way that the other Republicans would not. The chance of more wars or massive economic failure from loss of trade/etc is higher with him.

Lastly, his unpredictability means he could be either worse or better than I expect, but I'd rather not bet on "better".
posted by thefoxgod at 6:09 PM on March 1


Is Trump that bad

That's the thing, NOBODY KNOWS how bad he is. We know he's a phony. He could have a "surprise" announcement tonight that he's quitting to write a book, or that he's endorsing Bernie Sanders, or that he's voting for the aliens that live in his toothbrush cup. Or that he's got Marco Rubio locked in his closet and won't let him out until Election Day.

He could be less racist than we think. He could be WAY MORE racist than we think.

He's an actor playing a part and nobody knows the man himself. At least with Cruz or Rubio we know what we're dealing with. Trump is a true wildcard.
posted by mmoncur at 6:09 PM on March 1 [25 favorites]


kayfabe /ˈkeɪfeɪb/ is the portrayal of staged events within the industry as "real" or "true," specifically the portrayal of competition, rivalries, and relationships between participants as being genuine and not of a staged or pre-determined nature. Kayfabe has also evolved to become a code word of sorts for maintaining this "reality" within the direct or indirect presence of the general public.

Kayfabe: very appropriate
posted by theorique at 6:10 PM on March 1


In socialistic Celcius,

Hell yeah.
posted by Celsius1414 at 6:10 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


MSNBC saying Cruz wins Oklahoma.
posted by cashman at 6:11 PM on March 1


Yeah, I think he's worse--upside is about the same, downside is way, way worse.
posted by box at 6:11 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Okay, I'm sure I've been reading here and there that Cruz is kind of a lost cause at this point (based on delegate math maybe? Idk), and that Rubio stands the best chance of stealing the nom from Trump (if anyone can). But Cruz seems to have won TX and possibly OK so I'm not sure what's making people pin their hopes on Rubio. Anyone know?
posted by triggerfinger at 6:11 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


There's something about Trump's kayfabe life that is more appealing to his supporters than any genuine quality, intelligence, or style would be

The GOP has, basically since St. Ronnie, run on a platform grounded in the mutually exclusive promises of both lower taxes and better services. It was one thing when Reagan was cutting high tax rates and deficit spending in a proxy war with the USSR, but its a position that has basically spiraled out of control so that the actions are no longer goal oriented, they are dogma. Every modern GOP candidate is running on smoke and mirrors, promising to pour money into the military while slashing taxes, all the while maintaining 3rd rail services like social security and medicare (though with nods towards "reforming" them).

Since the GOP has become the party of bread and circuses (all the while cutting funding for bakers and lion tamers), its no surprise that a huckster like Trump has captured their audience. The GOP stopped being rational a while ago; it's been running on pure gut feeling for a while. Trump is just the candidate that recognizes that GOP candidates no longer have to say anything that makes sense or is even true, and he is running with that all the way to the convention.
posted by Panjandrum at 6:11 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


He could have a "surprise" announcement tonight that he's quitting to write a book, or that he's endorsing Bernie Sanders, or that he's voting for the aliens that live in his toothbrush cup. Or that he's got Marco Rubio locked in his closet and won't let him out until Election Day.

And all of those scenarios would boost him by 5 points in the next poll.
posted by sammyo at 6:12 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I'm going to be sure and let both the state and national Democratic parties know that the only way I'll vote for Hillary in November is if she stands with Elizabeth Warren during the convention and declares the economy to be rigged.

I figure the degree of association with Warren on the national stage makes for a good litmus test to know how committed Hillary really is to progressive causes. If Hillary ignores Warren during the general election, then she really doesn't deserve my vote.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 6:13 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Well, I just learned a new word: kayfabe

This is way off-topic, but as much as pro wrestling does not appeal to me at all, it's contributed a lot of very interesting and useful terminology to popular critical analysis.
posted by tobascodagama at 6:14 PM on March 1 [14 favorites]


Okay, I'm sure I've been reading here and there that Cruz is kind of a lost cause at this point (based on delegate math maybe? Idk), and that Rubio stands the best chance of stealing the nom from Trump (if anyone can). But Cruz seems to have won TX and possibly OK so I'm not sure what's making people pin their hopes on Rubio. Anyone know?

100% establishment wishful thinking. Nearly every pundit and Republican higher-up on Earth is pulling and spinning hard for Rubio because a) they need to stop Trump, but b) literally all of them hate Ted Cruz.
posted by dialetheia at 6:14 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Cruz is doomed because there aren't enough winner take all states in his favor to steal the nomination. The best that he can do at this point is be a spoiler.

Ruboto is likewise doomed but perhaps between the two of them they can force a brokered convention.

Of course if a brokered convention happens then the Donald will announce he's running independent and all hell will break loose.
posted by vuron at 6:14 PM on March 1


But Cruz seems to have won TX and possibly OK so I'm not sure what's making people pin their hopes on Rubio. Anyone know?

He's at or below the threshold for getting any delegates in four states, which means he's now a shoe-in!

In all seriousness, it's because (as Lindsay Graham put it), you could murder Ted Cruz on the Senate floor and would still get an acquittal if the rest of the Senate was the jury.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:14 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


MSNBC just called Oklahoma for Bernie
posted by zug at 6:15 PM on March 1 [18 favorites]


Trump is the worst because we have no idea how bad he actually is, because he's playing with absolute fire with overt racism and xenophobia, and I'm not sure he could control it even if he wanted to, and because it's really hard to know how to run against him or whom he could possibly convince to vote for him. Cruz would also be the apocalypse, but I think a Cruz presidency is very, very unlikely to happen, even if he gets the nomination. I can't really say the same about Trump.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 6:15 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Apparently Cruz is now positioning himself as the establishment candidate, since he's the only one who (projected) beat Trump anywhere. (Source: NPR)
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 6:15 PM on March 1


OK so I'm not sure what's making people pin their hopes on Rubio. Anyone know?

The Republican establishment dislikes Cruz as much (if not more than) as Trump.
posted by drezdn at 6:15 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I think maybe Trump's deal, and the support for Trump among the apolitical, is wrapped up something like what Walter Benjamin talked about when he critiqued the aestheticization of politics that happened under fascist regimes. Trump, and the Trump movement, isn't about a political effect, it's about an aesthetic effect. It's about the glorious freedom involved in treating public debate as a site of pure spectacle rather than a means to work out political disputes.

Under this interpretation, the act of beating the shit out of a Black person at a rally isn't a political act, it's an artistic one; the Black person's body stops being a person's body; their blood isn't treated as real blood but symbolic blood, red paint used to paint a picture of raw white power. The blood of a Black person isn't the blood of a Black person — it's just a means to annoy political types. Mexican immigrants stop being seen as people, and their forcible ejection is less about throwing out people and more about establishing an aesthetic of domination and control. America stops being a country and starts being a canvas, across which a dark spectacular fantasy is drawn. A blank sheet of paper on which a massive epic of cruel mastery can be written. And so on and so on and so on.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 6:16 PM on March 1 [43 favorites]


I have a feeling (not just based on wishful thinking, I don't think) that Sanders will come out on top in Massachusetts. From a quick eyeball of which communities have had precincts reporting and to what extent, the early results seem disproportionately to come from wealthy suburbs, and expected Sanders strongholds like Cambridge and Somerville are so far under-reported compared to the statewide percentage.
posted by threeants at 6:16 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]




Trump's a wild card.

Cruz and Rubio are relatively more predictable (senators with some kind of track record, big money donors to bring them to heel).

So Trump is more of the chaos vote, the others are the establishment vote.

And Rubio's considered more "liked" and "likeable". Cruz is very intelligent and often correct, but not well liked.
posted by theorique at 6:17 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Just for a recent example of how much everyone in DC hates Cruz, he went to Scalia's funeral and nobody would even let him sit with them (even though he was one of Scalia's former clerks!): "#SCOTUS sources say Cruz asked to sit w Scalia clerks @ funeral. They said no. Then GOP leadership said no bc he wasn't 1 of them either."
posted by dialetheia at 6:17 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Also, I'd like to congratulate each and every one of you for being tied with Rubio in number of states won so far. I know it's been hard work, but if he can declare himself a winner, so can you!
posted by zombieflanders at 6:17 PM on March 1 [25 favorites]


So, here's what I'm seeing as I head to bed (it's 2 AM here ...)

On the Republican side, Trump is winning in Alabama, Georgia, Massachusetts, and Tennessee. He is also nearly certain to win Virginia, although the race may tighten up a bit with Rubio edging closer to him before it's over.

Cruz is winning in Oklahoma and Texas (but probably not by enough to keep the delegates from being split, which frankly he would need to have a realistic shot at this point.) Vermont looks like a tossup between Kasich and Trump. Arkansas looks like a tossup between Rubio and Trump. There's no word yet from Minnesota or Alaska, both of which are supposedly states where Rubio has a chance of doing well.

On the Democratic side, Clinton is winning in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. Massachusetts looks like a tossup between her and Sanders. Sanders is winning Vermont and Oklahoma. No word yet from Minnesota or Colorado.
posted by kyrademon at 6:18 PM on March 1


I feel like we're a room full of sixth graders and the teacher wrote "Trump is the worst because..." on the blackboard.

That said, Trump is the worst because he has managed to make it acceptable in much wider circles to be racist again. For that alone, he needs to eat a fiery bag of hell.
posted by Mooski at 6:18 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


But Cruz seems to have won TX and possibly OK so I'm not sure what's making people pin their hopes on Rubio. Anyone know?

Cruz is possibly more disliked by the party establishment than Trump. They are pushing Marco as the alternative because they don't want to hold their noses while they campaign for Cruz in the general. But Cruz is also unelectable in the general. He's too Evangelical even for America, and anyway he's obviously an alien. I mean, nobody has ever liked him. So Rubio is the hope. He at least can smile without looking like he's trying to figure out which part of you to serve for dinner.
posted by dis_integration at 6:18 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I'm going to be sure and let both the state and national Democratic parties know that the only way I'll vote for Hillary in November is if she stands with Elizabeth Warren during the convention and declares the economy to be rigged.

I think Elizabeth Warren is staying out of this whole thing on purpose, and will probably continue to do so unless her endorsement becomes a literal win-or-lose proposition for the general. Can't say as I blame her, either, she's got a long career ahead of her and a lot to lose by backing the wrong horse.
posted by tobascodagama at 6:18 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Ruboto is the scariest general election Republican because he's just as fucking nutso as Cruz on social and economic issues but packages it up in a nice veneer of compassionate conservatism whereas you just know Cruz would sell his grandmother to organleggers for spare cash.

The reality is that Clinton or Sanders will beat Trump like a rented mule in the general election and Republicans know this and they are watching their last best hope to prevent Trump going down in fucking flames.

Now Ruboto will have loser stink on him and Republicans hate losers.
posted by vuron at 6:19 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


So, according to Walter Benjamin, the jock bully slamming the nerdy kid into the locker to impress the cheerleader is being a supreme aesthete?
posted by acb at 6:19 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I sort of believe that Trump would never have gotten this far, or anywhere at all, if the middle class were thriving and available.
posted by prefpara at 6:20 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]




Trump is the worst, because he really has no idea what government fundamentally is, and would bring a completely wrongheaded view to the office. He's a one-sided bully with no history of compromise, and all of his business ventures have failed, and disastrously. He would destroy a lot of things given the power of the executive office. Not just take them in a bad direction, but potentially sell off public resources, close agencies and throw ongoing work into chaos, get us embroiled in horrible international conflicts through hamhanded and blustering management, that sort of thing. YES. He's worse.
posted by Miko at 6:20 PM on March 1 [16 favorites]


The reality is that Clinton or Sanders will beat Trump like a rented mule in the general election

That's debatable. There's a case that Trump the Barnumesque Showman Of Wonder could wipe the floor with Clinton the Business-As-Usual Beltway Insider, especially if, once he has the deep-red states locked in, he pivots away from the firebreathing act and starts hammering Wall Street.
posted by acb at 6:21 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


6 New Jersey Newspapers Call On Christie To Resign

As a scion of the Garden State, that makes my blood boil. On that list are papers that totally, uncritically aided and abetted his rise.
posted by Miko at 6:22 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]




So, according to Walter Benjamin, the jock bully slamming the nerdy kid into the locker to impress the cheerleader is being a supreme aesthete?
Benjamin was a German Jew who committed suicide in 1940 at the French border when it became clear he wasn't going to be able to outrun the Nazis. I don't think he was saying that to minimize the badness of fascism.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 6:23 PM on March 1 [28 favorites]


I'm not really sure Warren's endorsement would add much, to be honest. Now that I think about it, don't "endorsements" kind of seem like a symptom of a system where politicians never have to commit to a set of political values? Even if it turns out Warren is for some idiosyncratic reason starry-eyed for Clinton, it doesn't particularly matter who she endorses, because her platform speaks for itself and so does Sanders'.
posted by threeants at 6:23 PM on March 1


Reporting in from MA right now, please be aware that because our primary is open, a lot of Trump votes in the primary are in hopes of setting him up against Hillary - many don't reflect votes he's going to get in the general. I have heard enough of my peers gloating about their strategic ballot pull for Trump today that I suspect the effect is non-insignificant.
posted by Miko at 6:23 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


You've reached that point, the point where you wish for bad things to happen so you can be proven right prediction is not the same thing a wish, champ.
posted by entropicamericana at 6:23 PM on March 1


Re November elections, if Hillary doesn't come out strong against the bill DWS just let the payday lenders buy from her, then I am officially done with the national party. Ill still support and vote for local leftists, but I will wash the DNC right out of my hair. Between the payday lender bill announced on the day of super Tuesday voting that is a direct attack on Elizabeth Warren, and the bullshit with Bill delaying voting for two hours in areas where Bernie was polling well, I am really pretty pissed off at the Dnc shenanigans around this primary.

Also, could the people behind Hillary during her speech have been a Benetton ad or what.
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 6:24 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


God, I wish I could be a fly on the wall in the rooms of the some of the Republican establishment tonight. Their two most-loathed candidates picking up so many delegates? It's delicious. (And scary. But also delicious.)

I have no idea how this is all going to play out and I can't get off the damn internet to get work done.
posted by Salieri at 6:24 PM on March 1


all of his business ventures have failed

I don't know about that, but what I do know is that mine and Mrs. Tanizaki's next Las Vegas trip, we will be staying at the Trump International. It will be very elegant.
posted by Tanizaki at 6:24 PM on March 1


Got back from caucus in MN. It was a literal nightmare. The one where you're supposed to be at class but nobody knows where it is and you wait in line for no fucking reason. Yea, I wrote my choice on a piece of scrap paper and handed it to one of the ancients with an envelope. Excuse me for not thinking of this shit show as a "quaint " example of democracy in action, rather than the failure it was. You're totally fucked of you actually want to be involved in the discussion itself, farce that it was, or if you're for any dozens of intersectional reasons not able to make it out.

Depressing as fuck.
posted by odinsdream at 6:24 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


Regarding Texas: Don't forget about the delegate math. Just because they called it for Cruz doesn't mean it's all over. If Rubio stays just under the 20% threshold, Cruz will take around 86 delegates (assuming he ends with around 40% and Trump with around 30%) and Rubio gets nothing. If it ends with Rubio above the 20% threshold, Cruz will only take 69 delegates and Rubio gets 34. While overall this probably doesn't matter much, if Rubio leaves Super Tuesday with zero delegates, it'll be a harder sell to keep him in the race until Florida comes around in two weeks during Super Tuesday 2: Electric Boogaloo.
posted by mhum at 6:25 PM on March 1


Haha Trump will never attack Wall Street because they would start calling in all his debt. It's abundantly clear that Trump worth nowhere near 10 billion under any valuation and is quite likely leveraged to the hilt. That's probably why he's being so reticent to release his tax records because then it will be apparent that he's actually a conman who is doing all this just to boost his "brand" valuation.
posted by vuron at 6:25 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Oh shit. I fucked up the math. The proportional allocation in Texas is for the at-large delegates (of which there are only 47). The bulk are allocated by district.
posted by mhum at 6:26 PM on March 1


Ill still support and vote for local leftists, but I will wash the DNC right out of my hair. Between the payday lender bill announced on the day of super Tuesday voting that is a direct attack on Elizabeth Warren, and the bullshit with Bill delaying voting for two hours in areas where Bernie was polling well, I am really pretty pissed off at the Dnc shenanigans around this primary.

Yeah, the DNC is literal garbage. Most actual Democrats in office are basically fine, but the party machinery is totally broken.
posted by tobascodagama at 6:27 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Maybe he's running for the presidency just so he can nationalize his creditors.
posted by Apocryphon at 6:27 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Bernie Sanders supporters booted AFTER Bill Clinton gives speech at polling station
#MoveBillGetOutoftheWay twitter tag

Freeeeaky, I wonder what people think of this. My friend (a Sanders supporter) who was voting at the Nevada caucuses, a Hillary supporter gave her wrong directions for where to put her ballot, so shady!
posted by yueliang at 6:27 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I think Elizabeth Warren is staying out of this whole thing on purpose, and will probably continue to do so unless her endorsement becomes a literal win-or-lose proposition for the general.

I'd like to think that, but given that Debbie Wasserman Schultz is pushing legislation to cripple the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau I'd like some reassurances from Hillary's campaign that they support Warren.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 6:27 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


I'd like Hillary to announce her support for Warren on this issue, too, but people were talking about Hillary bringing Warren out on stage, which is not giving support so much as demanding an endorsement.
posted by tobascodagama at 6:29 PM on March 1


The DNC has been awful for ages with a brief respite under Dean. Kaine was mediocre, DWS is bad, McAuliffe was bad, etc.

For the most part the DSCC and the house version are generally a lot better although I'm pretty sure Schumer would totally shiv you in a knife fight.
posted by vuron at 6:30 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Oh I get it. The reason why the DLC disbanded a few years and election threads ago is because they scrawled in another line to their middle letter and became the DNC.
posted by Apocryphon at 6:30 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Here's Trumps' press conference stream if you're curious about the "surprise."
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:31 PM on March 1


"Leadership" Council. That's like Trump levels of cartoonishly blatant villainy.
posted by Apocryphon at 6:32 PM on March 1




Those flags Trump will be speaking in front of all have gold fringes! The sovereign citizen types are gonna cream themselves.
posted by Justinian at 6:32 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Apropos of nothing, I just love this picture of Bernie Sanders leaving the Woody Guthrie museum in Oklahoma (from this post, I think).
posted by dialetheia at 6:32 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


*pfft* That's why I have my MeFi stream on.
posted by Mooski at 6:32 PM on March 1


Reporting in from MA right now, please be aware that because our primary is open, a lot of Trump votes in the primary are in hopes of setting him up against Hillary - many don't reflect votes he's going to get in the general. I have heard enough of my peers gloating about their strategic ballot pull for Trump today that I suspect the effect is non-insignificant.

I have no doubt that many people say they're going to do this, so I'm not disputing your personal experience, but I really suspect the overwhelming majority of these claims are fully in the realm of fantasy, along the lines of "I'll move to Canada". I really do think a lot of Americans have a cultural taboo around breaking what feel like major rules, including a not-rule rule like voting for the party you actually identify with-- even if it doesn't bother them on a theoretical level. I see these stories as a sort of political version of mumbling to yourself the insult you wish you could shout without repercussion.
posted by threeants at 6:32 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]






Here's Trumps' press conference stream if you're curious about the "surprise."

Here's what's NOT a surprise: The comment stream on the right full of bleating about "white genocide."
posted by dhens at 6:34 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Can't wait for Bernie to concede and Clinton to pick him as her VP. Gonna be great watching all the stans collide and annihilate one another like a matter-antimatter reaction.
posted by tobascodagama at 6:35 PM on March 1


Yeah, the only thing that surprises me about that comment stream is that they allow emojis in it.
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:35 PM on March 1


Rumor on the Twitters is that Rick Scott is going to endorse Trump. Don't know if that's the surprise, but if so, it's definitely another big get for presumptive nominee Marco Rubio.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:35 PM on March 1


For the whole campaign I've believed that Sanders value was in pushing Clinton left. That being said... Clinton is kicking ass in regions and states that the Democrats have a snowballs chance in hell of winning. Seems like someone should be talking about that.
posted by Glibpaxman at 6:36 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


See, this is the thing I can't get my head around — and for reals this is a problem with my head rather than a problem with the world. Trump's empire is a potemkin empire, the cardboard front of a business operation rather than a real business operation. He's continually riding the edge of bankruptcy while describing himself as a multi-billionaire, squaring that circle by claiming his name itself — pure image unattached to anything real — as an asset worth billions.

BUT as Tanizaki has so ably documented in this thread, Trump's kayfabe performance of wealth is vastly more aesthetically satisfying than the real wealth of conventional capitalists like Romney. Trashy-riche hotels in Vegas are more dirty fun than real money, trashy halfassed performances of Christianity are more dirty fun than any real religious beliefs could ever be, and on the whole living, for as long as you can, in the consensual hallucination of kayfabe is more fun than having to deal with the resistant material of reality.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 6:36 PM on March 1 [34 favorites]


Even though the Blue Dogs and DLC are largely extinct now I don't know that it's entirely practical to exile every non-progressive Democrat from the caucus as some really are representing their districts despite being mediocre Democrats as a whole. I don't like DWS and would prefer that she wasn't the national chairwoman but I also understand that Democrats like her are representative of the views of a lot of people.

Still it's less than an opportune time to be coming out in favor of payday lenders.
posted by vuron at 6:36 PM on March 1


Clinton won Iowa and Virginia. Those are battleground states. Might as well argue that Sanders is winning in states that the Democrats have a snowball's chance in hell of losing.
posted by Justinian at 6:37 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Here's a stream of the Trump press conference from Fox that, blessedly, doesn't have comments.
posted by sagc at 6:37 PM on March 1


Well, Oklahoma is a surprise tonight. Somehow Cruz managed to thread the right combination of Southern Baptists and Tulsans to overcome Marco Rubio in OKC and the strong pull for Trump in Little Dixie. Bernie, meanwhile, rolled with the conservative Democrats of Eastern Oklahoma... and Hillary was hurt by the 8% "other" on the ballot, which tells you just how dissatisfied they are with both candidates.

Oklahoma has always been a weird, contrarian, populist, xenophobic, go-fuck-yourself-y'all state. Seems right that Cruz would win. Bernie, though... still weird.
posted by dw at 6:38 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Chris Christie, I feel vicarious embarrassment for you. And pity. But mostly disgust.
posted by Justinian at 6:38 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


CHRIS CHRISTIE hauled out again despite being dissed on a hot mic. wow
posted by dhens at 6:38 PM on March 1


Here's Trumps' press conference stream if you're curious about the "surprise."

Christie out first to announce the Trump. Man, he's really hitching all his wagons to the Trump train. What happens to Christie if Trump crashes and burns?
posted by dis_integration at 6:38 PM on March 1


Chris Christie is introducing Trump. How's that shit sandwich taste, governor?
posted by peeedro at 6:38 PM on March 1


the overwhelming majority of these claims are fully in the realm of fantasy

I really don't think that's true, threeants. Both when I lived in NH and here, it was a fairly common event. I know for a fact my friend's wife did it, because she pulled the ballot in front of us. It may not be enough to be significant, but it does exist.

we will be staying at the Trump International

Which was initially built to be a condo complex, but that failed, so it was last-minute-morphed into a hotel.
posted by Miko at 6:39 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Can't wait for Bernie to concede and Clinton to pick him as her VP.

Won't happen. Bernie won't be relegated to a pointless role as VP, he won't assuage concerns about Hilary's age, and he doesn't have a separate regional base of support different from her New York / East Coast base. His only argument would be appeal to young voters, but if they're not turning out in enough numbers for him to win then it's a hard sell that he can deliver them for Clinton from the VP slot.
posted by T.D. Strange at 6:39 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Even though the Blue Dogs and DLC are largely extinct now I don't know that it's entirely practical to exile every non-progressive Democrat from the caucus as some really are representing their districts despite being mediocre Democrats as a whole.

I'm fine with these people being allowed in the tent. I'm less fine with them being the ones in charge of setting it up.
posted by tobascodagama at 6:39 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Wow, I can't believe Christie really came back for more.
posted by zug at 6:39 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Surprise! Christie has no spine!
posted by Mooski at 6:39 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Christie looks so miserable. He looks like he'll get an electric shock if he says something wrong.
posted by zutalors! at 6:39 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


You can see the black dog Christie met down by the crossroads in his dead, dead eyes.
posted by robocop is bleeding at 6:39 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


"Not a campaign, but a movement".

Yes, a bowel movement.
posted by dis_integration at 6:39 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


The youtube comment stream on Trump's live stream is RIDICULOUS ... never seen comments stream by so quickly before.
posted by theorique at 6:39 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Here's what's NOT a surprise: The comment stream on the right full of bleating about "white genocide."

Yeah, so, I tuned in to this stream on time (because I was curious about the "surprise," I guess) and the video source was initially doing a split screen. And while they waited for Trump to speak, they started showing a Marco Rubio speech on the other half of the screen, and he was going off on Trump as a "fraud" etc., of course. The Trump fans in the live comments were LOSING. THEIR. SHIT. Like 10 comments per second of "GET HIM OFF" and "SHUT UP POOL BOY" etc. It was hilarious in that "if you don't laugh you're going to cry" sort of way.

Oh and now we have Chris Christie bagging on Hillary. Lovely.
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 6:39 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Has anyone on any of the other networks talked about how or why Sanders won in Oklahoma? Total radio silence on it on MSNBC. Normally they'd at least do a quick spin through the demographics. I was so looking forward to them being forced to admit that it isn't just pointy-headed liberals and dumb kids voting for him.

Can't wait for Bernie to concede and Clinton to pick him as her VP.

He wouldn't take it in a million years. I would be willing to put a good deal of money on it.

BUT as Tanizaki has so ably documented in this thread, Trump's kayfabe performance of wealth is vastly more aesthetically satisfying than the real wealth of conventional capitalists like Romney.

It's not just about the wealth - it's about how he's a wealthy person, but still obviously an outsider, someone whose social class will preclude him from being accepted by the real big-money Lloyd Blankfein types. They relate to his "persecution" by elites. This piece from David Frum from when Palin endorsed him sort of gets at it. It's part of why attacks and condescension from elites are backfiring so badly - since people relate to him as some perpetual outsider, the attacks just confirm what they believe about elites looking down their noses at them.
posted by dialetheia at 6:40 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Christie was pretty well consigned to the halls of obscurity after dropping out so why not throw in for a chance with von Clownstick?
posted by Tevin at 6:40 PM on March 1


It will be fun to watch Trump beat Rubio in Florida in two weeks.
posted by peeedro at 6:41 PM on March 1


The youtube comment stream on Trump's live stream is RIDICULOUS ... never seen comments stream by so quickly before.

The live stream of the closing hours of the Malheur standoff was a lot like this. The mixture of trolls, /pol/, and SovCits makes for some very weird times on YouTube.
posted by fifthrider at 6:42 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


What is actually happening at this press conference?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:42 PM on March 1


I have nothing really insightful to say about the results tonight or the horse race or anything, but I just want to say that I'm having such a better time this election season keeping the TV turned off and using MetaFilter as a pinhole projector through which I can safely observe the election spectacle without harming my eyes by staring directly at harmful objects like Donald Trump or Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. Thanks, everyone.
posted by tonycpsu at 6:42 PM on March 1 [52 favorites]


Like seriously Ive never seen someone as unhappy as Christie looks right now, while "winning."
posted by zutalors! at 6:42 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Is this the "vote for me Florida or you'll lose your jobs" speech?
posted by melissasaurus at 6:42 PM on March 1


I really want Trump to be the President. Ever since I watched Idiocracy, I became fascinated by the idea of using Mountain Dew for plant production. I strongly feel a Trump presidency is our best attempt in years to get closer to a true Idiocracy. I want to see Mountain Dew used on plants instead of water. A boy can dream.
posted by RedShrek at 6:42 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I am irate! I was in Palm Beach earlier today. I could have stuck around for The Donald' press conference.

I notice that he is hosting the conference at The Mar-a-Lago Club, which he used to fight racist Palm Beach private clubs in the 90s. He is a uniter, you see.
posted by Tanizaki at 6:43 PM on March 1


What is actually happening at this press conference?

Trump is trumping it up in a trumpy way (china! florida! winning! great!)

So far it seems like a speech, not a press conference.
posted by dis_integration at 6:43 PM on March 1


Christie looks like he'd rather be anywhere else on earth. He's trying to sleep standing up.
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:43 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


What is actually happening at this press conference?

He's just vomiting three-second soundbites right now. Still waiting on that "surprise."
posted by fifthrider at 6:43 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


man, the stream of consciousness of the american id thing is really great
posted by Glibpaxman at 6:43 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Yeah he honestly looks distraught.
posted by defenestration at 6:44 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Trump seems to think his campaign is a company?
posted by robocop is bleeding at 6:44 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


does he ever use three-syllable words?
posted by angrycat at 6:44 PM on March 1


Wow, Trump "playfully" dissing New Jersey right in front of Christie. He really is a big bully.
posted by dhens at 6:45 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


'Tremendous.'
posted by box at 6:45 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Christie eats a shit sandwich with a phony smile in response to the lame NJ joke.
posted by defenestration at 6:45 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


literally
posted by Glibpaxman at 6:45 PM on March 1


You guys. Please don't make me feel bad for Chris Christie. I don't think I could handle that.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 6:45 PM on March 1 [17 favorites]


I would like to thank whomever it was above that cautioned Dems pulling a ballot for the other party to try to influence results, because of possibly interesting Dem primaries that need your votes. My better half mentioned he was considering doing just that, so then I mentioned he should look at the ballot first.

We've now found out that in the Dem primary for our local Congress seat (currently and probably almost certainly again occupied by a crazy Tea Party guy), we have our choice between a guy who makes his own maple syrup and my better half's former barber, who is also claiming to have been endorsed by Willie Nelson. We are now weirdly excited about the primary, even though neither has a chance against Tea Party dude.

The laboratories of democracy, my friends!
posted by mostly vowels at 6:45 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


'Escalator.' 'Literally.' 'Cameras.'
posted by box at 6:45 PM on March 1


does he ever use three-syllable words?

He has the best words money can buy, the best.
posted by dis_integration at 6:46 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


does he ever use three-syllable words?

He managed "escalator" a moment ago.
posted by fifthrider at 6:46 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


He just called himself courageous!
posted by dis_integration at 6:46 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Tanizaki are you being legit serious or just putting on an act because honestly at a certain point in time it all kinda blurs together but you are sounding more and more like a redpill.
posted by vuron at 6:46 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


He's hitting the populism & trade stuff hard in this speech - probably pivoting to the general already.
posted by dialetheia at 6:46 PM on March 1


Christie looks like he's being held hostage.
posted by defenestration at 6:46 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Trump seems to think his campaign is a company?

Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. is a corporation, just like every other organized political campaign. That's how they can accept donations, enter contracts, that sort of thing.
posted by Tanizaki at 6:46 PM on March 1


Please don't make me feel bad for Chris Christie.

Chris Christie is now ruined
posted by peeedro at 6:47 PM on March 1


Christie has to be running for something like Secretary of Transportation at this point.
posted by drezdn at 6:47 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Is anyone going to ask for the surprise?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:47 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


You think he projects himself to win 51 states by the end of the press conference?
posted by Glibpaxman at 6:47 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I think the "surprise" is that he's actually deigning to answer questions from the press.
posted by vverse23 at 6:47 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


LOL. The Globe has Jim Gilmore taking Chelsea, reporting at 100%, with 47.2%-- 366 votes. I have literally no idea what to make of this and am supremely tickled.
posted by threeants at 6:47 PM on March 1


I want to see Mountain Dew used on plants instead of water

Not Mountain Dew, it was Brawndo—The Thirst Mutilator.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 6:47 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Apparently the Oklahoma Democratic primary was open to independents.
posted by drezdn at 6:47 PM on March 1


Frankly I'm surprised Trump didn't make Christie come out there wearing a gimp mask and a leash.
posted by Justinian at 6:48 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


'Democratic.' 'Democrats.' 'Democrat.'
posted by box at 6:48 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]



does he ever use three-syllable words?


Yu uuu ge
Mex i cans
Rube i o
Biz Ness man
posted by futz at 6:48 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Can i just say I would have loved to hear what HST would have to say about this election?

Or Molly Ivins.
posted by fuse theorem at 6:48 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Is that the equivalent of saying someone's name over and over while trying to make a sale? Subtle, cutting edge stuff.
posted by defenestration at 6:49 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Christie has to be running for something like Secretary of Transportation at this point.

Well, he does have hands-on experience in the administration of toll bridges...
posted by theorique at 6:49 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


The surprise is going to be nothing, I predict. He just wanted the media to be pointing at him. It bugs me that the media never dares say that they are being manipulated.
posted by benito.strauss at 6:50 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Benjamin was a German Jew who committed suicide in 1940 at the French border when it became clear he wasn't going to be able to outrun the Nazis. I don't think he was saying that to minimize the badness of fascism

Benjamin thought he would not be able to outrun the Nazis, but the reality is that his party was let into Spain the day after he committed suicide. It's a double tragedy.
posted by OmieWise at 6:50 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


The only thing I like about Donald Trump is that he at least mentions women's healthcare.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:50 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Trump with this Planned Parenthood thing again.
posted by dhens at 6:51 PM on March 1


While saying he won't fund them while they do "the abortion thing."
posted by defenestration at 6:51 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Via Reddit: "Christie, blink three times quickly if you need viewers to send help. I have the 9 and the 1 already dialed."

Also, some Sanders supporters are blaming his (probable) loss in Mass. on Bill Clinton's appearance at that polling station.
posted by girlmightlive at 6:51 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Maybe Christie's secret plan is to get close enough to Trump to murder him
posted by Automocar at 6:52 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


The only thing I like about Donald Trump is that he at least mentions women's healthcare.

Except for the part where he just implied that he'd defund Planned Parenthood until they stop providing abortion services. So, basically, the "reasoned" position in the current GOP is splitting the baby between regular old misogyny and firebombing doctors' offices.
posted by fifthrider at 6:52 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


trump - 'says very clearly planned parenthood does very good work for women planned parenthood... needs to be defunded if they do not stop abortions.'
posted by yertledaturtle at 6:52 PM on March 1


So, current odds with the bookies for which party wins the general election are (roughly):

Democrats: 1/2
GOP: 6/4

But if you break down the odds of the winners by candidate the odds are (roughly):

Clinton: 1/2
Trump: 2/1
Rubio: 10/1
Sanders: 25/1
Bloomberg: 40/1
Cruz: 80/1

It seems to me that:
1. The bookies agree that Rubio is more likely to win the GE than Cruz (but still less likely than Trump)
2. The GOP (as an entity) has a better chance of winning than any of its current individual candidates, though I'm guessing that the party odds are dependent on if the they have a better candidate than Trump, which is not likely to happen, according to the current odds.

I could be interpreting this wrong.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:52 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


You know how some of those benthic zone fish with black eyes and 1,000 needle-like teeth have a little glowing lure growing out of their heads?

That's Trump talking about women's healthcare
posted by prize bull octorok at 6:52 PM on March 1 [27 favorites]


You Can't Tip a Buick: consensual hallucination of kayfabe is more fun than having to deal with the resistant material of reality

It's Baudrillard and the hyperreal. The simulacrum. This is it. We are here.

Simulation is no longer that of a territory, a referential being, or a substance. It is the generation by models of a real without origin or reality: a hyperreal.... It is no longer a question of imitation, nor duplication, nor even parody. It is a question of substituting the signs of the real for the real
posted by Cuke at 6:52 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Looking at the delegates, is this the night Carson finally quits? I know he himself has a hard time with reality, but I have to imagine at least someone working for him knows about it.
posted by downtohisturtles at 6:53 PM on March 1


Also, some Sanders supporters are blaming his (probable) loss in Mass. on Bill Clinton's appearance at that polling station.

Damn Bill Clinton for stopping 25,000 Sanders supporters from voting at one station!
posted by Justinian at 6:53 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Maybe Christie's secret plan is to get close enough to Trump to murder him

I definitely had this same thought. I'm half-waiting for him to pull a piano wire out of his jacket.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:54 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


The only thing I like about Donald Trump is that he at least mentions women's healthcare.

On his terms. Which do not include abortion rights, or a right to control their own bodies.

Mentioning it isn't a high enough bar, imo.
posted by zarq at 6:54 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Does trump have batteries wired to Christies balls? Chris looks terrified.
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 6:54 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Can someone explain the Jim Gilmore / Chelsea thing? Surely there's an actual reason that one of Trump's only defeats in the whole state is to a complete non-entity who received almost no votes in any other municipality.
posted by threeants at 6:54 PM on March 1


What Bill Clinton did was illegal, end stop.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:54 PM on March 1 [17 favorites]


The GOP (as an entity) has a better chance of winning than any of its current individual candidates,

That makes sense. You would expect entirely predictive polls to have all of the GOP candidates sum to the total party chance of winning.
posted by fifthrider at 6:54 PM on March 1


the rapist republican frontrunner mentioned womens healthcare


...i hate this timeline.
posted by nadawi at 6:55 PM on March 1 [19 favorites]


Looking at the delegates, is this the night Carson finally quits? I know he himself has a hard time with reality, but I have to imagine at least someone working for him knows about it.

Carson's still in it?
posted by theorique at 6:55 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Damn Bill Clinton for stopping 25,000 Sanders supporters from voting at one station!

Damn Bill Clinton for possibly breaking the law and possibly disenfranchising voters.
posted by yertledaturtle at 6:56 PM on March 1 [24 favorites]


Carson is running as a financial scam. So he will never stop.
posted by Justinian at 6:56 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Looking at the delegates, is this the night Carson finally quits? I know he himself has a hard time with reality, but I have to imagine at least someone working for him knows about it.

Nah, he said people still have enough time to have an Awakening.

And he still has books to sell.
posted by futz at 6:56 PM on March 1


Does trump have batteries wired to Christies balls? Chris looks terrified.

It's this or jail for him in 2020 once all those probes go to sourc.
posted by The Whelk at 6:56 PM on March 1


Jeff Weaver (Bernie's CM) just told CNN they're going all the way to the convention.

That's too bad. I thought Sanders cared about America.
posted by OmieWise at 6:56 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


This is what I'm on about, btw, for those not familiar with the area. Wtf?
posted by threeants at 6:57 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


This press conference is amazing for Christie's face. I think it's because he's been used to being the biggest dog in the room for so long, and he knows that he's going to be a hanger-on for the foreseeable future.
posted by benito.strauss at 6:57 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


"I've had thousands of people work for me that are hispanic" is hopefully going to be the next "binders and binders of women."
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:57 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Damn Bill Clinton for possibly breaking the law and possibly disenfranchising voters.

Yeah. I don't think he affected the outcome in MA at all. But that was some bullshit anyway.
posted by tobascodagama at 6:58 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Christie looks like he's going to pass out.
posted by defenestration at 6:58 PM on March 1


That's too bad. I thought Sanders cared about America.

Keeping Hillary from having that much extra time to slide back to the "center" (read: somewhere between Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon) is the very definition of "car[ing] about America" right now.
posted by fifthrider at 6:58 PM on March 1 [35 favorites]


Christie looks like the Trashcan Man standing in front of the Walkin' Dude.

I mean, you can almost SEE him mouthing 'my life for you'
posted by Mooski at 6:58 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


That's too bad. I thought Sanders cared about America.

Oh, spare me. Last I checked we still lived in a country with a semi-functioning Democratic process, at least for now. Clinton kept running in 2008 under very similar circumstances and nobody accused her of "not caring about America."
posted by dialetheia at 6:59 PM on March 1 [51 favorites]


Yeah. I don't think he affected the outcome in MA at all. But that was some bullshit anyway.
Either do I. But this kind of stuff is disgusting to me. Our voting franchise is very important on principle.
posted by yertledaturtle at 7:00 PM on March 1


Chris Christie's face at the press conference.
posted by Justinian at 7:00 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


I can't believe anyone is like "Trump's not any worse" when he's going on about this wall that Mexico is going to pay for, and goes higher as some punishment or something. It makes me furious. He mentioned healthcare but not with "abortions going on in there." So what? This man is vile and yes, has ticked racism way up already, which matters to brown people.
posted by zutalors! at 7:00 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Mexico's going to pay for that wall so we can keep the heroin out of New Hampshire.

what
posted by emelenjr at 7:00 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


What is the Left supposed to do electorally?: "So, you can’t run as a third-party because you might split votes. You also can’t run in the primary if you have any chance of winning the nomination because then you increase the risk that the “party” (so defined) will lose the general election. What, then, can you do? What is the center-left’s view on how the left is supposed to interact with electoral politics? It seems that the actual view is that they shouldn’t involve themselves at all, except as voters to a centrist party that does not accomplish (or even aim to accomplish) the left’s political goals."
posted by dialetheia at 7:00 PM on March 1 [38 favorites]


Well, we finally have a candidate entering the fray who's an equal to Trump.

Still, it is cathartic to imagine The Donald getting this kind of treatment from Ol' Mean and Green.
posted by oneswellfoop at 7:00 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I don't really see why it's a problem for Bernie to stay in until the convention.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 7:01 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


The reason I don't cite Baudrillard is that he's so mournful about the loss of the real and the replacement of the real by simulacra — I think the interesting/terrifying/wonderful thing about simulacra are that they have a material realness all their own, without regard to whether or not they reflect or represent anything but themselves.

But yeah we're precessing our way through simulacra with a vengeance these days, aren't we?
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 7:01 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


Christie looks like he's on a huge dose of mushrooms and barely holding it together as Trump's face grows strange appendages.
posted by One Second Before Awakening at 7:01 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


can this press conference just go on forever?
posted by Glibpaxman at 7:01 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


honestly bernie staying in it is good for hillary if she comes out on top. if we keep fighting among ourselves the gop will keep fighting their own weird battles, bernie will make her keep answering to liberal issues, it'll show she can win a hard fought contest and isn't just waiting on the coronation. and if he wins? well, i'm for that as well.
posted by nadawi at 7:02 PM on March 1 [21 favorites]


my TV keeps freezing on Trump's speech. It doesn't want me to see him bragging about getting Muslim/Hispanic/black voters.
posted by zutalors! at 7:02 PM on March 1


Jeff Weaver (Bernie's CM) just told CNN they're going all the way to the convention.

That's too bad. I thought Sanders cared about America.


As much as I think this primary is essentially over for the Dems and Hillary has it in the bag, I do think Sanders keeping up his campaign until the convention is a good thing. For one thing, he's demonstrably moved Clinton to the left, and that effect will get stronger the more desperate she gets to tie a bow on the primary. For another, it delays the inevitable Republican smear campaign and gives the Democrats more time to sell themselves positively before things get ugly.
posted by tobascodagama at 7:03 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


Sanders running isn't hurting anything, in many ways it is probably helping. Some of his supporters (like Clinton's) may be a different story but that's not his fault.
posted by Justinian at 7:03 PM on March 1 [33 favorites]


Bernie has to be in until all states have voted. Having only one candidate left in the race before a huge number of voters could even exercise their right to vote is not a democratic process in any way.
posted by downtohisturtles at 7:03 PM on March 1 [27 favorites]


I would love to see how much the Trump Campaign is paying Mar-a-Lago to host this evening. That may have been the reason he self described it as a press conference rather than a campaign victory party, some way of paying himself. He is always looking for the scam.

Can a campaign declare bankruptcy?
posted by readery at 7:04 PM on March 1


exercise their right to vote

it's not a right to vote in primaries. They're party events, not public elections.
posted by Miko at 7:04 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


As much as I think this primary is essentially over for the Dems and Hillary has it in the bag, I do think Sanders keeping up his campaign until the convention is a good thing.

Not to mention that if Loretta Lynch actually does wind up rolling out felony indictments this summer, having a backup candidate would be a very, very good thing.
posted by fifthrider at 7:05 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


The parties love to be private when they want and public when they want. That's why I say fuck 'em.
posted by downtohisturtles at 7:05 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Well, I'm kind of wrong in that primaries are governed by the Voting Rights Act and there can't be mechanisms to ban people from voting. But it's routine for primaries to offer a ballot vote that doesn't matter because the other candidates have already dropped out or will not win the nomination by any chance.
posted by Miko at 7:05 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


so what was the surprise
posted by angrycat at 7:06 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


What is the center-left’s view on how the left is supposed to interact with electoral politics?

How about not making the issue the biggest prize? What about running local candidates?

As I've said before, the problem with Sanders candidacy isn't that he has it wrong, it's that someone is going to be president. The stakes are very very high here.
posted by OmieWise at 7:06 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Bernie doesn't have to stay in if it's impossible for him to win and it's just causing people to donate in a needless way.

That being said if he doesn't go nuts on spending with big Ad buys he probably has enough cash on hand to last until the convention. The reality is that the media is going to basically ignore him from now on in favor of watching the shit show that is the Republican party.
posted by vuron at 7:07 PM on March 1


What about running local candidates?

Indeed. Guaranteed, all this passion will vanish overnight.
posted by Miko at 7:07 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


The justice department of a democratic administration is not going to "roll out" anything on the Democratic frontrunner in an election year. Never in a million years.
posted by dilaudid at 7:07 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Clinton kept running in 2008 under very similar circumstances and nobody accused her of "not caring about America."

I think Sanders should stay in the race as long as he wants, but hahahahahaha OMG yes they did.
posted by Salieri at 7:07 PM on March 1 [16 favorites]


so what was the surprise

Christie's soul was in the box.
posted by cashman at 7:08 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


So it looks like Hillary is going to win 6 or 7 states and Bernie is going to win 4 or 5, at least according to NY Times estimates. Why on earth would people expect him to drop out?
posted by waitingtoderail at 7:08 PM on March 1 [17 favorites]


Sanders staying in can serve a very useful purpose: voter registration. He just blows all his money paying for state organizers to register voters and to push the message. Seems legit to me.
posted by Glibpaxman at 7:09 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


This is way off-topic, but as much as pro wrestling does not appeal to me at all, it's contributed a lot of very interesting and useful terminology to popular critical analysis.

Trump has fought as a professional wrestler. Here he is clotheslining WWE CEO Vince McMahon and repeatedly punching him while he is down.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 7:09 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


What is the Left supposed to do electorally?: "So, you can’t run as a third-party because you might split votes. You also can’t run in the primary if you have any chance of winning the nomination because then you increase the risk that the “party” (so defined) will lose the general election. What, then, can you do? What is the center-left’s view on how the left is supposed to interact with electoral politics? It seems that the actual view is that they shouldn’t involve themselves at all, except as voters to a centrist party that does not accomplish (or even aim to accomplish) the left’s political goals."

Yeah, we see this time and time again, thanks for the link. It's so strange to me that the center-"left" seems genuinely baffled and offended that essentially serving as an aphid farm, expected to continually supply votes for literally nothing in return, doesn't strike leftists as a universally appealing arrangement.
posted by threeants at 7:09 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


Honestly, shit like this is why I'm no longer a registered Democrat. The smug contempt from centrists for the left wing of the party is palpable and extremely off-putting.
posted by dialetheia at 7:09 PM on March 1 [32 favorites]


This is way off-topic, but as much as pro wrestling does not appeal to me at all, it's contributed a lot of very interesting and useful terminology to popular critical analysis.

I have a twitter feed that contains A LOT of pro wrestling goings-on tweeted by GLBT POC folks in their 20's. A bald man with an impressive beard in a tuxedo named Sheamus got everyone weeping with a speech about wrestling at one point, everyone wants John Cena to cage-match Roman Reigns so they both die, and OPINIONS on Kevin Owens and Dean Ambrose are voiced loudly. (They're for 'em!)

I remember when I was far, far away from home at college, and desperate for something that was at once complex and simple to understand. Tugboat was a good guy (who was enormous and athletic), and the really, really bad guys all had to beat him before they could take on (insert popular Face-wrestler here), and it was always a close, close match. (And almost all of them lost, depending on how close it was to a PPV event.) His worst enemy ever was Avalanche! Avalanche was a "Monster Heel", he was about the only wrestler operating at the time who outweighed Andre The Giant while still being able to do acrobatic off-the-ropes stuff. Avalanche, as a monster heel, always won (unless it was pay-per-view), but his battles with Tugboat were epic! Easily half the length of the (then) WWF show on Monday nights on TBS.

Then, one day, a new MONSTER HEEL TAG TEAM was announced! The Natural Disasters! Earthquake (Not even pretending to be anyone but Avalanche) ... and Typhoon! Who was John Ott, who played Tugboat previously. He was still 380 and could backflip over a Buick with his mullet cemented in place by hairspray, just like he could when he was Tugboat! He wore his old tugboat costume, but now it was all shiny and metallic-spandex!

The announcers pretended like this was a completely new wrestling team, so I immediately set out to create a head-canon at how this iniquity could ever happen in a just multiverse, which is too inane to recount here.

But here's the curve-ball, tho. Audience polling became A Thing in the early nineties. The WWE was very forward thinking as a media enterprise, even then. These were incredibly talented, athletic, skilled, charismatic showmen (who weighed above 400lbs each at that point, in a time when that kind of weight Just. Didn't. Happen.) They were also created as Monster Heels who could simply crush whoever they went up against... and that appealed more than corporate thought it might.

So, John "Tugboat I mean Typhoon" Ott and John "Kototenzan I mean Earthquake" Tenta - as Typhoon and Earthquake - won the tag-team championship as 900lbs combined worth of heel-face turn.

Kayfabe. Anyone can be a champion, so long as their story is awesome. I really like my twitter feed when wrasslin' comes up, tho they all think I'm completely in the bag for Andre as best-ever. I know better, and will never correct them as I like to watch as they react and live in the moment, imagining themselves in the ring.
posted by Slap*Happy at 7:09 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Indeed. Guaranteed, all this passion will vanish overnight.

Yup.
posted by OmieWise at 7:09 PM on March 1


so what was the surprise

His hands are bigger. His fingers are much longer than before
posted by oulipian at 7:10 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


He shouldn't drop out, but things aren't as close as the top line "states won" suggests. The delegate difference is much higher.
posted by Justinian at 7:10 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I was told there would be a surprise.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:10 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I thought there was going to be a surprise?
posted by Arbac at 7:10 PM on March 1


How about not making the issue the biggest prize? What about running local candidates?

Exactly. I would love to be able to support socialists for city council, state assembly, state senate, possibly governor and house rep, and then vote dem for President and Supreme-Court-justice-picker. Possibly if this works out for a few election cycles, also support socialists for Senate.
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 7:11 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Surprise: no surprise.
posted by defenestration at 7:11 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


God, I would love, love, love, love, love it if the Bernie people would get involved in local politics. They could make such a huge, massive difference. About 650 people caucused in my precinct, mostly for Bernie. By contrast, 11 people voted in the last county supervisor election. That is not missing a 0: eleven people. 73 people voted for city council in November. The Bernie people could make a huge impact locally if they showed up. Hell, they could run candidates. I really hope they do.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 7:12 PM on March 1 [60 favorites]


Was Christie the surprise? That's a shitty surprise.
posted by yasaman at 7:12 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


The delegate difference is much higher.

Is that counting "superdelegates" or no?
posted by waitingtoderail at 7:12 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


The surprise is Colorado.
posted by box at 7:12 PM on March 1


but anyway, let me get to my main point, which is WAKE UP SHEEPLE, JIM GILMORE NATION IS ASTIRRING IN CHELSEA
posted by threeants at 7:12 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


The progressive movement needs to start stocking the bench with competitive candidates and plan for the long haul. Changing the trajectory of the US is a massive undertaking (look how long it took the Republicans following Goldwater to achieve even a fraction of their objectives).

Civil Rights movement was not won overnight and it seems quite likely that a progressive revolution is going to take decades to accomplish and is going to take a whole lot of outreach to communities that quite honestly feel "whitesplained" when progressives drop in and lecture them about how to be a good Democrat.

Just keep in mind that time and demographics are on your side as the US has consistently veered slowly to the left over the decades and that is likely to continue despite the attempts of reactionaries to slow progress.
posted by vuron at 7:12 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


Possibly if this works out for a few election cycles, also support socialists for Senate.

I'm pretty sure that's how Sanders ended up running for President in the first place. And how dare he run for office when he's damn near splitting the country's Democratic support with someone who was supposed to have a simple coronation?

God, I would love, love, love, love, love it if the Bernie people would get involved in local politics.

Maybe if people didn't condescend to them constantly and treat them like idiots, they would be more inclined. I am involved, but this sort of thing is rampant and, again, extremely alienating.
posted by dialetheia at 7:14 PM on March 1 [16 favorites]


Jeff Weaver (Bernie's CM) just told CNN they're going all the way to the convention.

That's too bad. I thought Sanders cared about America.
posted by OmieWise


You brought this up yesterday in the Nevada post. The answers are still the same.
posted by futz at 7:15 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


Indeed. Guaranteed, all this passion will vanish overnight.

Do you have any evidence to support this assumption?
posted by yertledaturtle at 7:16 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I think Sanders should stay in the race as long as he wants, but hahahahahaha OMG yes they did.

I fully expect Sanders supporters to conduct themselves with as much grace and dignity as 2008's PUMA crowd.

Sanders staying in can serve a very useful purpose: voter registration. He just blows all his money paying for state organizers to register voters and to push the message. Seems legit to me.

I would love if he did this, but it seems like one of the big reasons he's losing despite being a candidate with popular policies is the utter lack of a solid ground game. So I'm not sure how much help he could actually provide here.
posted by tobascodagama at 7:16 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


House and Senate Hopefuls Betting on Bernie Sanders

Long shot candidates are trying to use their endorsements of Sanders to gain support from his coalition
posted by Glibpaxman at 7:16 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I'm pretty sure that's how Sanders ended up running for President in the first place. And how dare he run for office when...

You'll notice that I didn't say a single bad thing about Sanders or his supporters - I just said I would love to see some socialists in down-ticket races.
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 7:17 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


I, for one, hope that Tanizaki's stay at Trump's hotel is every bit as pleasant and relaxing as Trump himself.
posted by Faint of Butt at 7:17 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


(look how long it took the Republicans following Goldwater to achieve even a fraction of their objectives).

Right, but this is exactly the point - Goldwater changed national politics and set that entire movement off in the first place with his run! They didn't get their state legislatures voting 100% movement conservative first - that's an incrementalist view that doesn't square with that story. His run created political space for that movement. That What Democrats still don't get about McGovern piece (not to mention Nixonland) covers most of that territory. Big political change in American history doesn't happen through incremental legislature shifts over time, it happens through national movements.
posted by dialetheia at 7:18 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


The progressive movement needs to start stocking the bench with competitive candidates and plan for the long haul. Changing the trajectory of the US is a massive undertaking (look how long it took the Republicans following Goldwater to achieve even a fraction of their objectives).

Hear, hear. It took eight years for the Democrats to produce a really viable candidate in Barack Obama, and then they kind of forgot that that was a thing after he won. Bizarrely short-sighted.
posted by tobascodagama at 7:19 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


as much as pro wrestling does not appeal to me at all, it's contributed a lot of very interesting and useful terminology to popular critical analysis.

This time next year, we will have the first president to be a member of the WWE Hall of Fame.
posted by Tanizaki at 7:19 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


[OmieWise, if we have to have the same conversation as yesterday, it's going to end differently. Please make an attempt to be civil. Thanks.]
posted by restless_nomad at 7:19 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Clinton kept running in 2008 under very similar circumstances and nobody accused her of "not caring about America."

Endless editorials in 2008 attacked her for running a scorched earth campaign against Obama. To the point that her campaign had to defend the intra-party feud they were perpetuating. Meanwhile, forums and commenters on Dem sites like TPM were absolutely vicious towards Hillary supporters.

This is not new behaviour. It sucked back then. It sucks now.
posted by zarq at 7:21 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


Vuron has it. If the left can learn to play the long game as opposed to the Hail Mary, we will get somewhere.

I would love, love, love, love, love it if the Bernie people would get involved in local politics.

Absolutely. Now, this is what was supposed to happen after 2008 with Obama for America, which transitioned to Organizing for Action. The idea was we would take our local organizations and plow them into local races and reps. It fell apart. In fact, the same thing was supposed to happen with Dean/Democracy for America. Both these organizations are relatively toothless at this point; I am sure they connect some people but they are not forces with wide traction.

It seems to be very, very hard to rally interest in local and midterm races on the left. This is a big difference between the left and the right. On the right, they've learned to develop infinitely deep benches, starting with town councils and school boards and working the pipeline up from there. On the left, we seem mainly interested in big grabs and highly visible statements, not in the long slog. Where are the Greens and Democratic Socialists in local races? Maybe we've reached a tipping point where we've galvanized enough people to take on the boring part of politics, but the last two waves broke on the shores of late November. There's reason to be skeptical.
posted by Miko at 7:22 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


You know the alienation that you are feeling is shared by people who also hold deeply held positions of their own dialethia. Just because they aren't as progressive in many areas as people want doesn't make them bad or wrong or evil. People have a lot of reasons why they vote like the do and it shouldn't come as a surprise that a large number of Democrats like Clinton for any number of reasons and resent being told that they are stupid or doing democracy wrong.

We don't get to pick the electorate that we feel like we deserve and the consequences are that often we don't get what we want.

I'm incredibly progressive on a ton of issues but I also believe in fundamental democratic principles like consensus building and compromise. I fucking loathe how the Republican party enforces ideology over practicality and good governance and I definitely don't want the Democratic party to try to resemble that.

So yeah I'm content that the Democrats are choosing a centrist because they are exerting their democratic rights in doing so just like they did in 2008. Yeah I'd like a more liberal candidate but I am sure as fuck going to do everything I can to elect Clinton assuming that she's the nominee because I respect the will over my fellow voters.
posted by vuron at 7:23 PM on March 1 [19 favorites]


To be perfectly fair, Hillary was posting pictures of Obama in traditional clothing and accusing him of being muslim, and generally digging up dirt that the GOP would use for the next 8 years against him.

Bernie has been sticking 100% to the issues. They're very different campaigns.
posted by zug at 7:23 PM on March 1 [26 favorites]




There is a movement to remove that clown from the wwe hall.

I love spending time with you yahoos and wonks but I have a long long day tomorrow so good night, have faith in the better angels out there in the electorate, chill the fuck out and see you at the next primary. We do this every four years, it is never the end of the world.
posted by vrakatar at 7:25 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


My county had so few Democratic voters in this primary that my 1 vote upped Sanders by a full percentage point. Good grief.
posted by joeyh at 7:25 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


Got back from caucus in MN. It was a literal nightmare. The one where you're supposed to be at class but nobody knows where it is and you wait in line for no fucking reason. Yea, I wrote my choice on a piece of scrap paper and handed it to one of the ancients with an envelope. Excuse me for not thinking of this shit show as a "quaint " example of democracy in action, rather than the failure it was. You're totally fucked of you actually want to be involved in the discussion itself, farce that it was, or if you're for any dozens of intersectional reasons not able to make it out.

Yeah, my husband was excited to caucus until he realized that Minnesota caucusing is just voting, but less organized and more time restraints*. This is the second time I've meant to stay for the local resolutions , but by the time I've voted I'm always so angry at the process that I just go home.

*You can kind of vote absentee, but your vote is taken as a consideration and doesn't really count as the total. You have to vote between 6:30pm and 8pm. Instead of a modern voting apparatus, you're putting an X on a sheet of paper. There's no privacy, and the counting is done by hand.
posted by dinty_moore at 7:25 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Sorry, Brawndo not Mountain Dew but still. Imagine Trump and Putin on the world stage. It tickles my heart.
posted by RedShrek at 7:25 PM on March 1


Just because they aren't as progressive in many areas as people want doesn't make them bad or wrong or evil.

Hell, some of us are as or more progressive and just have accumulated some experience from having been around this block a few times, and have come to have a longer-term strategic critique.
posted by Miko at 7:25 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Absolutely. Now, this is what was supposed to happen after 2008 with Obama for America, which transitioned to Organizing for Action.The idea was we would take our local organizations and plow them into local races and reps. It fell apart. In fact, the same thing was supposed to happen with Dean/Democracy for America. Both these organizations are relatively toothless at this point; I am sure they connect some people but they are not forces with wide traction.


Why did these organizations fall apart? Was it due to the lack of enthusiasm and motivation of the voters/participants after Obama was elected or was it lack of support from the Democratic Party?
posted by yertledaturtle at 7:26 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Maybe we've reached a tipping point where we've galvanized enough people to take on the boring part of politics, but the last two waves broke on the shores of late November. There's reason to be skeptical.

From what I remember as a big Obama booster in 2008, a lot of the enthusiasm for him dissipated when he signaled his support for Wall Street by appointing Tim Geithner, and the youthful enthusiasm for his campaign was redirected first into Occupy Wall Street and now into the Sanders campaign. He squandered some of it as well, just by not calling on those folks to help fight for health care. It's not like these are all totally separate phenomena, though - all protest movements like this submerge and reconstitute themselves this way. It's a lot of the same people involved in all three of those movements. They are signaling hard that they won't be involved in supporting more centrist neoliberal economics - it's just that nobody in the centrist wing is listening.
posted by dialetheia at 7:26 PM on March 1 [26 favorites]


Hell, some of us are as or more progressive and just have accumulated some experience from having been around this block a few times, and have come to have a longer-term strategic critique.

I get what you're saying and this is not an attack on you or anyone. But you can see how that sort of phrasing can seem condescending to people, right?
posted by downtohisturtles at 7:28 PM on March 1 [17 favorites]




If the Dems continue to campaign from the left and Trump starts to move to the middle (and I'm guessing he will do this whenever he feels the nomination is a lock-in), Trump could start to capture some of the moderates, which is a huge proportion of likely voters. On top of this, if the GOP starts a smear campaign against Trump, one of their talking points is going to be that he's really a moderate, or a RINO. So if they do succeed in driving Trump away from the GOP base, they're driving him to the moderates. They'd actually be playing right into his hands. At that point, the only way I see a leftist Democrat winning (no matter who it is), is if the GOP runs a third party candidate and splits the vote.

I mean, I like Bernie, I really do, and I would love to see Hillary move to the left. But I just don't know what to say about this.
posted by triggerfinger at 7:29 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


"So yeah I'm content that the Democrats are choosing a centrist because they are exerting their democratic rights in doing so just like they did in 2008."

Oh come on...everybody's exerting their democratic rights if they go out and vote. You can't follow the word "because" with that kind of pablum.
posted by uosuaq at 7:29 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Listening to Cruz is painful.
posted by carmicha at 7:30 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Democracy for America, for whatever it's worth, is still a going concern / effective organization.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 7:30 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


he one where you're supposed to be at class but nobody knows where it is and you wait in line for no fucking reason.

Yep! Did this in Maine. Worst system EVER.

a lot of the enthusiasm for him dissipated when he signaled his support for Wall Street

I don't know if you can pinpoint that as an actual event, but from what I observed, in the very deep trenches of local-first activism, even in the first six months of his term it was simple fatigue, and feeling like victory had been declared and people needed to get back to their families and stuff. I can fault the administration for not giving more leadership in this area, for not better transitioning David Plouffe and his message, sure. There might have been a moment. But should it depend on that, if the motivation is so deep and true and sincere in the followers? If they are gifted with the true vision and passion, why would such things matter?

Was it due to the lack of enthusiasm and motivation of the voters/participants

Yes. These were not Party organizations. They were meetings in church basements at which there were a handful at first, but within weeks, no one showed up but the convener and a couple of half-hearted volunteers who faded away rapidly.
posted by Miko at 7:30 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


So forgive me if this is like American Electoral Politics 101—I'm a dilletante—but to what do the soothsayers attribute Clinton's astounding advantage among African-Americans?
posted by escape from the potato planet at 7:31 PM on March 1




Why did these organizations fall apart? Was it due to the lack of enthusiasm and motivation of the voters/participants after Obama was elected or was it lack of support from the Democratic Party?

I would love to see a full accounting for this, because I think the answer is very, very important for the future of leftist politics in America.
posted by tobascodagama at 7:31 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Looks like Sanders is cleaning up Minnesota, except for the wealthy Lake Minnetonka DFLers.
posted by localhuman at 7:32 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


escape from the potato planet: "So forgive me if this is like American Electoral Politics 101—I'm a dilletante—but to what do the soothsayers attribute Clinton's astounding advantage among African-Americans?"

Great question. I'd like to know too. Could it be that Bernie's liberalism reminds black voters of FDR and the Democrats' white supremacist policies in the 30s and 40s?
posted by crazy with stars at 7:34 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Who is that guy who looks like an imperfect clone of Jeb Bush who's always on stage with Cruz?
posted by prize bull octorok at 7:34 PM on March 1


The problem is that the centrist wing sees progressive positions and candidates show up in Presidential election years and then the Democrats get fucking slaughtered in the midterms because the only people showing up are the old grumpy white guys who vote straight party Republican.

Millenials will definitely be a force to be reckoned with but until they start showing up consistently for every political event not just media frenzies like the Presidential election but also state and local elections- hell city council meetings so that it's not just 20 cranks talking about some stupid conservative stuff. When progressives can turn the people power that is fueling Sanders into a sustained movement not just a temporary blip then those centrist Democrats will sit up and take notice and start moving in a more progressive manner rather than triangulating the fuck out of everything.

It requires a sustained push or a breakthrough candidate and the reality is that Sanders isn't a breakthrough candidate.
posted by vuron at 7:34 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


Parenting success: my wife and I managed to cast our caucus votes with our four-year-old along for the ride. Our precinct voted 23 for Sanders and 6 for Clinton. Turnout was much higher than 2014.

Speaking only for myself as a Sanders supporter, I will be helping where I can with my state House representative's race. The incumbent Democrat is in a competitive district, especially when Democrats don't turn out to vote.

I'm also looking ahead to how I might help revitalize the local Party, though Democrats locally and nationally face some difficult challenges. I extend my hand to any willing to work for change, even if we don't agree on primary candidates. That's not always easy to do, given the inevitable bad feelings and bad behavior that emerge on all sides.
posted by audi alteram partem at 7:35 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


So forgive me if this is like American Electoral Politics 101—I'm a dilletante—but to what do the soothsayers attribute Clinton's astounding advantage among African-Americans?

Sanders has been completely ignoring them. Hasn't even shown up to campaign in states that aren't lily-ass white.

Clinton -- for all her massive and well-known flaws on racial justice issues -- has been actively doing outreach in the black community and at least making noises in the direction of an apology for her past stances.

I think it's as simple as that. Black voters are turning out for Clinton because she actually bothered to ask for their votes.
posted by tobascodagama at 7:35 PM on March 1 [18 favorites]


The Natural Disasters! Hell yes, Slap*Happy. I was still a kid at the time and I believed it was all real. How can Tugboat go evil? But still as a fat kid I loved that tag team.

So many traumatizing moments being a mark as a little kid. The Ultimate Warrior was almost killed by the Undertaker by locking him in a coffin. Shawn Michaels throwing Marty Jannetty through a window! Then you accept that your Dad isn't lying when he says it's fake and somehow you become even a bigger fan.

And then eventually you realize Vince McMahon is a scumbag in real life and his friend Donald might be President.

It's funny, even when I was young enough to believe wrestling was real, I still knew Donald Trump was a jackass. I remember playing some real estate based board game with this kid down the street and I thought owning the Taj Mahal would be cool, but then he berated me about how much of an idiot Trump is and I decided he was right. This was two little kids. In the 80s. We knew better.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:35 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


You can see how that sort of phrasing can seem condescending to people, right?

Uh...it's in response to condescension. The condescension is flying in both directions, but I'm not going to not respond to the idea that I am just not enough of a True Believer. Experience matters. After you've been part of two Democratic "revolutions" you evaluate the third one differently. I would be delighted to be wrong, but I think rather than a sudden groundswell of progressivism that sends Sanders into office and brings us all our Socialist dreams overnight, I think (as a historian too) what's much more likely is the usual long, difficult fight over several major elections to get the train rolling in a vaguely acceptable direction, with lots of slips and backslides and increments. That's generally how American history evolves in the absence of wars and cataclysms that allow rapid change. So yeah, we need the excitement and pure vision of new energy to fuel that process, but that alone is not actually how the polity changes over time.
posted by Miko at 7:35 PM on March 1 [19 favorites]


Trump and Bernie are still the only one speaking to what could broadly be called "labor". Middle to working class, mostly whites, who have been completely and utterly failed by neoliberal top down economics from Reagan to NAFTA now to TPP. If Trump can make it a contest of economic populism running to Hilary/Obama's left, that's a winning coalition almost the exact mirror image of Obama in 2008.

Be scared. He's winning it all.
posted by T.D. Strange at 7:35 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]




So if they do succeed in driving Trump away from the GOP base, they're driving him to the moderates.

I think it's less about moderate in a strict left-right sense, and more about economic liberalism paired with social conservatism (whereas the center of gravity in the ruling parties is more about economic conservatism and social liberalism). That RAND presidential election survey linked above goes into more detail about this, but Trump's voters are much more in favor of liberal economic policy already but are also in favor of socially conservative policies like controlling immigration.

So forgive me if this is like American Electoral Politics 101—I'm a dilletante—but to what do the soothsayers attribute Clinton's astounding advantage among African-Americans?

Mostly just her familiarity with the community - Sanders hasn't been a national figure for very long at all, and there's a lot of goodwill for the Clintons leftover from his presidency, and they have a lot of experience knowing how to reach Black voters. This piece from Cedric Johnson has some good insights. I also think that the religiosity in the South hurts Sanders' chances there, but I rarely hear anyone mention it.
posted by dialetheia at 7:37 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


I wasn't that involved in 2008, but I think part of it may be a lack of coordination (and to some extent active antipathy) between the OFA people and local party people. The local party people saw the OFA people as a bunch of interlopers who didn't have respect for local know-how or tradition, and the OFA people saw the local party people as a bunch of condescending, out-of-touch oldsters who were constantly lecturing them on how things had been done since Kennedy was elected. I really tried to reach out to the local party after 2012, and I would sit at meetings where they would talk about how lazy OFA people were and how they would never come to local party meetings because they weren't interested and blah, blah, blah. And I would be like "I am here. I want to help. Please give me something to do." And they would ignore me and go on badmouthing us.

I do think that part of it was burnout. There's now way to maintain that level of intensity and still have a normal life, and the less-intense day-to-day isn't nearly as heady as the lead-up to a big election.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 7:37 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Massachusetts keeps getting tighter and tighter. Worcester and Amherst have yet to report anything and are Bernie friendly. Looking forward to a nail biter!
posted by kyp at 7:38 PM on March 1


And while we're at it:
"There is no record that Clinton herself or anyone within her campaign ever advanced the charge that Obama was not born in the United States. A review by our fellow fact-checkers at Factcheck.org reported that no journalist who investigated this ever found a connection to anyone in the Clinton organization."

posted by zarq at 7:38 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


Eh, some people just want to see the world burn.

...myself, I prefer to see the world scorched with cobalt-60. Actual oxidation is somewhat less important than the cobalt-60, and you may all feel free to thank me for that.
posted by aramaic at 7:39 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


escape from the potato planet, she has a better ground game with black leaders/communities, more history with black voters and they remember a better economy under Bill Clinton. Overall I think it's because she's much more of a known quantity than Sanders. Sanders can promise a lot but there isn't evidence to these voters that he can deliver it like the Clintons have.
posted by stavrogin at 7:39 PM on March 1


It always seemed to me like resenting the Democratic party's complacency should lead to a hardcore push to change the two-party system, or voting in general (a massive undertaking) but people mostly seem to stop at the resentment part.

The party's complacency isn't surprising, given how voting/parties are set up in this country. So long as the other guys are more conservative/hateful, they are going to look good by default and have no real reason to push leftward. Sanders and Warren are an exception, but also encouraging, in that they seem to signal a change brought about by larger societal shifts. But if you want true socialists/Greens/etc. running for office, you're not going to get it in our current two-party system.

The only other alternative is to get involved, run for office, and push from inside without getting co-opted.

But just bitching about DWS or the party in general does nothing. Neither does refusing to vote, unless you like where the Republicans want us to go. You should vote Democratic because it is the responsible thing to do if you oppose the Republican party's goals. Full stop.

I guess saying these things might make me seem condescending, but that's not my intent. I'm not saying that people are wrong to want a better system. I do too! But I don't have a lot of patience for people who flounce in every 8 years, gasp at how buggered up things are, make noises about not voting to Show Those Democrats, and then promptly move on to forgetting about it till the next election.

So: you hate that the party is too corporate/conservative. What are you personally doing about it? I know some of you are doing things, but I don't think it's the ones doing most of the griping.

This is the kind of problem that is going to take sustained effort to solve.
posted by emjaybee at 7:41 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


Jon Favreau@jonfavs
He's already sanding off the rough edges, moderating the tone, and focusing on economic populism. Watch out, people.

Glenn Greenwald ‏@ggreenwald 10m10 minutes ago
Democrats getting nervous after Trump's press conference, for good reason. It was skillful, a sign of what's coming:

posted by Trochanter at 7:42 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Clinton is cleaning up with AA voters because it's a power block that the Clintons have aggressively courted for decades. Bill wasn't called the first Black president for nothing. Hillary in particularly has been aggressively doing outreach to the AA churches and speaks a language of faith that feels very at home to a large percentage of AA churchgoers. Keep in mind that in a large percentage of the US the AA church is the absolute center of the AA experience. Clinton has understood that and has locked in that support.

The ease that Bernie has in speaking to crowds of college-aged millenials is very apparent in regards to Clinton when she speaks to the AA community. Bernie quite honestly never stood a chance and then his supporters had a tendency to aggressively court AA voters with language that demeaned them and didn't relate to them where they were. That's why Sanders completely failed to reach out to the AA community and it's quite honestly doomed his campaign.
posted by vuron at 7:42 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Bernie winning Minnesota wouldn't surprise me - Minnesota has a pretty long history of favoring anti-establishment candidates, with strong third party showings in local elections. Even this summer, the Sanders booth at the state fair seemed to have a lot more energy than the Clinton booth (enough that someone from out of state commented on it to me). The fact that Rubio is currently beating Trump in Minnesota is far more surprising.
posted by dinty_moore at 7:43 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Democrats getting nervous after Trump's press conference, for good reason

I am goddamn FRIGHTENED after watching that press conference.
posted by Gaz Errant at 7:44 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


The local party people saw the OFA people as a bunch of interlopers who didn't have respect for local know-how or tradition, and the OFA people saw the local party people as a bunch of condescending, out-of-touch oldsters

So, maybe you would say that generationally divisive politics did not move the left agenda forward?

I do think that part of it was burnout. There's now way to maintain that level of intensity

Absolutely true - so why do we keep having very short-term, insanely passionate pushes behind a single candidate for a single office, instead of playing the long, slow ground game that wins House and Senate seats, governships, mayorships, city councils and school boards, and develops a truly progressive pipeline? Why do we save it all up for the Big Show and then do nothing but slash at each other throughout it?
posted by Miko at 7:45 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]



I am goddamn FRIGHTENED after watching that press conference.

Well, he threatened Paul Ryan in it. I don't see a lot of unifying or Presidenting.
posted by zutalors! at 7:45 PM on March 1


I think Trump is not as bad as Cruz. Cruz has no soul.
posted by RedShrek at 7:45 PM on March 1


I do think Bernie should have done more outreach with black voters, but black voters are also just more conservative overall, so it's not a huge surprise that they prefer hillary, both on policies AND on personal appeal.
posted by zug at 7:46 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


they remember a better economy under Bill Clinton

yup, https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=3Epa shows how 1999 was peak employment, and the current recovery has just gotten us up to the starting point of the late 90s boom.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 7:46 PM on March 1


So forgive me if this is like American Electoral Politics 101—I'm a dilletante—but to what do the soothsayers attribute Clinton's astounding advantage among African-Americans?
Ok, I have a theory, which I've seen floated elsewhere, but I can't remember by whom. So Obama didn't accomplish everything that people wanted him to accomplish. Bernie says this is Obama's fault: he was a bad person and a bad politician, and that's why he failed to live up to expectations. But many black voters don't think that's the reason. They think that Obama is a good person and a good politician, and he did the best that he could in a very challenging political situation. They are not convinced that Bernie could do any better. But when you press Bernie and his supporters on how he is going to accomplish his lofty goals, they can't really answer. So a lot of black voters draw the conclusion that Bernie thinks he could do better because he is confident that he is better and smarter than Obama. He doesn't really have any reason to think that: he's been over on the margins of American politics, and he has never had to negotiate with hostile people to get the best deal he could. But he has the confidence of the mediocre white dude. And that's both galling and worrisome. Hillary isn't so great, either, but at least she seems to be dealing with reality and to understand the limitations of what one person can accomplish.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 7:47 PM on March 1 [24 favorites]


“The Latter Days of a Better Nation, Part I,” Jim Wright, Stonekettle Station, 16 February 2016

“The Latter Days of a Better Nation, Part II,” Id., 29 February 2016
posted by ob1quixote at 7:48 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I think Trump is not as bad as Cruz. Cruz has no soul.

I mean, he is the Zodiac Killer.
posted by tobascodagama at 7:48 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I, for one, would like to see Trump's birth certificate.
posted by mazola at 7:49 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Bernie says this is Obama's fault: he was a bad person and a bad politician, and that's why he failed to live up to expectations.

whut
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:50 PM on March 1 [27 favorites]


Bernie says this is Obama's fault: he was a bad person and a bad politician, and that's why he failed to live up to expectations.

?! When has he said that?! His most substantive criticism of Obama is exactly what we've been discussing - that he wasn't able to keep the energy of his movement going. Sanders has also said repeatedly that Republicans were historically obstructionist because they are racist and wanted to delegitimize Obama as president. I know he did make noises about primarying Obama, but only because they were in the middle of a big debt ceiling negotiation where the White House was about to propose offering to raise the retirement age and lower benefits for Social Security.
posted by dialetheia at 7:51 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


I think Sanders is very weak on organization, ground game, and outreach to black voters all for the same reason: he never really expected to be here. And even if he did, he couldn't build the infrastructure for that kind of outreach without resources, resources that only became available to him very recently. Unlike Clinton who has been swimming in money and on the ground connections to local organizers and community leaders since before some registered voters were even born.

Thats the sort of disadvantage being a cool black man with a pastoral speaking style and experience in community organizing can overcome (if he has enough money and a little bit of populism on his side).
posted by Glibpaxman at 7:51 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


I do think Bernie should have done more outreach with black voters, but black voters are also just more conservative overall, so it's not a huge surprise that they prefer hillary, both on policies AND on personal appeal.


African American voters are more conservative on some issues, but even that's pretty overstated. You can't just compare AA views on, say, abortion against those of White liberals - a more reasonable view would be to compare it to white voters as a whole. And of course, they're more liberal on issues like gun control, police violence, voter ID laws, ect.
posted by dinty_moore at 7:51 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Even though the Blue Dogs and DLC are largely extinct now I don't know that it's entirely practical to exile every non-progressive Democrat from the caucus as some really are representing their districts despite being mediocre Democrats as a whole.

Look I know I'm an awful pragmatist, but I would vote for literally an Democrat with any shitty politics if it would help bring back Speaker Pelosi.
posted by great_radio at 7:52 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Bernie did do outreach with southern black voters. He went to prayer breakfasts, and toured HBCUs. He got Killer Mike on his side, and other black public figures, and he let the BLM folks push him to the left on racial justice almost immediately, while Clinton is still pretty wobbly on it. If you look at his numbers with black voters, the more they learn about him, the more they like him. I really think that if he were 20 years younger, and this was his starter-run at the presidency instead of the only run he's going to be able to make, in 4 or 8 years, if he kept himself in the public eye he'd be doing a lot better with black voters in the south. I think black voters are more comfortable with the devil they know, since they know that no matter what they're voting for the devil.
posted by dis_integration at 7:52 PM on March 1 [21 favorites]


Bernie says this is Obama's fault: he was a bad person and a bad politician, and that's why he failed to live up to expectations.

I don't think Bernie himself has said this specific thing, though he's probably implied it somewhere or other. However, his loudest supporters DEFINITELY believe this, and he hasn't done anything to shut them down.

Hillary isn't so great, either, but at least she seems to be dealing with reality and to understand the limitations of what one person can accomplish.

This is entirely the same as my own personal take on these candidates. I don't actively back either one, but I think that Sanders, for all that I like his politics, fails as a presidential candidate on a couple of core qualities, like flexibility, the ability to appeal to more than just one narrow demographic, and more important the ability to actually implement all those very nice policies he talks about. IMO, Clinton is promising a lot less but probably will deliver slightly more than Sanders would.
posted by tobascodagama at 7:53 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Yep, keep in mind that a major subtext of Clinton's campaign is essentially "4 more years" of Obama style politics where things that Obama started under his watch continue to get stronger and stronger (like ACA as only now is polling coming around to show people actually kinda like Obamacare).

There is a perception that Sanders (or maybe just his campaign and proxies) are coming in and saying you know Obama was really just a Republican all along and we really need someone truly progressive who won't sell us out to the corporations like Quisling.

And for a sizeable percentage of the AA community that sort of shit is annoying as fuck and tends to get people to ignore the rest of what you are saying even if you have some good points.
posted by vuron at 7:53 PM on March 1 [17 favorites]


?! When has he said that?! His most substantive criticism of Obama is exactly what we've been discussing

I think this could partially be from Hillary positioning herself as a continuation of Obama's policies. So attacks on Hillary's polices became partly attacks on Obama's too. And it could also be Sanders' being an anti-establishment candidate. Even a couple of posts here group Obama as part of the Establishment and that's hard to argue with since he is the president.
posted by FJT at 7:55 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


> African American voters are more conservative on some issues, but even that's pretty overstated. You can't just compare AA views on, say, abortion against those of White liberals - a more reasonable view would be to compare it to white voters as a whole. And of course, they're more liberal on issues like gun control, police violence, voter ID laws, ect.

I didn't mean "more conservative than white people", I meant "more conservative than Bernie". Particularly the southern religious crowd, which is a big chunk of who was voting tonight.
posted by zug at 7:56 PM on March 1


I read somewhere that black voters aren't single-issue voters the way other demographics are, and that makes sense to me. Sanders really pushed a few specific issues and I'm not surprised that it didn't really resonate with black voters.

Also, he frequently pivoted from racial issues to economic issues. Some of his colleagues in Vermont felt he wasn't comfortable talking about the realities of racism.

Also, the conservative issue. It's not necessarily that he's more liberal than them, it's that he's more liberal than Obama and they saw how difficult it was for Obama to get anything done as a moderate.
posted by girlmightlive at 7:58 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


MSNBC just called Colorado for Sanders.
posted by dialetheia at 7:58 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


mental note: never try to post a comment on a thread like this using an iOS device, especially if you're trying to quote somebody.
posted by entropicamericana at 7:58 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


When has he said that?! His most substantive criticism of Obama is exactly what we've been discussing - that he wasn't able to keep the energy of his movement going.
I think that, for instance, Bernie's stance on healthcare reads this way. I don't think that most Democrats are delighted with Obamacare, but Obama didn't have the ability to wave a magic wand and get the policy he wanted. He got the best he could considering what he was dealing with. Bernie acts as if Obama chose Obamacare because of a moral failing or ineptitude, and Bernie will be able to get single payer through the power of Bernie magic. When you ask his supporters how this is supposed to work, they call you names. This seems both naive and insulting.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 7:59 PM on March 1 [14 favorites]


For another take on Sanders and black voters, see this post, and especially this chart. I don't agree with all of his conclusions, but it's an interesting illustration of how hysteresis works. The differences in appeal may reflect mostly how long they've been on the national stage and how well they are known to a demographic that is in many ways hard to reach via traditional media, and like many other factors at play here, it's something that might well have changed significantly given more time.
posted by chortly at 8:01 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Even this summer, the Sanders booth at the state fair seemed to have a lot more energy than the Clinton booth (enough that someone from out of state commented on it to me)

I have photos of the DFL booth at the state fair, which prominently featured the Sanders banner, making it seem very much like they were giving him top billing (though I don't think it was intended).
posted by triggerfinger at 8:01 PM on March 1


As Obama has said repeatedly he's the President of the United States not the president of the people who voted for him.

Bernie's purity of thought and purpose make him a good standardbearer for a progressive vision, a mirror to hold up to the party and get it to re-evaluate where it's going but it's not always the most appealing thing for an actual candidate that needs to not just represent a movement but also govern afterwards.

I sincerely believe that the people that are voting for Clinton today and throughout the nomination process are looking at both candidates and saying to themselves that while Sanders has a great message they feel like Clinton is the better candidate and will be the better President if elected.
posted by vuron at 8:02 PM on March 1 [14 favorites]


MSNBC just called Colorado for Sanders.

DNC to the bat pole! Super Delegates, assemble!
posted by Trochanter at 8:03 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]




Bernie acts as if Obama chose Obamacare because of a moral failing or ineptitude

I mean, I don't really agree with this - Sanders was involved in that process and managed to substantially improve funding for community health centers by $11 billion in that legislation. He understands exactly what went into it. As far as I've been able to gather, he just thinks we still need to improve on it in the future and that we have the best chance of doing that by aiming high, not that Obama was a failure for enacting Obamacare. That said, thanks for explaining that point of view, I can understand that.
posted by dialetheia at 8:03 PM on March 1 [18 favorites]


ABC analysis of exit polls for all Democratic primaries

Does anyone have a good set of exit polls by state? I'm not sure that combining a bunch of southern states and northern states and western states gives a very useful view of things.
posted by dialetheia at 8:07 PM on March 1


I didn't mean "more conservative than white people", I meant "more conservative than Bernie". Particularly the southern religious crowd, which is a big chunk of who was voting tonight.

I'm pretty sure the AA electorate is still to the left of Bernie on some issues. The other thing is that pivoting to economics is a common ploy to deny that racism is at work, so him tying everything back to economics can have a sour taste, or at least just not read as well to PoC (evidenced by a facebook litmus test).

The 'Blacks are just more conservative about some things' has been used in the past to explain why liberal measures have failed - think prop 8 - but really, it's pretty easy to go through and see a failure to outreach. It's just a very lazy answer to a more complex question.
posted by dinty_moore at 8:08 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


ABC analysis of exit polls for all Democratic primaries

I like the result showing that Sanders is more popular with Republicans than Clinton is, despite the fact that, if you were looking at it solely in terms of policy positions, Clintons has traditionally been much closer to your traditional Republican voter.

I think it entirely comes down to the stuff YCTAB is talking about. The image of Sanders is more palatable to them, and most voter (not just Republican voters, most voters, period, though it's a lot more obvious with the GOP right now) are ultimately reacting to an image of the candidates they have formed rather than a list of policy positions.
posted by tobascodagama at 8:08 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


MSNBC just called MA for Clinton. Time to refill the bourbon.
posted by Gaz Errant at 8:11 PM on March 1


ABC analysis of exit polls for all Democratic primaries

Looks like young white guys for Sanders and pretty much everyone else for Clinton.
posted by octothorpe at 8:12 PM on March 1


Ouch, Bernie did not say that he thought Obama was a bad president or a bad person, that's Hillary attacking Bernie and manipulating the tide so people think that Bernie hates Obama, when Bernie questioning of some ways that Obama worked. It's part of how Clinton is positioning herself as "4 more years of Obama." Her campaign looks more 'doable' to a lot of people because of that. Also, people need to stop phrasing 'black voters' as some kind of weird othering monolith, it's creepy language. Second link
posted by yueliang at 8:14 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


MSNBC just called MA for Clinton. Time to refill the bourbon.

Hey, that's great!
posted by OmieWise at 8:14 PM on March 1


Looks like young white guys for Sanders and pretty much everyone else for Clinton.

Honestly, I'm really tired of this erasure of his female and PoC supporters. She won the majority of those groups (among mostly southern states) but that doesn't mean nobody else supported him. I've been increasingly offended by efforts to spin his support as mostly male, in particular.
posted by dialetheia at 8:14 PM on March 1 [50 favorites]


I think it's as simple as that. Black voters are turning out for Clinton because she actually bothered to ask for their votes.
posted by tobascodagama


This is just a completely ridiculous nonsense.
posted by haveanicesummer at 8:14 PM on March 1 [8 favorites]


Of course Bernie should stay in.

Policy or philosophical reasons aside, validation of the democratic process aside, there is a very practical reason for him to stay in -- the Dems need a backup.

Clinton still faces some legal difficulties. It is not inconceivable that those difficulties might mean that she can no longer run, or is no longer a viable candidate. And if she can't run or is too damaged to continue -- then what? Then you need someone else who can step in, someone with an arguable claim of legitimacy to the nomination.

Plan B for Bernie. At the very least.
posted by Capt. Renault at 8:14 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


Yeah those breakdowns of Republicans voting for Democrats in the primary are really weird.

Is there a desire by Republicans for Sanders to continue to play spoiler? Or is there a genuine passion for his message? Or is there just a sad resignation that the Republican nominees are fucking horrible but they still aren't quite desperate enough to pull the lever for Hillary?

I'm beginning to see more and more conservatives actually voice the very real chance that they would be willing to cross party lines in an Anybody But Trump effort. And these aren't just random Redditors. Conservatives are fucking terrified about what Trump and the brownshirts are doing to their party and it's long term viability.
posted by vuron at 8:15 PM on March 1


Yes, bourbon IS great!
posted by Gaz Errant at 8:15 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


I'm disappointed in Massachusetts. This maybe goes back to the "dynasty" idea from a while ago...it's not that Hillary isn't well-qualified in her own right, but it's hard to picture her beating Bernie here without a well-established machine; and that does have something to do with being married to the other Clinton.
posted by uosuaq at 8:15 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Or is there a genuine passion for his message?

I've linked to a number of these pieces, but yes, there are a decent number of Republicans who support Bernie. They are particularly interested in his campaign finance message, which transcends the boring reductionist left-right axis everyone insists on applying to everything.
posted by dialetheia at 8:16 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Anecdotally, I've noticed that a lot of women and POC supporters are already stretched at capacity due to organizing at other realms (at least in my friend groups). Combined with how there isn't much of a strong central grass-roots organizing that isn't the subreddit, and it's been really hard to get our voices and support out there.
posted by yueliang at 8:17 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


it's not that Hillary isn't well-qualified in her own right, but it's hard to picture her beating Bernie here without a well-established machine

Well, Romney was Governor of MA. He was elected and everything.
posted by OmieWise at 8:17 PM on March 1


Aw. I have no longer won as many primaries as Rubio.
posted by kyrademon at 8:18 PM on March 1 [21 favorites]


but it's hard to picture her beating Bernie here without a well-established machine

Because Bernie has such a well-established machine himself? What's your counterfactual here? Like sure, the chances of any one person making it as far as Hillary has in politics are astronomical, but if she had been Senator and a cabinet secretary but not first lady, do you think it's that hard to picture her winning?
posted by tonycpsu at 8:18 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Emjaybee, I like you a lot, and generally agree with you, but I disagree that we leftists continue to owe fealty to a party that is actively supporting ideas and legislation that are directly counter to our ideals. I cannot tell you how viscerally I felt the anger when I heard that DWS had sold out that blatantly to the payday lenders. I expect that from the republicans, I don't expect it from the person who chairs the dnc, the party nominally in favor of helping people, rather than sacrificing them on mammon's altar.

I am furious that the head of the dnc introduced legislation that benefits payday lenders to the detriment of all the work that Elizabeth Warren has done, and the poor people she is trying to serve. Thus, the head of the dnc, and those who do not immediately condemn this legislation, no longer meet my definition of left or liberal or democratic, and thus they have done nothing to EARN my vote.

That's the thing. I don't owe anyone my vote, they need to earn it. If Hillary wants my vote, she will need to disown DWS's legislation hard and fast.

That said, I live in Texas, so it's not like my vote counts anyway. But I did call the dnc and told them to take me off the donor call list as long as DWS is the party head. The party does fuckall for local democratic candidates anyway. They gave up on Texas decades ago.
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 8:18 PM on March 1 [31 favorites]


I don't think it's erasure so much as a comment that his message hasn't been effectively communicated across racial/ethnic boundaries, across generational divides, and has made limited traction across gender boundaries.

I think the biggest takeaway that I see from this is that progressives are going to need to brush up on their understanding of intersectionality and approach prospective voters not just from an economic justice perspective but from a broader social justice perspective that acknowledges differentials across racial, gender and generational divides.
posted by vuron at 8:19 PM on March 1 [17 favorites]


That's the thing. I don't owe anyone my vote, they need to earn it.

Are her policy positions more reflective of your ideals than those of Trump or any of the other possible opponents in our two party system? If so, she's earned your vote.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:21 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


I think the biggest takeaway that I see from this is that progressives are going to need to brush up on their understanding of intersectionality and approach prospective voters not just from an economic justice perspective but from a broader social justice perspective that acknowledges differentials across racial, gender and generational divides.

Out of favourites, so I'll just quote you and say: Yes, exactly, this.
posted by tobascodagama at 8:22 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


I actually wonder how much of a problem it is that most of Bernie's grassroots efforts were in the bernie subreddit. The rest of reddit is a cesspool of toxic misogyny and racism, so it's entirely possible that Bernie's supporters seem like they're all bros when in reality, people who aren't on reddit never saw the calls to action.
posted by zug at 8:25 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Are her policy positions more reflective of your ideals than those of Trump or any of the other possible opponents in our two party system? If so, she's earned your vote.

Not everyone lives in a swing state.
posted by dialetheia at 8:25 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


MSNBC just called Minnesota for Sanders.
posted by dialetheia at 8:26 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Carson is running as a financial scam. So he will never stop.

Right Now, What's the Difference Between Ben Carson and Marco Rubio?
What's the difference between these two guy right now? As far as can see, the only difference is that Carson is staying in the race so that the flow of small to medium-size checks from churchgoing heartlanders won't stop altogether, and Rubio is staying in the race so the flow of somewhat larger checks from Republican one-percenters won't dry up. They both like the money. They both like the attention. Carson's hoping to sell a million copies of a godly campaign memoir and Rubio's hoping to position himself for 2020. But it's still all about that grift.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:27 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


It's eleven 30 or so EST. If everything's on schedule, Scott Kelly just touched down after a year in space. So, I guess that's neat, at least.
posted by Trochanter at 8:27 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


shows how 1999 was peak employment,

"This is a simulation of the late 20th century, the peak of your culture..."
posted by The Whelk at 8:27 PM on March 1 [12 favorites]


General statement: given the disruptive nature of this election, and the high expectations (and we haven't even hit a national crisis yet), any candidate who is sworn in come January needs to put up or else be prepared to be primaried in 2020. Let's try to retain this spirit, regardless what happens.
posted by Apocryphon at 8:27 PM on March 1


I just want to confess/admit for the record that earlier on in this primary season, several times on the blue, I said that Christie was the least of evils among the GOP candidates (not precisely, but words to that effect). I thought he was someone who could at least put aside partisanship in the midst of a crisis to get shit done, and I thought that was important.

Then he started talking his crazy shit about not even letting in Syrian refugee orphans, and I lost it. So yeah, my "I was so horribly wrong" moment was pretty far back down this highway. Yet I want to take this moment to recognize that Holy Shit, I Was So Wrong.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 8:28 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


I think this is the first election where I'm starting to understand it when other people have said that they don't like following politics.
posted by FJT at 8:30 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Honestly, I'm really tired of this erasure of his female and PoC supporters. She won the majority of those groups (among mostly southern states) but that doesn't mean nobody else supported him. I've been increasingly offended by efforts to spin his support as mostly male, in particular.

Indeed. Completely anecdotal but my precinct caucuses had a surprising number of Somali women wearing Bernie Sanders stickers. Something tells me they're not Bernie Bros. Lots of Hmong voters as well, though the t-shirt and sticker exit polling was closer to 60/40 for Sanders.

And echoing Odinsdream, Triggerfinger and the other Minnesotans: Caucuses are a fucking mess. Mark an X on a piece of paper and shove it in an envelope. There isn't a log ensuring that there's one ballot per voter and, even if there was, we ran out of "official" ballots forcing us to write down our vote on scratch paper. Once that ordeal is over you can stick around while people read their rambling, ill-conceived platform resolutions to a room of people who don't even have a rudimentary understanding of parliamentary procedure or sense for that matter.

Oh and MSNBC just called MN for Bernie.
posted by nathan_teske at 8:30 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


Christie is from the McCain school of opportunistic decision making apparently. He's like a bully who lost out to a bigger bully and immediately pledged his fealty without considering his options.
posted by haveanicesummer at 8:30 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Not everyone lives in a swing state.

And not everyone who makes the "send a message / candidate needs to earn my vote" argument doesn't.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:31 PM on March 1


Props for the comment, scaryblackdeath. We've all been wrong at some point, not everyone faces up to it.
posted by benito.strauss at 8:32 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Haha yep, Christie has shown since last Friday that he has absolutely no moral fiber whatsoever. He's effectively destroyed as a politician now and deserves his fate as Trump's lapdog.

"Does Christie want a sausage? Beg, Christie, beg!"
posted by vuron at 8:32 PM on March 1


It looks like Sanders is winning or neck-and-neck in about half the states in play. That's considerably better than the narrative that I've been hearing in the last week or so had indicated. Good on him.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:32 PM on March 1 [17 favorites]


And not everyone who makes the "send a message / candidate needs to earn my vote" argument doesn't.

So maybe keep reading the rest of the comment, because the person you were responding to explicitly said that they didn't live in a swing state. More people live in safe states than swing states - maybe we could stop jumping down everyone's throats when they express the way they want to use their vote, which is none of our goddamned business.
posted by dialetheia at 8:33 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


I was wrong when I thought America was too good to make Trump the nominee of its conservative party. But this is just a way to say "I was wrong" and still feel smug about myself.
posted by dis_integration at 8:33 PM on March 1


I'm a little afraid that Trump seems to be far less of a warhawk than Hillary. This is a country that is utterly sick of wasting money on empire building abroad, and I think it's going to bite her in the ass in the general.
posted by zug at 8:33 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]



but it's hard to picture her beating Bernie here without a well-established machine

Because Bernie has such a well-established machine himself? What's your counterfactual here? Like sure, the chances of any one person making it as far as Hillary has in politics are astronomical, but if she had been Senator and a cabinet secretary but not first lady, do you think it's that hard to picture her winning


I simply meant based on their respective political positions. I would have expected Bernie to do better here on a "level playing field", meaning, without...well, a political "establishment" already on the side of his opponent. That's all.
posted by uosuaq at 8:35 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Caucuses are a fucking mess.

WA has a caucus. It's great for people like me who benefit from most or all of the societal privilege checklist (straight, white, male, etc), and who don't suffer from any sort of social anxiety, and are healthy enough to show up, and don't suffer from anything like social anxiety, and aren't targeted by any form of voter intimidation--be it nasty neighbors or an abusive domestic partner--and can make it to the caucus on that one specific time slot on one specific day. I mean if you can meet all those requirements, it's great.

Which amounts to it totally disenfranchising a shit ton of people. Oh, and it's arbitrary as hell, too.

...oh, hey look: I have an conflicting commitment of serious importance on Saturday March 26th at 10am. Like literally any weekend would be better than that one. Guess the caucus system doesn't work for me, either.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 8:37 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


CNN just called CO and MN for Sanders.
posted by Lyme Drop at 8:37 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]




Trump's just bringing Christie on stage as an intentional humiliation. He'd have Jeb up there looking ashamed too if he could. Like heads on pikes.
posted by ctmf at 8:38 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


So maybe keep reading the rest of the comment, because the person you were responding to explicitly said that they didn't live in a swing state.

Yes, I read that loud and clear. People can vote for whoever they like, but perpetuating the meme that candidates must do X or they don't deserve your vote has harmful consequences no matter where you live when you say it. There are a million reasons to stay home / vote for Mickey Mouse when you're dealing with a two party system, the corrupting influence of money, etc. I detest what DWS is doing with the loan shark legislation, but it doesn't give anyone moral justification for supporting the idea of only voting for the purest candidates.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:38 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Heh, the Grauniad is messed up right now. They've got a green check mark next to Bernie with him down by 2.2% in the numbers they're showing. Or maybe they know something they're not telling us yet...I'd be okay with that.
posted by uosuaq at 8:38 PM on March 1


NYT called MA for Bernie even tho he's down 3 points???
posted by ian1977 at 8:39 PM on March 1


Caucuses are a fucking mess. Mark an X on a piece of paper and shove it in an envelope.

Yes please.

I mean, it was sorta nice sitting and talking with fellow Democrats from my neighborhood (to the small extent that I was able to do so while helping keep my son occupied). And I learned that I live a few streets over from one of my county comissioners. But the process was a mess: loud, crowded, one person voted who wasn't in our precinct and we had to correct the vote, etc. The nature of a caucus also means that many, many people who could have participated in a vote-by-mail primary were unable to participate.
posted by audi alteram partem at 8:39 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


As a MA voter and Bernie it's depressing to feel so close and so far away. Same way I feel when we elect Scott Brown or Mitt Romney or Charlie Baker. Western Mass is truly a liberal bubble I must admit, I could barely find a Clinton supporter to talk to but clearly there are a lot of them.
posted by haveanicesummer at 8:39 PM on March 1


To be fair, I thought that Christie was supposed to be finished every since Bridgegate broke out all those news cycles ago? I mean, what else is he or Rick Perry or Huckabee supposed to do after they lose nominations.
posted by Apocryphon at 8:39 PM on March 1


NYT *and* the Guardian? Maybe some results just came in from one of the bigger precincts?
posted by uosuaq at 8:40 PM on March 1


http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results has Sanders winning Mass, but shows Clinton with 51% of the vote so far with 59% of precincts reporting. Interesting. (Or glitch. One site had my hometown down as having 200% of precincts reporting for a while there.)
posted by joeyh at 8:40 PM on March 1


CNN analyst Jeffrey Lord just called the KKK "a leftist terrorist group that killed to further the progressive agenda" - analyst Van Jones did not let that slide. Well worth 4:39 of your time.
posted by dnial at 8:40 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


I assume it's based on which precincts are still out.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 8:41 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Props for the comment, scaryblackdeath. We've all been wrong at some point, not everyone faces up to it.

I won't say I was for the Iraq war, 'cause I wasn't, but I had mixed feelings that led to resigned acceptance. I wrote to my Senators to say "don't vote for this bullshit," but at the same time, it's not like I was out protesting. I honestly believed that our media & "the system" would've sussed out the truth if it really was all bullshit, and I never felt like they did that until it was too late.

To a lot of folks, that would mean basically the same thing. And I'm willing to concede that and say I was wrong.

What bugs the living fuck out of me is how many other people were like me, or even more approving than I was, who can't admit it now. 'cause today you'd think that all those polls and all those voices raised in approval were as phony as the WMDs.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 8:41 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Now she is shown as winning again. Glitch i guess.
posted by ian1977 at 8:41 PM on March 1


Weird - my screen has Mass called for Hillary.
posted by zug at 8:42 PM on March 1


Uhh no they've given it to Clinton.

http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/massachusetts
posted by haveanicesummer at 8:42 PM on March 1


I'm a little afraid that Trump seems to be far less of a warhawk than Hillary.

Nobody knows what his real ideology is on anything, especially foreign policy, which he knows fuck all about. He can certainly campaign as less of a war hawk, but anyone who wants that asshole holding the nuclear football is too stupid to bother trying to campaign to. She'd do better improving her messaging on other issues than chasing the ghost of whatever foreign policy Trump is supporting this week.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:42 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Lindsey Graham: GOP may have to rally around Cruz to stop Trump

The thing about that is that 50% of people in a lot of Repub. exit polls say that they feel betrayed by the GOP. What better way to alienate those people than to back the candidate that a lot of them have expressed open hatred for? I really don't see a good strategy for them other than backing trump, like Christie.

I feel like that's a good thing, but I really can't enjoy the victory too much...
posted by codacorolla at 8:43 PM on March 1


NYT called MA for Bernie even tho he's down 3 points???

They called it for Clinton. They deleted the tweet that listed it as a Bernie win.
posted by melissasaurus at 8:43 PM on March 1


Guardian and NYT must be getting their numbers (and faulty projections) from the same place. Bastards.
posted by uosuaq at 8:43 PM on March 1


Anyway, I'm really heartened by how big Sanders' wins in Colorado, Minnesota, and even Oklahoma were tonight. I didn't expect him to win by such big margins there (and I would love to see some separate exit polls for those states if anyone has seen any, since lumping everything together with all those southern states totally washes out any geographic variability). I wish he could have pulled it out in Massachusetts but he kept it closer than most people expected, and I feel good about tonight. On pledged delegates, he's back a ways but I expected that with so many southern states front-loaded into the schedule. The primaries look better for him from here on out, for the most part, and I hope he continues to gain steam as he has throughout this process.
posted by dialetheia at 8:44 PM on March 1 [19 favorites]


Tumps's got absolutely zero experience with foreign policy. Who knows if he's a warhawk? What I do know is that he has terrible impulse control and no propensity for patience or considered, protocol-observant negotiation, which to me doesn't spell "dove."
posted by Miko at 8:44 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


CNN is all in on Trump.

CNN Host: "How did Trump become so popular? How did we get to this?"
CNN Co-Host: "That's an interesting question..."
Wolf Blitzer: "I'M SORRY TO DO THIS BUT WE HAVE BREAKING NEWS IN THE SITUATION ROOM"

::cuts to 38 minutes of uninterrupted feed of Trump's victory rally::
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:45 PM on March 1 [21 favorites]


I wish he could have pulled it out in Massachusetts

It was incredibly close, a squeaker - and just a couple of months ago, it was predicted to be a Hillary landslide. I'd count it among his victories in that sense.
posted by Miko at 8:45 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


I wasn't referencing a tweet. It was on their info graphic page. People on dailykos saw the same thing.
posted by ian1977 at 8:46 PM on March 1


Yeah I'm surprised how far Sanders got, considering. That's a big sign,
posted by The Whelk at 8:46 PM on March 1


CNN is all in on Trump.

CNN is just hot garbage, and has been for years and years.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:46 PM on March 1 [14 favorites]


I'm not going to disagree with anybody here, but I think it's pretty significant that he's positioning himself as a dove, and I think because he's such a "straight shooter" a lot of people are going to believe him. It's part of his anti-establishment appeal.
posted by zug at 8:47 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


It was incredibly close, a squeaker
Man, the difference in Worcester appears to only be about 500 votes. So close!
posted by TwoStride at 8:48 PM on March 1


FWIW, NPR said American Samoa went Clinton.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 8:49 PM on March 1


CNN analyst Jeffrey Lord just called the KKK "a leftist terrorist group that killed to further the progressive agenda"

Bless his pea-pickin' little heart. His momma must be so proud of how hard he tries.
posted by middleclasstool at 8:49 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Let's be honest here Republican leaders wouldn't be running this far away from Trump unless they have internal polling that shows that Trump is absolutely toxic to their brand. Keep in mind this is the party of Saint Reagan where the party cannot fail it can only be failed by lesser mortals.

These aren't the back benchers either these are the most connected members of the Republican caucus that are either hearing from pollster/strategists that they are looking at losing the Senate (hell maybe even the house) or their corporate donors who are saying "shut it down now" or both and they are looking desperately for a hail mary pass.

They have to move swiftly and decisively now to prevent Trump from meeting the minimum threshhold of delegates because they don't have a superdelegate system to prevent this sort of shit from happening. You can basically guarantee that Preibus is going to be told to deliver a superdelegate system before 2020 though (that is assuming he doesn't get sacked for this monumental fuckup).
posted by vuron at 8:50 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


CNN analyst Jeffrey Lord just called the KKK "a leftist terrorist group that killed to further the progressive agenda"

I just watched that. My jaw is... That's a nutbar statement. Shoved into the conversation like I don't know what. Like there was an agenda to say that.

This guy works there full time? WTF?
posted by Trochanter at 8:51 PM on March 1 [16 favorites]


I'm not going to disagree with anybody here, but I think it's pretty significant that he's positioning himself as a dove, and I think because he's such a "straight shooter" a lot of people are going to believe him. It's part of his anti-establishment appeal.

Yeah, he hammers the "I was against Iraq" and "we aren't the world's police" stuff pretty hard (though it doesn't really even seem to be true about Iraq, and those comments are interspersed with commentary about bombing the hell out of ISIS, so....). It will be interesting to see him and Clinton argue about regime change and intervention re: Libya in the debates, though, assuming they are the nominees. I'm not sure I can handle the Democratic candidate being on the defensive and holding the bag for the Iraq war though - it makes me feel kind of ill just thinking about it.
posted by dialetheia at 8:51 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


She'd do better improving her messaging on other issues than chasing the ghost of whatever foreign policy Trump is supporting this week.

No, she'd do better by regretting her hawkish actions in the past, pledging to seek path for international peace, and repudiating neocon endorsements like they're from the Klan.
posted by Apocryphon at 8:52 PM on March 1 [13 favorites]


the difference in Worcester appears to only be about 500 votes

There's a meme going around about Methuen - about 6500 votes were cast there - and the count tonight differed by ONE vote.

Vuron, I think you are right; there has been a party decision. The turn in the positioning from R guests on talk shows yesterday was palpable - someone had said "finish him," and all hell broke loose.
posted by Miko at 8:52 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Jeffrey Lord is a fucking racist.
posted by Lyme Drop at 8:52 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


How is Trump going to square a "dove" stance with his carpet bombing comments? Just Trump gon' Trunp and keep talking?
posted by strange chain at 8:54 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Jim Gilmore won in Chelsea, Mass with 366 votes, so there's that.
posted by joeyh at 8:54 PM on March 1


CNN doesn't mind having a few racists opining their bullshit as long as they have two Ds and two Rs sitting at the table. Because that's "balanced coverage" in their world.
posted by downtohisturtles at 8:54 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


>I'm not sure I can handle the Democratic candidate being on the defensive and holding the bag for the Iraq war though - it makes me feel kind of ill just thinking about it.

Maybe that's the smartest way for Clinton to fight back, actually, to argue that it was overwhelmingly a republican fuckup and that GWB should be holding the bag, not her. It's not all that convincing, though. I don't actually know what she's going to do about that. That vote has already bitten her in the ass once, I will be 0% surprised if it bites her again.

I still have a faint hope that Sanders can pull this out somehow. "Somehow" probably involves a scandal sticking to Hillary or a big shifts in the votes of PoC. Bernie is really behind in the name recognition, which means that there is hope, that if he can really get his message out there he has more than zero shot. But, I admit, it's a long one.
posted by zug at 8:55 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Actually, the CNN clip I linked starts too late, watch this one (youtube)
posted by dnial at 8:56 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


How is Trump going to square a "dove" stance with his carpet bombing comments? Just Trump gon' Trunp and keep talking?

I mean, probably that! No doubt that none of his crap is coherent. But he could pretty easily make some distinction between "taking out the bad dudes" like ISIS vs. wholesale regime change and 70-year presences, like Clinton was talking about in Libya at the last town hall.
posted by dialetheia at 8:56 PM on March 1


CNN analyst Jeffrey Lord just called the KKK "a leftist terrorist group that killed to further the progressive agenda"

Holy shit I noped out of that faster than Trump's hair in a tornado. Why does cable news put these argue fests on the air so often? I can barely stand KCRW's Left Right and Center. These people are just yelling at each other. If you want to know what made Trump possible, the blame lies squarely with the monster Ted Turner created.
posted by dis_integration at 8:57 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


The Jim Gilmore thing was a frameshift error.
posted by zug at 8:57 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


People who are watching this all from the p.o.v. of wrestling kayfabe: is there a wrestling-world plot logic that leads to Trump's downfall? Like, what events would the script contain or what emotional/character beats, to lead to the crowd turning on him?
posted by LobsterMitten at 8:57 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Maybe that's the smartest way for Clinton to fight back, actually, to argue that it was overwhelmingly a republican fuckup and that GWB should be holding the bag, not her. It's not all that convincing, though. I don't actually know what she's going to do about that.

Yeah - I think if she does that, he'll pivot to Libya, unfortunately.
posted by dialetheia at 8:57 PM on March 1


ISIS:Libya/Syria :: al-Qaeda:Iraq, to some degree
posted by Apocryphon at 8:59 PM on March 1


lazyweb: has Trump ever held an elected office? (Or any other position where you can't declare bankruptcy and get a do-over)
posted by strange chain at 9:01 PM on March 1


Trump has a hard time being consistent even within the reference point of a single speech. He can't be expected to be consistent from day to day because he's the Donald and he's too busy for that.

The reality is now Republican party elites are in full on panic mode because their handpicked candidate Ruboto cannot close the deal and they are being forced to choose between the asshole they don't like who will lose them the general election by a landslide and the coworker who they'd rather see dead but who is less of a shitshow in the general election.

But desperate times call for desperate measures. I'm just waiting to see how they Willie Horton Trump. Illegitimate child used to be a good stunt but I figure they need something even more visceral.
posted by vuron at 9:02 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


People who are watching this all from the p.o.v. of wrestling kayfabe: is there a wrestling-world plot logic that leads to Trump's downfall? Like, what events would the script contain or what emotional/character beats, to lead to the crowd turning on him?

After Trump announces his intention to drive a steamroller over a box filled with adorable kittens, Chris Christie rips off his mask to reveal that he's really been Terry Crews in disguise all along, grabs a chair and leaps into the ring....
posted by zarq at 9:03 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


The NYT just did a great two-part series on our involvement in Libya, in case anyone missed it:
Part 1: Hillary Clinton, ‘Smart Power’ and a Dictator’s Fall: "The president was wary. The secretary of state was persuasive. But the ouster of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi left Libya a failed state and a terrorist haven."
Part 2: A new Libya with very little time left: "The fall of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi seemed to vindicate Hillary Clinton. Then militias refused to disarm, neighbors fanned a civil war, and the Islamic State found refuge."
posted by dialetheia at 9:04 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


what events would the script contain or what emotional/character beats

What if he started saying vile things about a beloved media personality on the Republican party's cable news channel?

oh wait
posted by tonycpsu at 9:05 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I actually think Cruz is the worst shitshow for them in the general potentially, if Trump manages roughly on the same path as now. I still think he loses but I think Cruz loses worse, but I don't think Cruz would take the Republican party down with him. Trump just might.
posted by haveanicesummer at 9:05 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


After listening to his speech tonight, I was reminded of how much I fear Cruz. Trump's a buffoon, but Cruz is a True Believer fanatic cut from a Handmaid's Tale cloth.
posted by Windigo at 9:06 PM on March 1 [32 favorites]


Gotta love that election results are being reported via error-prone copy-n-paste in spreadsheets. Then too, probably the paste goes via a server that hasn't been updated with the openssl security fixes that had their release helpfully scheduled for this morning.
posted by joeyh at 9:06 PM on March 1


Trump publically ridiculing St Reagan during an episode of SNL ala Sinead O'Connor ripping up a picture of JPII would be an excellent heel turn, you know or ripping off his skin and outing himself as a reptilian.
posted by vuron at 9:08 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Ted 'Grease Lizard' Cruz gets massacred in the general by either Sanders or Clinton, no question, I'd say. Donny (Shut the fuck up, Donny)... I'm still not sure. Not sure at all.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:08 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Yesterday I watched Better Call Saul. It was so much better than this, reality TV sucks.
posted by Drinky Die at 9:10 PM on March 1 [10 favorites]


People have been saying in this thread and others that Carson's campaign is just some kind of finance scam. And it makes sense, just look at his numbers. He's raised, and "spent", an absurd amount of money for someone who is basically competing with Vermin Supreme for votes at this point. What's his scam exactly? And how is it legal, if it's a scam?
posted by dis_integration at 9:13 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


honestly bernie staying in it is good for hillary if she comes out on top. if we keep fighting among ourselves the gop will keep fighting their own weird battles, bernie will make her keep answering to liberal issues, it'll show she can win a hard fought contest and isn't just waiting on the coronation. and if he wins? well, i'm for that as well.

I feel pretty similarly. I definitely am glad that Bernie is giving Hillary a run for her money. I think it's made her a better candidate, and if he succeeds in pushing her to the left on some issues, all the better.

Personally, on most issues I feel like I'm much more aligned with Bernie than the more centrist views that Hillary espouses. But I also feel like all that's really going to be accomplished in the next four years by other Bernie or Hillary is just to get a Justice on the Supreme Court, and then try to maintain the status quo. Unless things really work out in the Dems favor in November when it comes to the House and Senate elections, I doubt the next president will be able to get much of anything else done.

I mean, I would love love love to have single payer health insurance, but that's not going to happen in the next four years, lbr.

The Dems really need to focus on building up their liberal base from the ground up. That's really the only way we're going to be able to get much of anything accomplished on the national level.
posted by litera scripta manet at 9:14 PM on March 1 [7 favorites]


Dank meme from Matt Oswalt.

I keep thinking about "Falling Down" too.
posted by Trochanter at 9:14 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Yeah Ted Cruz gets destroyed in the General Election but he doesn't take down the party (because he believes all of that shit) and who knows he might even win over some Latinos.

I think the Republicans are willing to tolerate a loss in 2016 at this point as long as they still have the Senate because then they can continue to filibuster like crazy.

Hell they might even just being willing to permanently keep the SCOTUS at 8 members because they are megadicks.

Trumo scares them because not only is he a wildcard but he's fucking up all the rebranding efforts they've been trying out.
posted by vuron at 9:15 PM on March 1


I think Trump looks like he's doing better than his overall support would be. He has been burning bridges with demographic groups left and right, and something's gotta give there. Trump will be unacceptable to a larger number of people than maybe anyone else out there. I think that'll sink him and the fact that he's trying for a coalition no one has tried before makes it hard to predict but doubly difficult for him to win.

Of course I also said he couldn't win the Republican Primary and bet as such on Predictit....
posted by haveanicesummer at 9:15 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


What's his scam exactly?

Ask Sarah Palin.

And how is it legal, if it's a scam?

Because there's no "you must be campaigning in good faith to accept peoples' money" clause in the FEC's rules.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:15 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


People who are watching this all from the p.o.v. of wrestling kayfabe: is there a wrestling-world plot logic that leads to Trump's downfall? Like, what events would the script contain or what emotional/character beats, to lead to the crowd turning on him?

No no, not downfall, the trope you're looking for is "heel-face-turn."

For example, the Rock was once a heel, and became a face. So perhaps that is Trump's destiny.

Remember, "babyface" does not mean "Trump Jr."
posted by My Dad at 9:16 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


...unless Trump is currently a face...
posted by My Dad at 9:17 PM on March 1


And how is it legal, if it's a scam?

Same might be asked of Citizens United.
posted by Celsius1414 at 9:17 PM on March 1


Trump is going undergo a miraculous transformation into a centrist technocrat; he'll try to out-Hilary Hilary, and be like, 'oh all that racist stuff I said, that demagoguery and warmongering? Pfft, I didn't mean any of that, I was just doing what I had to do to win the nomination, come on, you guys knew that.'
posted by Flashman at 9:18 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Because there's no "you must be campaigning in good faith to accept peoples' money" clause in the FEC's rules.

Well, but I'm pretty sure there's a clause in there somewhere that says you can't just make out checks to yourself from the the campaign coffers. How does he benefit if he's just blowing it all on TV and internet ads?
posted by dis_integration at 9:18 PM on March 1


Gosh, this thread moves fast! Been skimming my way as quickly as I can.

I still have a faint hope that Sanders can pull this out somehow.

I know I'm slightly shifting your meaning, but he has already pulled this out in some important ways. Tonight has gone about as well as Sanders could have expected; even better, imo.

Forgive me if this has already been mentioned and I just missed it, but the most important reason for Sanders going to the convention is because of the development of the party platform. Not as important nowadays as it used to be, but still, hashing out the planks is a pretty important element of a national campaign. The more Sanders delegates there are, the more leverage there will be to insert some important ideas into the platform. People say Sanders is doing good by forcing Clinton to the left and the best way to hold her feet to the fire is to make some of the Sanders' campaign ideas into actual party platform planks.

So, despite the earlier claim that a Sanders-to-the-convention strategy is un-American, it is, on the contrary, quite American. Citizens gonna citizen and all that jazz... .
posted by CincyBlues at 9:19 PM on March 1 [22 favorites]


Some polling I've seen shows Cruz doing worse than Romney with latinos, which if true, is just delicious and a sign that this inability of theirs to not attack immigrants is going to have generational consequences for their ability to win elections.
posted by haveanicesummer at 9:19 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Also trying to decide which Republican candidate would be preferable for President is basically like deciding which whether you'd like to cut off your arm or your leg, but I still would take Trump over Cruz and probably over Rubio too. I think Trump is a terrible person and a racist and a misogynist and all that shit, but I don't think he's actually going to build a fucking wall, and I honestly feel like Cruz or Rubio would be far more likely to get us into another shitty war. Not to mention the fact that I think Rubio or Cruz would be motivated to dismantle Obamacare and do everything in their power to take away women's rights.

So yeah, any of these Republican candidates would basically be a nightmare, but I'd probably choose the Trump nightmare over the Cruz or Rubio nightmare. And with a little luck Trump's victory would cause the Republican party to completely implode, so there's always that.

But PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF EVERYTHING do not let a Republican win in November. Eight years of Bush was bad enough. i can't take this shit again.
posted by litera scripta manet at 9:19 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


Well, but I'm pretty sure there's a clause in there somewhere that says you can't just make out checks to yourself from the the campaign coffers. How does he benefit if he's just blowing it all on TV and internet ads?

I think the scam is by the people running the campaign, who happen to also have an ownership interest in the TV and internet ad creators.
posted by melissasaurus at 9:20 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


'oh all that racist stuff I said, that demagoguery and warmongering? Pfft, I didn't mean any of that, I was just doing what I had to do to win the nomination, come on, you guys knew that.'

Of course. Hell, he just did in in the last few days! Disavow Duke/KKK endorsement, then just before the south votes weasel out of disavowing, then as soon as the vote is over, disavow again. It's transparent and craven, but goddamn if it doesn't seem to be working.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:22 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


He's raised, and "spent", an absurd amount of money for someone who is basically competing with Vermin Supreme for votes at this point. What's his scam exactly? And how is it legal, if it's a scam?

Two possibilities. Carson's staying in the race because it's effectively free publicity for his books and future speaking gigs -- he can run ads saying "Ben Carson sure is swell, people say he has amazing hands, etc." without spending a dime of his own money. Second is that a lot of the direct mail vendors Carson uses are run by large Carson fundraisers. It's basically legalized graft where the fundraisers are keeping the campaign going just to rack up millions in direct mail contracts.
posted by nathan_teske at 9:24 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


I think the reality is that there really doesn't seem to be a great deal of animosity between the Clinton camp and the Sanders camp at the high levels. Down in the trenches it's a different story of course but I think at a high level there is a general acknowledgement that no matter what Trump must be stopped and I think Clinton and Sanders will team up like Super Saiyans fighting Freiza rather than waste energy and resources fighting each other.

I'd be shocked if both of them don't start using their campaign cash in a more or less concerted effort to weaken Trump. At a minimum the Clinton Super PACs are going to be charging their Lazers.
posted by vuron at 9:25 PM on March 1 [9 favorites]


Hell they might even just being willing to permanently keep the SCOTUS at 8 members because they are megadicks.

Quorum for the US Supreme Court is six judges. They could conceivably keep the court shorthanded for years, even if a couple more justices die, especially if the right justices die...
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 9:27 PM on March 1


I can't remember who described him as a "stupid man's idea of what a rich man is like,"

I like to watch the real estate listings for super expensive housing. Trump is not significantly different in tastes from other rich people who live in mansions.
posted by srboisvert at 9:28 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Obama could recess appoint if it got that bad though right?
posted by haveanicesummer at 9:32 PM on March 1


Well, but I'm pretty sure there's a clause in there somewhere that says you can't just make out checks to yourself from the the campaign coffers. How does he benefit if he's just blowing it all on TV and internet ads?

His speaking fees will be higher, and he'll also have a lot of people in his campaign apparatus that owe him favors for letting them be in on the grift, travel around the country, put some things on their resume. Even if you assume he's not benefiting right now and that there's no quid-pro-quo where they reward him financially later, it's impossible to set the system up such that someone who has millions of dollars flowing through them isn't enriched in some way by that power.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:32 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I think Clinton and Sanders will team up like Super Saiyans fighting Freiza rather than waste energy and resources fighting each other.

Clinton/Sanders 2016.
(or Sanders/Clinton 2016. I'm not picky.)
posted by zarq at 9:33 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Obama could recess appoint if it got that bad though right?

If the Senate ever went into recess. They have parliamentary tricks to prevent that.
posted by Justinian at 9:34 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


To be fair, recess appointments are a "trick" too. Congress is supposed to get the chance to give its advice and consent, but it's also supposed to made up of adults and not toddlers so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
posted by tonycpsu at 9:37 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


vuron: Let's be honest here Republican leaders wouldn't be running this far away from Trump unless they have internal polling that shows that Trump is absolutely toxic to their brand.

I hope so, because otherwise I'm expecting a sea-change real soon now as they get behind him. After all, he loves rich people and thinks the laws should be written to benefit them, which is all the Republican moneymen care about. And he offers subaltern people to kick and blame for everything, which all the Republican 'base' cares about. He's really the perfect candidate for them.
posted by tavella at 9:41 PM on March 1


It's not like Carson's the only one running a grift. All those campaign donations have to go somewhere -- why not straight back into Trump Inc?
Between June 16, when he announced his candidacy from the lobby of Trump Tower, through the end of 2015, the Trump campaign spent $2.2 million patronizing Trump businesses.

The majority—$2 million—was spent on Tag Air Inc., where Trump is CEO.

Trump owns a commercial-sized plane, a Boeing 757-200, which is equipped to safely transport 43 passengers in seat belts plated with 24-carat gold—although they might prefer to sit in the dining room, one of two bedrooms, or in the shower, (or they might prefer to travel in his smaller jet or one of his two helicopters).

His aircraft ferry him around the country, from New York to Des Moines to Manchester to Biloxi, at a steep cost.
The bill paid by the campaign on June 16 alone—the day of his formal announcement—was $506,846.

[...]

And paid $90,000 in in-kind rent to Donald J. Trump, Trump CPS LLC, and Trump Plaza LLC.

Rent and utilities were also doled out—to the tune of nearly $74,000—to Trump Restaurants LLC and Trump Tower Commercial LLC.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:43 PM on March 1 [18 favorites]


I too am one of those who suspects that Trump may end up running to the left of Hillary on a number of dimensions. This isn't about what he believes or what he has said in the past, but about what he will say in the next 6 months. He is already to her left on campaign finance, and may end up to her left on military interventions and her general Kissingerian real-politick. And many of his populist positions -- the identification of the problems, not the solutions he proposes -- are also to her left, eg arguing that unemployment is larger than it looks (a traditional left-populist view), or that many people are silently suffering under the costs and complications of health insurance and Obamacare. He might even have ended up to her left on TPP or social security, if she hadn't been forced to disavow TPP and "saving" social security in the last few months.

Of course, his solutions to these problems are right-wing, but in many ways the identification of the problems and the proposed solutions are separate dimensions: people respond as much, if not more, to hearing their suffering affirmed, as they do to specific policy solutions -- and those affirmations of the problem can be very leftish. In some ways, we may be seeing conservatism redefined, with HRC becoming the standard-bearer of the status quo (or mild gradualism), vs the populism of the other side. And that populism isn't always to her right, and I imagine there are other ways it may end up to her left as things progress. A center/right populist free from both the evangelical and establishment shibboleths may be a very powerful thing.

Sleep tight!
posted by chortly at 9:47 PM on March 1 [15 favorites]


the guy who very recently suggested targeting the families of terrorists. I don't love Hillary's connection with Kissinger either either, but the answer to your actual question isn't hard.


Well, Spetsnaz:

"Six years later, in October 1985, Alpha Group was dispatched to war-torn Beirut, Lebanon. The Kremlin was informed of the kidnapping of four Soviet diplomats by the militant group, the Islamic Liberation Organization (a radical offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood). It was believed that this was retaliation for the Soviet support of Syrian involvement in the Lebanese Civil War.[19] However, by the time Alpha arrived, one of the hostages had already been killed. Through a network of supporting KGB operatives, members of the task-force identified each of the perpetrators involved in the crisis, and once identified, began to take the relatives of these militants as hostages. Following the standard Soviet policy of no negotiations with terrorists, one the hostages taken by Alpha Group had his testicles removed and sent to the militants before being murdered. The warning was clear: more would follow unless the remaining hostages were released immediately.[20] The show of force worked, and for a period of 20 years no Soviet or Russian officials were taken captive, until the 2006 abduction and murder of four Russian embassy staff in Iraq."
posted by yoyo_nyc at 9:47 PM on March 1


Oh yeah Trump is totally running a grift. He's self-financing by giving his campaign a loan which he can use donations to pay back (until the convention). He's largely been lucky because the media is basically giving him free exposure and he's one of those guys that thinks that there is no such thing as bad publicity.

The very fact that he's the leading Republican candidate but he's trying to do things on the cheap make me extremely suspicious.
posted by vuron at 9:48 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


ricochet biscuit: "See, I read HST as Harry S Truman and I was wondering how we could try to map late-1940s politics onto the current situation. "

Well, Truman could be a pretty salty guy, and he had a low tolerance for assholes, so it could be pretty juicy actually.
posted by Chrysostom at 9:57 PM on March 1 [3 favorites]


"I too am one of those who suspects that Trump may end up running to the left of Hillary on a number of dimensions. "

As long as Sanders is in the running, he's a guard on that left flank. I think his halo effect on the party is underrated. The longer we go without Hillary clinching the nomination, the better for her (or the eventual D nominee) in the general.
posted by klarck at 10:00 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


This isn't about what he believes or what he has said in the past, but about what he will say in the next 6 months.

Yes, I think he'll attempt to pivot on certain issues (infrastructure spending, health care, taxes, campaign finance), but I would be surprised if his stance on climate change, immigration, refugees, abortion, policing, and guns isn't remembered at all. And none of those are left wing in any way.
posted by FJT at 10:05 PM on March 1


Ben Carson actually won a precinct (in Alaska).
posted by melissasaurus at 10:05 PM on March 1


tonycpsu: "recess appointments are a "trick" too. Congress is supposed to get the chance to give its advice and consent, but it's also supposed to made up of adults and not toddlers so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯"

Supreme Court recess appointments are a trick that Washington pulled, so at the very least they've got long precedent. But they are of limited value, because "advise and consent" doesn't go away for Supreme Court nominees; it just gets postponed. Obama could nominate during the one time when there actually is a recess anymore (that is, between congresses) but it would only last until the next congress sat down and got around to holding hearings on the nominee.

So basically recess appointments of Supreme Court justices have never been spectacularly strategic. The only purpose is to fill the court when it's empty and congress isn't around. Otherwise, you're just going to piss them off, and they won't confirm your nominee anyway - which is incidentally what happened to Washington, too.
posted by koeselitz at 10:06 PM on March 1


Maybe I've got my head in the sand but I just don't see Trump as the electoral savant so many other people do. He is trying to thread an electoral gauntlet and the longer he has to actually maintain his schtick the harder it is to balance this insanely incoherent set of arguments he's trotting out. I know the Trump true believers have bought that their line is supposed to be "He's just saying what everyone's thinking!" If the Democratic party can't successfully paint Trump as the racist liar we all see than they've just failed miserably.
posted by haveanicesummer at 10:09 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


It certainly would be great if Obama sat someone on the court and then when congress came back they pretended that person didn't exist.
posted by haveanicesummer at 10:10 PM on March 1


Are we absolutely certain that Trump isn't really Andy Kaufman in disguise?
posted by Jonathan Livengood at 10:34 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Ever since I watched Idiocracy, I became fascinated by the idea of using Mountain Dew for plant production. I strongly feel a Trump presidency is our best attempt in years to get closer to a true Idiocracy.

Here's the Dark Movie Donald Trump's Campaign Most Resembles​. It's no longer a comedy.
posted by homunculus at 10:38 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Y'know, that "he's going to rip his mask off any minute" joke has gotten pretty damn old.
posted by We had a deal, Kyle at 10:39 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


I think this blog post overemphasizes class and also seriously downplays the importance of race (and racism) but it also has this insight into Trump's appeal that I haven't seen anywhere else that makes so much sense:
The man is brilliant. I mean that without the smallest trace of mockery. He’s figured out that the most effective way to get the wage class to rally to his banner is to get himself attacked, with the usual sort of shrill mockery, by the salary class. The man’s worth several billion dollars—do you really think he can’t afford to get the kind of hairstyle that the salary class finds acceptable? Of course he can; he’s deliberately chosen otherwise, because he knows that every time some privileged buffoon in the media or on the internet trots out another round of insults directed at his failure to conform to salary class ideas of fashion, another hundred thousand wage class voters recall the endless sneering putdowns they’ve experienced from the salary class and think, “Trump’s one of us.”

The identical logic governs his deliberate flouting of the current rules of acceptable political discourse. Have you noticed that every time Trump says something that sends the pundits into a swivet, and the media starts trying to convince itself and its listeners that this time he’s gone too far and his campaign will surely collapse in humiliation, his poll numbers go up? What he’s saying is exactly the sort of thing that you’ll hear people say in working class taverns and bowling alleys when subjects such as illegal immigration and Muslim jihadi terrorism come up for discussion. The shrieks of the media simply confirm, in the minds of the wage class voters to whom his appeal is aimed, that he’s one of them, an ordinary Joe with sensible ideas who’s being dissed by the suits.

Notice also how many of Trump’s unacceptable-to-the-pundits comments have focused with laser precision on the issue of immigration. That’s a well-chosen opening wedge, as cutting off illegal immigration is something that the GOP has claimed to support for a while now. As Trump broadens his lead, in turn, he’s started to talk about the other side of the equation—the offshoring of jobs—as his recent jab at Apple’s overseas sweatshops shows. The mainstream media’s response to that jab does a fine job of proving the case argued above: “If smartphones were made in the US, we’d have to pay more for them!” And of course that’s true: the salary class will have to pay more for its toys if the wage class is going to have decent jobs that pay enough to support a family. That this is unthinkable for so many people in the salary class—that they’re perfectly happy allowing their electronics to be made for starvation wages in an assortment of overseas hellholes, so long as this keeps the price down—may help explain the boiling cauldron of resentment into which Trump is so efficiently tapping.
posted by overglow at 10:49 PM on March 1 [19 favorites]


How is a campaign a grift ?

Campaigns employ people such as a Marketing Director. The Director draws a salary and contracts for printing and polling with their friends. Marketing results in a database of marks who will contribute more later or buy books. Money is also spent on consultants, lawyers, and web developers who are friends and relatives who owe their fortune to the candidate. If the candidate is suspending a paying gig in order to campaign, then the candidate can draw a salary equal to what their paying gig was. If the candidate travels for political purposes, the campaign pays for travel, food, and lodging at whatever level of luxury the candidate deems necessary. Care for a vacation in Miami ?

There are campaign finance rules. These are overseen by the Federal Elections Commission. The Commission is composed of three Democrats and three Republicans. There is never a majority vote to take action. The rules are loose enough that the IRS considers Karl Rove's Crossroads organization to be a public service, not a political, organization. Christine, I am not a witch, O'Donnell did get in trouble for campaign spending. Her campaign was paying for the rent of her campaign offices but that address turned out to be the same as her home address. A rookie mistake. If she had a decent campaign lawyer, a property management company and a PO Box would have been inserted between her office and her home.

Sarah Palin still draws in about 800,000 dollars a year. After endorsing Trump, her marketing requested donations so she could continue her good work.
posted by llc at 10:56 PM on March 1 [6 favorites]


Trump's Insurgency

Trump is trouncing the competition. He's doing so well that the prediction systems give him a 81% chance of winning the nomination -- despite the opposition of the entire Republican establishment.

What's most surprising to many pundits and analysts is that Trump has done this without presenting all of the detail plans, voluminous position papers, etc. that we've come to expect over the last couple of decades.

He has simply refused to play by those rules, and he's not paid a price for it.

Trump is able to pull this off because he's not running a political campaign. Instead, he's running an insurgency.
...



posted by yertledaturtle at 11:05 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Billmon deleted his twitter account today.
posted by Auden at 11:10 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Billmon deleted his twitter account today.

Noooooo! I really loved his commentary. Does he write anywhere else?
posted by dialetheia at 11:14 PM on March 1


dialetheia he writes here:

Moon Of Alabama

This was his last message on twitter:
So, I'm signing off now. I don't particularly want to live tweet what's comes next. Good luck, everybody.
posted by yertledaturtle at 11:20 PM on March 1 [2 favorites]


Articles like that feed the narrative that he's a genius. I don't think it's true. Or if it is true he's a genius with gigantic glaring flaws. One that may win the battle of the Republican nomination but doesn't speak to the war. Trump's inability to not juvenilely respond when his looks are criticized or other personal attacks is not some genius chessmaster outthinking his opponents. He just goes with his gut and tells everyone he's perfect and they are shit. This sort of pointless bravado appeals to many, but turns off others. Trump's genius messaging might work with a subset of voters but we literally have no evidence it will work with a broader base, and the leaping on the side of some liberal publications to decide he's a genius because he can convince a bunch of racists and rubes to vote for the loudest, most famous, most racist guy around. Liberals should view Trump as the biggest opportunity we've had in generations.

We get to have these conversations out in the open, and we have the winning and more American argument. We normally have to pretend the Republican isn't racist because calling them racist would go beyond the bounds of political decency. With Trump, we don't have that problem.
posted by haveanicesummer at 11:21 PM on March 1 [4 favorites]


Re November elections, if Hillary doesn't come out strong against the bill DWS just let the payday lenders buy from her, then I am officially done with the national party.

"Abusive payday lenders take advantage of families trying to get ahead. Glad to see @BarackObama & @CFPB take a stand." - Hillary Clinton, 27 Mar 2015 (via)

I hope Clinton responds to DWS's bullshit now.
posted by homunculus at 11:23 PM on March 1 [11 favorites]


How is a campaign a grift ?

A campaign is not by definition a grift. Some campaigns, however, quite clearly are.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:24 PM on March 1


Articles like that feed the narrative that he's a genius. I don't think it's true.

I don't think they feed that narrative. I think they describe what is happening.
posted by yertledaturtle at 11:26 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


FASCISM ISN’T FUNNY


On Sunday, the staff of the gossip website Gawker were extremely pleased with themselves. After months of trying, they finally managed to get
Donald Trump’s Twitter account to post a quote from Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini. They accomplished this by setting a robo-account to barrage Trump with Mussolini quotes, in the hopes that eventually he would pick one up and send it out to his followers. He did. This scandalous “event” was then covered in The New York Times, New York Magazine, The Washington Post, TIME, and the BBC. Some were swift to see Trump’s posting of the quote as confirmation of the oft-cited allegation that Trump is a fascist, while Gawker said it confirmed their theory that Trump was an “idiot” who would “retweet just about anything.”

Isolated from its context, the quote in question appears completely innocuous: “It is better to live one day as a lion than 100 years as a sheep.” If you didn’t know it was from Mussolini, you might expect it to be the epigraph to a business book, or simply one of the thousands of anonymous platitudes that percolate incessantly across the culture. The advice itself seems sound, if not terribly helpful; after all, few people would consciously aspire toward a lifetime of sheepdom. It also hardly seems much different in its general flavor from “it is better to die on one’s feet than live on one’s knees,” a maxim associated with both Che Guevara and Mexican revolutionary Emiliano Zapata. At the very least, this sort of sentiment is hardly confined to one particular political faction.

The question about Trump and the Mussolini quote, then, is: what does it prove? Is it news? And what is the use of pulling this sort of glib micro-stunt? The first two questions can be confidently answered with a resounding “nothing” and “no,” respectively. As to the third, it’s very likely that, far from successfully undermining or humiliating Donald Trump, tactics like these enable him to grow even stronger. Those with liberal political sympathies (like the staff of Gawker), who profess to fear a Trump presidency and think him akin to an actual fascist, may want to consider whether this sort of mischief is useful or simply childish. And if it is childish and useless, as one may suspect it is, one may wonder why people on the left are spending their time taunting Trump on Twitter rather than trying to stop the danger they believe he poses to the country. ...


Rest of the article at the link.
posted by yertledaturtle at 11:35 PM on March 1 [5 favorites]


Trump voters don't know what Gawker is and probably not a Mussolini either for many of them. This meme that mocking Trump helps him is just baseless. Effective characterizations have worked to damage Sarah Palin in the past. No reason Trump is permanently immune to it.
posted by haveanicesummer at 11:43 PM on March 1 [1 favorite]


Trump voters don't know what Gawker is and probably not a Mussolini either for many of them. This meme that mocking Trump helps him is just baseless. Effective characterizations have worked to damage Sarah Palin in the past. No reason Trump is permanently immune to it.

What evidence do you have that Trump Voters do not know what Gawker is? Regardless, that was not the point of the article.

Also - Trump is a symbol. Trump is - for a fairly large portion of our fellow citizens a tabula rosa.
It does not matter what you say about him to the people that support him they project whatever they want on to him.

His movement is large and growing - snarky jokes while they may be fun are not turning people away from Trump like they did Sara. Feel free to go ahead and make snarky memes and ridiculous characterizations while Trump and his supporters arm up, (There are 100,000 armed militia members now), and prepare to take the levers of power.

To me, this is very scary not funny.
posted by yertledaturtle at 12:01 AM on March 2


CNN has exit polls by state here. I wish they had caucus entrance polls too, but it looks like it's just the primary states. Are Minnesota and Colorado included in the grouped polls from 538? It sure seems like nobody has entrance polls for the caucuses, and if those weren't included, that would probably change some of the overall results that are being reported for today. Seems a little misleading to report overall results that leave both of his big win states out, but caucuses are tough.

I glanced at some of the results, and the ideology categories are interesting. In the states where he did well like OK and MA, there's a pattern where he wins the most liberal and the most conservative, but loses the centrists (he won them all in VT). In Oklahoma, he won liberals and conservatives, but lost moderates. In Massachusetts, he won the very liberal, lost the somewhat liberal, and won the moderates, with not enough conservatives to say; when those subcategories are combined, Clinton won liberals and Sanders won moderates/conservatives.

The only other thing that really jumped out at me was how affluent the MA electorate was - 37% of Democratic voters made more than $100k!
posted by dialetheia at 12:02 AM on March 2 [3 favorites]


How is a campaign a grift ?

First class travel and accommodations "at the expense of the Campaign" sounds pretty sweet to me. Where can I sign up?
posted by mikelieman at 12:02 AM on March 2 [2 favorites]


mikelieman's campaign sure is spending a lot of time in Hawaii...
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 12:04 AM on March 2 [6 favorites]


Campaigns are huge wealth transfers to media companies
posted by thelonius at 12:04 AM on March 2 [10 favorites]


And it appears that Trump is a master at transferring wealth from his contributors to his own pocket..

He takes the donations to the campaign, uses them to pay his expenses staying at his properties, and the check from the campaign committee is cut to his company.
posted by mikelieman at 12:05 AM on March 2 [1 favorite]


As plebes make the Donald increasingly acceptable, expect elite Trump supporters to come out of the closet.

In America, Donald Trump — who many of the experts thought had no chance — is dominating the polls. In Britain, meanwhile, much of the public seems to be mobilizing in favor of exiting the troubled European Union — a British Exit, or Brexit.

Writing in The Spectator, Brendan O’Neill puts this down to a class revolt on both sides of the Atlantic. And he’s right as far as he goes, but I think there’s more than just a class revolt. I think there’s also a developing preference cascade. O’Neill writes: “In both Middle America and Middle England, among both rednecks and chavs, voters who have had more than they can stomach of being patronised, nudged, nagged and basically treated as diseased bodies to be corrected rather than lively minds to be engaged are now putting their hope into a different kind of politics. And the entitled Third Way brigade, schooled to rule, believing themselves possessed of a technocratic expertise that trumps the little people’s vulgar political convictions, are not happy. Not one bit.”

...



Rest of the article at the link.
posted by yertledaturtle at 12:13 AM on March 2 [6 favorites]


Twitter - Short video file:
Trump supporters repeatedly assault Black woman at his KY rally

Shaun King is documenting and naming the people who were a part of it.
posted by yertledaturtle at 12:17 AM on March 2 [4 favorites]


Liberals should view Trump as the biggest opportunity we've had in generations.

I understand this impulse, and not too long ago shared it

Now I'm disgusted by it. Trump's campaign has normalized hate, and the best the GOP can do is mock his spray tan. The Klan is back. American Nazis are back. Hate groups are spreading.

Democrats might win the election, but our country has been damaged. An election won't fix that.
posted by kanewai at 12:50 AM on March 2 [37 favorites]


“5 Ways We Got The Trump Campaign Wrong: An Insider Explains,” Robert Evans , Cracked, 01 March 2016
posted by ob1quixote at 1:06 AM on March 2 [4 favorites]


This is the guy Shaun King named: Matthew Heimbach
posted by kanewai at 1:14 AM on March 2


The GOP could run Pol Pot and CNN and NPR would still report on the race in measured tones. Because anything is better than being accused of being liberal.

"Democrats accuse him of being a genocidal maniac. Pol Pot denies the charges." And they'd leave it at that.
posted by persona au gratin at 1:22 AM on March 2 [37 favorites]


Chris Christie is such a jackass. Somehow he managed to end up looking even more pathetic than Jeb Bush. There is no political value or personal reward in this humiliation. It just makes him look like the exact sort of crooked valueless bully who would shut down a bridge for political revenge. There's nothing of value or vision in his contribution to public life. You can't be dumb enough to think Trump is going to win. So why are you doing this? For who? For what?
posted by Drinky Die at 1:45 AM on March 2 [4 favorites]


managing some trump property in Atlantic City once his political career tanks?
posted by lmfsilva at 1:53 AM on March 2


By the look on his face at that press conference I imagine he's asking himself those same questions, DD.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 2:15 AM on March 2 [6 favorites]


Honestly, shit like this is why I'm no longer a registered Democrat. The smug contempt from centrists for the left wing of the party is palpable and extremely off-putting.

This is due to the enforced "big tent" of American electoral politics, in which there are two (and only two) major parties and third-parties tend to be low-profile and irrelevant protest votes.

My earlier comment points out that it hurts the right-wing of the Republicans too (if it's any consolation). Both of the extremes have to hold their nose and pile into one of the electable parties if they want any hope of influencing things within the government (as opposed to as activist groups and non-profits).
posted by theorique at 2:25 AM on March 2 [1 favorite]


Now the dust has settled, the betting markets say:

- Democrats: Extremely likely to be Hillary.
- Republicans: Very likely to be Donald. Outside chance now of Marco, remote chance of anyone else.
- Winner in November: Probably the Democrat candidate, and likely to be Hillary, possibly Donald, with everyone else having at best a remote chance.
posted by Wordshore at 3:14 AM on March 2




Maybe it is because I'm a queer woman of color leftist, and have come face to face with a bunch of bullshit in my life that is from systematic, historic oppression, but I always thought Trump was going to win the nomination from the first moment that he was going to enter the race. He speaks for the population of awful bigots that still want the old good days of no more civil rights for those who suffer. I don't know why people were so convinced it was otherwise - he is so blatantly evil, so stupid, and always so consistently on message, that it is easy to follow him and vote for him. There is nothing complicated about him, and the anti-intellectuaism establishment LOVES IT.
posted by yueliang at 3:58 AM on March 2 [22 favorites]


Predictwise summarises the various betting sites and prediction markets with a very nice graph that I find much easier to understand than the other sites. Even better, it uses percentage probability rather than fractional odds!
posted by adrianhon at 4:14 AM on March 2 [2 favorites]


kyrademon: I WANT a woman president, just not her.
posted by Chitownfats at 4:18 AM on March 2 [1 favorite]


New York Daily News: MAKE AMERICA MIGRATE: our cheat sheet if Trump wins
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:42 AM on March 2 [1 favorite]


kyrademon: I WANT a woman president, just not her.

Unfortunately for you, the Republicans are going out of their way to hand it to her.
posted by dances with hamsters at 4:45 AM on March 2


I think Clinton is in for a very tough fight if Trump is the nominee. His press conference last night was, I think,just the tip of the iceberg.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:47 AM on March 2 [5 favorites]


Now I'm disgusted by it. Trump's campaign has normalized hate, and the best the GOP can do is mock his spray tan. The Klan is back. American Nazis are back. Hate groups are spreading.

Those things haven't gone away. The best thing from this campaign may be that we have to finally face those things instead of pretending that they are ghosts of the past.
posted by dances with hamsters at 4:47 AM on March 2 [5 favorites]


My main take aways are as follows:

Clinton has a crushing lead over Sanders but she still has to pivot to the left at least through 3/15. Yeah she basically has the nomination locked up and that is reflected in the betting market but she still needs to be careful not to alienate Sanders supporters.

Progressives cannot successfully create a candidate without outreach to minorities and across the generational gap.

Trump is deeply unpopular on the right with the ABT vote being the majority still. This is awful for the party because nobody is going to catch him and he is going to suck as a GE candidate.

Ruboto and Cruz are clowns

Stick a fork in Kasich he is done

Carson is a total grifter
posted by vuron at 4:54 AM on March 2 [3 favorites]


Hate has been central to the Republican party since the failure of the Dixiecrats to repudiate LBJ for the civil rights movement in the 60s and 70s.

Yeah it's been implicit rather than explicitly transmitted but hate is a great GOTV strategy.

Playing off of racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, religious intolerance, etc are proven winners time and again.

Post racial America my ass.
posted by vuron at 5:08 AM on March 2 [11 favorites]


Progressives cannot successfully create a candidate without outreach to minorities and across the generational gap.
I would say that there cannot be a successful progressive movement in the US unless people of color are central to the coalition. Seeing it as "outreach to minorities" is, I think, part of the reason that Sanders and his supporters were doomed pretty early on.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:16 AM on March 2 [40 favorites]


If you didn’t know it was from Mussolini, you might expect it to be the epigraph to a business book, or simply one of the thousands of anonymous platitudes that percolate incessantly across the culture.

It *is* an anonymous platitude that dates to antiquity.
posted by Tanizaki at 5:16 AM on March 2 [4 favorites]


WaPo: Chris Christie's Wordless Screaming
When he asked to be part of Trump’s cabinet he never thought to specify “presidential cabinet, of course, not a literal cabinet underground where the ventilation is poor and there is no light.” It just did not occur to him. Why would it?

Chris Christie has the glazed and terrified look of someone who has traded his inheritance for no pottage at all, who has watched his credibility dry up and is about to be led back to his basement cage, having lost Winterfell for good.
posted by schmod at 5:24 AM on March 2 [19 favorites]


It will be interesting to see how soon Christie ends up in prison for corruption now that he has pissed off the entire GOP party apparatus and has no friends left.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 5:31 AM on March 2 [3 favorites]


It will be interesting to see how soon Trump ends up in prison for corruption now that he has pissed off the entire GOP party apparatus and has no friends left.

It will be interesting to see how soon Cruz ends up in prison for corruption now that he has pissed off the entire GOP party apparatus and has no friends left.

For what it's worth, I don't think Rubio has salted the earth behind him.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 5:41 AM on March 2


Tanizaki: It *is* an anonymous platitude that dates to antiquity.

A.k.a. "go big or stay home"? Totally agree.

When I was a brash young lad, and few other brash young lads and I worked for a guy we thought was a stuffed shirt. We tricked him into using an obviously-wrong technical term in a presentation to a bunch of similarly-ignorant customers. We thought ourselves quite clever, but a decade or so later I realized it was both a shitty thing to do (on a human level) and also career-threatening if my bosses had found out (they didn't).

So while I think it's somewhat revealing of Trump's character that he re-tweets management/motivational speaker-grade pablum like a True Believer, it also lowers Gawker closer to his level.
posted by wenestvedt at 5:42 AM on March 2 [3 favorites]


Unexpected turnout throws Boulder caucus into chaos
“We were expecting 12-15 percent. We could have managed that,” said Mike, holding up all the leftover registration cards in two small stacks.

“I think we were closer to 20 percent,” he said.
posted by audi alteram partem at 5:43 AM on March 2 [1 favorite]


I'm hearing that the Rubio campaign has concluded that Rubio's attacks on Trump were ineffective because they were still a little too highbrow. Before the next primaries, they're planning to hit Trump for eating his own poo-poo and drinking his own pee-pee.
posted by airing nerdy laundry at 5:44 AM on March 2


I would say that there cannot be a successful progressive movement in the US unless people of color are central to the coalition.

Absolutely. I'm not at all convinced that on a broad scale people of color ascribe to quite the same progressive platform as, e.g., Sanders. This may well be generational.
posted by OmieWise at 5:53 AM on March 2


The most consistent part of Trump's appeal, and something he'll probably keep if he tries to move toward the center, is 'tells it like it is.'

But, like, dude is totally full of shit. He's always been full of shit, he surrounds himself with people who are full of shit, being full of shit is kind of his thing.

If somebody, R or D, can make that case, and make it stick, they can take him down.
posted by box at 5:54 AM on March 2


MetaFilter, thank you. You do election dissection better than anybody. Much gratitude from an interested bystander in Australia.
posted by valetta at 5:54 AM on March 2 [3 favorites]


Honestly, I'm really tired of this erasure of his female and PoC supporters. She won the majority of those groups (among mostly southern states) but that doesn't mean nobody else supported him. I've been increasingly offended by efforts to spin his support as mostly male, in particular.

But this isn't an attempt at erasure, it's the standard way of talking about population groups during an election cycle. The phrase "candidate X won group Y" is always understood to mean the majority (not everyone), which is why it is so frequently followed by the percentage difference in support. There would be no percentage difference if there weren't some people in the group who voted for the other candidate.

I get very confused by the mixing of legitimate criticisms (for instance, superdelegates are undemocratic) with idiosyncratic choices to try to wish away how things actually work (e.g., putting superdelegates who have pledged to Clinton into her column is unfair and bad math). It's one thing to remind people that there are lots of women who support Sanders, which is obviously true, and another to read a bog standard bit of well understood reporting as if the intent is nefarious.
posted by OmieWise at 6:03 AM on March 2 [12 favorites]


Trump "tells it like it is" because he says things racists want to hear. Just like when my wife asked what it means when Trump says he'll "Make America Great Again" and I responded that he means he's going to put minorities back "in their place" like they were in the '50s.
posted by graymouser at 6:03 AM on March 2


MetaFilter, thank you. You do election dissection better than anybody. Much gratitude from an interested bystander in ...........
posted by infini at 6:07 AM on March 2


dialetheia he writes here:

Moon Of Alabama


that's not billmon, just some camp followers who borrowed the template from billmon's old blog and have a conspiratorial world view.
posted by ennui.bz at 6:07 AM on March 2


Election coverage is hard, so CNN are shifting their focus back to their core incompetency.
posted by schmod at 6:14 AM on March 2


Trump "tells it like it is" because he says things racists want to hear. Just like when my wife asked what it means when Trump says he'll "Make America Great Again" and I responded that he means he's going to put minorities back "in their place" like they were in the '50s.

But it also has perfect plausible deniability. A person who's racist and wants what you describe can map that onto MAGA. A person who's not racist but wants America to be economically competitive and repatriate steel, auto-making, and other manufacturing and industry can map that onto MAGA as well.

It's a perfect content free ink-blot test for whatever issues are on your mind.
posted by theorique at 6:23 AM on March 2 [4 favorites]




The most consistent part of Trump's appeal, and something he'll probably keep if he tries to move toward the center, is 'tells it like it is.'

The other edge of this sword is that he may have picked the worst possible year to run as a Republican on the platform of blaming the government for not fixing things. We have eight years' worth of sound bites, video clips, and press releases from GOP politicians and political operatives saying their entire purpose is to be obstructionist. And it's not as if this is just the deranged Tea Party wing that already lovesTrump saying that, it comes from the "establishment" types just as much as the extremists and trolls. Better yet, there's a SCOTUS opening where the GOP is nearly unanimous in not even considering talking to anyone (let alone fulfilling their Constitutional duties) even when one of their own is chosen.

So it may very well be that both Trump and the anti-Trump coalition are in a bind here. If the GOP falls into lockstep behind him, even begrudgingly, they provide the Democrats with a boatload of ammunition that undercuts his core message. If they don't, the party risks splintering in a way that could make the election a bloodbath for them. This may have been why Christie criticized GOP senators for it last week, but it seems impossible for Trump to control the frothing-at-the-mouth types that are already glomming on to his campaign for eight months about it.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:29 AM on March 2 [