election and will likely allow Trump to ascend to the throne and hence the decline of American democracy.

The GOP is incapable . . . No, incompetent. They ignored trump and the danger he posed until it was too late. At the same time, hillarians ignored the many defects and issues with the inevitable one.

A clusterfuck of YUGE proportions.

exit polls of people who just voted. They, of course, don't include those who voted for Hillary, but as many would vote for Bernie.

Why on earth do you WANT to believe the left is divided? Would being proven "right" by having the nation taken over by conservative extremists be somehow satisfying? You're off in a minority. Get smart and understand it. Accept it and be proud. Or change.

Teh Google has plenty of accurate numbers, numbers that hillarians ignore at their own risk.

Stating a fact is somehow Causing this divide? Seriously? No wonder our country is fucked.

I know very few people who can stand Hillary in any way. Some will very reluctantly vote for her over Trump, many will simply not vote given those choices, and these are engaged people who value their vote.

I live in a very progressive area on the west coast of northern California, so that doesn't necessarily translate to anywhere else, but it's an overwhelming sentiment out here, no love for Hillary whatsoever, and people resent the party shoving her corporatist vision down our throats.

How was it possible he didn't win? What does "shoving her corporatist vision" even mean? From now on let's buy cars that aren't made by corporations? Nationalize the auto industry? Free cars for everyone! So far it doesn't look like enough voters are buying Bernies Socialist vision.

against long odds, and without selling out to corporate money, no matter how you spin it.

I don't know to what extent he plans to implement it but I have heard Bernie speak positively about worker-owned businesses, and it's a great idea, the kind of movement that would make a difference, leading to better conditions for labor, less dependence on wall st., and bringing with it the workers' intrinsic interest in caring for their land and their planet, making decisions based on providing good products and sustainable jobs rather than rapidly extracting maximum profits. I'd be surprised to see the auto industry move to this model, but I can see other industries doing so.

The more people learn, the more people like about such ideas. It isn't the mainstream of U.S. political thought, but the mainstream of U.S. political thought has exactly no answers for staggering inequality, and is little more than the propaganda of a capitalist system that, having largely captured its government regulatory system, is bringing obscene profits to a very few people, foreign interventions and blowback terrorism, squeezing petro-profits from our aquifers, and leaving us with a hopelessly uninhabitable planet in the near future.

We're doing quite well in this campaign, thank you, people are responding to the truth. We may not win this primary, but it's the best fight from the left I can remember in some time, and long overdue. It's a wave that, IMHO, will not be stopped by the nomination of Hillary, it's bigger than that, and amplified by the horrors of growing inequality and impending ecological disaster.

We aren't the crazy ones or the nuts, you are, you who ignore the urgency of the situation and the vector we're currently on. It was time for a huge change in world view in 2008, and it's even more urgent now. The old corporate-funded centrist way supports profits, not solutions.

These mostly liberal voters may not like her as much as him, but she makes a quite acceptable second choice for them. That is in addition, of course, to those for whom she is their first choice.

So fool yourselves if you want, but Bernie's hostile far-left "True Believers" are a small, small minority. Literally a fraction of 10% of all voters.

Thankfully for America.

I can see Hillary voters 'happy to vote for Bernie"

I have not seen the reverse.

But 20 % of 1/3 of the party is still over 6%.

Know what happens when 5% of the Democratic base + lack of cross-over voters + independents sitting on their hands happen al at once? - It's called a landslide and we'd be the ones buried in it.

or even my FB page where you will see thousands who say they will not vote for Hillary. It is not 20%...Twitter and Reddit too........80%...I disagree from what I have seen.

that those of the weasel persuasion are taking names to get people booted as soon as the primaries are over?

If you're okay with that, then fine. If Hill wins the primary, I don't think I'd want to be here, either.

to vote down ticket.

They will vote for Clinton over Trump make a formidable voting block! Especially since those same Republicans will not be voting FOR Trump.

Nor will anyone I know.

eom

Clinton conceded gracefully even as people were expecting her to make it a brokered convention. Clinton then went on to go to a dozen or so rallies in support of Obama.

Let's be fair...

HRC carried NY, TX, NJ,NV, AZ, CA, OH, MI, PA, FL, MA...


She made it a race... Bernie Sanders is getting waxed, beside Michigan his only wins have come in homogeneous and sparsely populated states...

In boxing folks still argue over the Holmes-Spinks fight, the Ali-Norton fights, the Leonard-Hagler fight because they were close. No serious fan argues over the Holmes-Cobb Fight because Cobb got waxed.

That race could have went either way. As it was it worked out just fine.

are often discounted even by other minorities- Native Americans, the largest percentage in the contiguous US. Oklahoma has 74% 'white alone' population, the US as a whole has 77.4% 'white alone'; US has 1.2% Native Americans, OK has 8.6%; US has 2.5% identifying as more than one race while OK has 5.9%.
OK's population ranks it as the 28th largest out of 50, hard to argue it is all that sparsely populated as it has more people than Iowa, Mississippi, Arkansas, Kansas....

The 2008 race, let's be fair, CA came on Super Tuesday, the largest State and she won it. This year CA is not voting until June. Just as several of the States you list as her big wins have yet to vote. You are comparing very different electoral scenarios and claiming they are the same scenario just as you are pointing at States with a mid-range population and more diversity than the US at large as sparsely populated and homogeneous. None of what you are saying is accurate.
States by population size:
http://www.ipl.org/div/stateknow/popchart.html#statesbypop

Rest of the data comes from US Census Quick Facts
http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/00,40

Bernie won in Minnesota and tied in Massachusetts.
He also won in Colorado.

Discounting millions of Democrats who voted for Bernie seems to be his modus operandi.

But, it won't work.

elect the Democratic nominee. I guarantee it. So will the voters in all of the blue states. We're not stupid, nor are we tied to either candidate with knots that cannot be untied.

We will elect the Democrat as President, just like we do in Minnesota in virtually all presidential elections.

I don't see her winning Florida, Ohio, North Carolina and either Colorado or Virginia.

And those are the deal-breaker states.

then she's lost nothing, has she?

Of the primary. She had won the popular vote and Michigan results were in question because Michigan broke the rules of when they could hold their primary.

Dean was very worried about a brokered convention and on June 6, Obama and Clinton hammered out their agreement.

There would have been no unity if Obama did not give her either VP or SoS. She wanted VP and Obama had offered Biden SoS who refused it because of the demands that position would require.

This is not snarky, but how do you know and can you tell us more?

Please?

Is out there if you search for it.

Because it's incredibly insulting to Obama and his character, and it's extremely insulting to Clinton's intelligence (had she attempted to broker the convention, without a delegate lead, it would've fractured the party and she would've been out of politics forever).

It's just silly and has no basis in reality.

According to Axe HRC was surprised when she was offered the SOS position.

He also said Bill Clinton was the first person President Obama called after his 012 re-election to thank him for the tireless work he did on his behalf.

He also said he was fond of HRC for the work she did on behalf of the physically and emotionally challenged who include his daughter.

Both MI and FL were seated and Obama still had the pledged delegate advantage even without MI delegates (they were uncommitted because he wasn't on the ballot; though by agreement they went for Obama, even if they hadn't he would've still won).

There was of course talk about all sorts of seating controversies leading up to the convention, but it was just that, clamor, there was no basis for it to actually happen. I remember this very very well.

There is zero, absolutely zero evidence that there was an agreement about the VP or SoS position.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-and-clinton-the-60-minutes-interview/

Exactly correct!

favors, campaign contributions from her Donors to politicians that she wants support from. It's how she gets the votes that matters.

Bernie the joined the party just eight months ago so he could more get media and name recognition. He certainly wasn't going to get that running as an independent socialist. He and Jill Stein would be in the same boat. People outside of New England would be asking "Bernie who" if he hadn't made that move.

He was literally late to the party though. He should have joined years ago and made a name for himself nationally outside of Vermont — you know, to get name recognition and media coverage, form relationships with constituent groups, especially ethnic constituents so his support does not just come mostly from white dems. He should have put in work for the party, raised money for other dem candidates — you know, the kinds of things that earn super delegates.

Eight months in the party of course puts him behind Clinton on those things, which when you think about it, explains why he's behind in both pledged and super delegates.

Clinton has put years of work in in the party. Bernie, not so much.

He is a Democratic Socialist. He explained this initially as being essentially a Democrat but being a Democratic Socialist goes a step further to say government should work for all of the people instead of just the wealthy. He was categorized as an Independent by the House because there was no Democratic Socialist party. I was very familiar with Sanders, his work and his position on issues long before he announced his candidacy. I always wanted him to run for President but assumed he would not because of his age. I was ecstatic when I was proven wrong. Bernie as well has put years of work into Democratic positions.

Sam

Thom Hartman's radio show where he was a self-avowed "Socialist". The Democratic Socialist label is kind of new and smart as it is not so radical sounding and starts with the word "Democratic" and thus associates him with the Dem party.

Those of us who follow politics closely know of him but for most people outside of the New England area, he was virtually unknown as shown by his results in the southern state dem primaries. Non-political AAs had hardly heard of him.

Now because he joined party he's gotten more name recognition. It's helped him, and we both know he'd be in Jill Stein's shoes if he hadn't joined the party for his presidential bid.

He should have done it long before though if he had ever thought he might run for the presidency.

Caucusing with the Democrats but having an (I) next to your name and calling yourself a socialist hasn't had the same weight with actual Democrat voters.

Because she decided not to do so, he jumped in.

I too am a political junkie and have been for decades.

Sam

A real winner here.

. . . that's not in the script! Stick to your lines!

Hillary is just like you!

Your slip is showing

And they say the Bernie bros don't exist.

Listen bro the oppressed white male is a myth. It's a right wing meme. As I said your slip is showing.

They ARE determined. The party's realignment -- from the party of FDR to a party in which the only acceptable difference from the GOP is on social issues -- depends on it.

If you're not angry about the direction of this country, there's something wrong with you.

You want to know who rich white males support? Ask Goldman Sachs.

Its because one side refuses to swallow their loss and look big picture. It won't be the side that won.

because that is what matters more than some label that has changed meaning in the last 25 years.

Tell me, are PoC still killed by those in authority?

Are there more earthquakes in Oklahoma?

Is the income gap narrower than before?

Have we stopped bringing back mangled soldiers from wars abroad?

We vote with ya, then watch the Left get ignored.

The story of the man trying not to fall into the hole comes to mind. I am leaving the house and taking a different route.

I don't understand why this is a difficult choice for people.

Usually it is the person you know and trust who betrays you the most.

We let go of this moment, it is gone forever. If we vote for third way, they will continue moving to the right.

Momentum.

You're obviously failing to grasp how much damage a Republican president and an obedient Republican Congress can inflict on this country. But you go ahead and continue making false comparisons while remaining willfully oblivious to the true dangers ahead.

It's simply stupid to think otherwise.

Really, really stupid. And dangerous. And selfish. And unpatriotic. Etc.

Sid

h skirting the very edict from President Obama.

Ha...

I think I'll start pointing that out when I see that avatar now, too.

hard feelings in either party when a nomination contest is close and strongly contested. Indeed there is the distinct possibility of PUMA breaking out in the republican party this year.

My guess is that the PUMA mentality goes back as far as the parties' nomination process.

the Bernie or Bust people are a small minority. Even here, the Bernie supporters who live in the world of reality are regularly beaten up and shut up by the more vocal Bernie or Bust posters.

Hillary was never going to have the Bernie or Bust people. It would be a waste of her time to try to convince them of something they are determined not to be convinced of. They are not a large number, regardless of what they think of themselves.

So be it.

It is a reality that needs to be faced, but it is little more than a speed bump. There are more important issues that need to be dealt with.

If that doesn't give people motivation, they weren't really that progressive to begin with.

are polls that support my belief.

The rest, well, really. You are right. They aren't progressive, they never were, and it would be a waste of our time to try and suss out what would make them happy.

program that got millions of kids insured? Did you see about all her work on the Southern Poverty Law Center? Did you see about the programs she founded to help women start businesses in third world countries? And she's done tons more.

Bernie has been in Congress for decades and has named two post offices, and written a bunch of riders that said that people shouldn't do things that were already illegal.

LOL! You're pretending that Bernie is more progressive than Hillary in the real world!

You slander the true progressive while touting Hillary as a champion for the poor. SMH.

They don't have to worry about being poor any more.

Oh, yeah an Libya. Turned that one into a hell hole. Real progressive!

Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Stephen Breyer were good picks and I don't think she is to the right of her husband.

Which she has proven time and time again.

With the millions she and Bill have received, both in donations and speaking fees, did you ever consider whose thumb will be on the decision scales in favor of some drone who is totally pro Wall? Instead of a judge who would be fair, honest, equitable, and understands the constitution?

My blood boils every time she tries to "Me too" with Bernie about over turning Citizens United at these faux debates.
She is the poster child for corrupt corporate donations.

and maybe downstream paymaster as well...

http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/01/30/clinton-system-donor-machine-2016-election/

That much money provides the "carrots and sticks" to keep everybody in line, doing her and Bill's bidding.

They probably hate the public so much that they think this is a nifty way to get back at us -- ruining American democracy. I wouldn't be at all shocked.

that Bernie didn't point this out from day one of his campaign. He might have done better in early primaries if he had.
I can repeat verbatim some of his campaign speeches just because he was so repetitive and it was issues that matter to me. Had he put HRC on blast over and over again for her corporate and wall street ties, it might have stuck in folks' minds.

And one that shows an enormous amount of disrespect to the concerns of the LGBT community. Trump has made it clear he disagrees with the ruling that bans on same sex marriage violate the US Constitution. He has described Scalia as one of the greatest justices of all time. He has spoken very favorably about Clarence Thomas.

Your statement is baseless and absurd.

He's made. Hillary is based her campaign on continuing Obama's moderate (and let's be totally hones: conservative and corporate friendly) policies.

Also the guy who accepted it did so fully knowing he may never sit on the court and would be subject to a highly partisan fight. I believe there were a limited number of people that fit the bill of willing to have arrows slung out them and never sit on the bench and were reasonable enough to make the Republicans look unreasonable.

Republicans will nominate this pick then and we'll be left with a less than liberal judge who is pro-prosecution and who will not overturn Citizens United. Putting forth a liberal judge would have put Republicans in a box.

...we are stuck with getting no one nominated or a moderate. Given those choices, and given the notion that the bully pulpit only goes so far, what would be your choice?

Republicans would not be 'in a box'. They would simply say 'No. Next!'
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

Simple.

After 8 years of Republicans doing any and everything in their power to disrupt him, you look really foolish making such an obviously incorrect declaration.

Right now they have none and it should help the Senate races