And they can't be the only ones. There must be many, many more fabulous politicians in this country. So many, in fact, that I wonder what all of us have been complaining about. Surely things couldn't possibly be better in this Panglossian country of ours!

I just did a quick google search, and it looks as if thus far Pelosi has not endorsed either candidate. Which is very smart of her, because despite the optimism on the part of the supporters of each candidate, the nomination is NOT in the bag at this point, and probably won't be until at least June 7, if not until the convention.

Still, making a statement like that hints to me that internal polling shows Bernie ahead, perhaps decidedly ahead, in NY.

That's my feeling about it. And these are very surprising statements from Pelosi. I did not expect her to be hedging her bets like this.

It could be NY she's looking at. But more probably CA (or maybe both?).

Here's my prognosis: Sanders is going to do very well in NY (despite immense obstacles including very serious vote suppression by the NY Dem Party/DNC and possible rigging) but not 'win' it. He'll remain viable on delegates. He'll split the remaining primaries and then win CA (despite CA's "Independent" vs "No party preference" confusion). I believe Sanders has the Latino vote here (Latinos = 38% of the CA population*; Sanders has closed a huge gap vs Clinton). Jerry Brown has been very silent** (despite his turn toward Corporatism, as governor). (Never forget that he is Jesuit-trained, i.e., Church social justice teaching.)

And this is going to be the most interesting and exciting Democratic Party convention, ever.***

--------------------------

***(Take a look at these stats: http://www.ppic.org/main/publication_show.asp?i=264. Half of Latino likely voters are under age 45! (It says, too, that Latinos undervote, but I think they will come out for Sanders.) Sanders has closed the gap with Clinton among Latinos. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/18/sanders-camp-touts-growing-latino-support-crucial-in-ny-calif-races.html

**(Check out these Jerry Brown items on Clinton: https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=jerry%20brown%20hillary%20clinton )

***(1968 was NOT interesting and exciting. It was a tragedy. The candidate of most of us was DEAD--assassinated 3 months prior to the convention (after his brother was assassinated in 1963). RFK was murdered on the night he won the CA primary! Furthermore, Martin Luther King had been assassinated just a few months before RFK's assassination. All hope was gone. The "military-industrial complex" was in charge. We were to be DISALLOWED any anti-Vietnam War choice. Even then we didn't riot--though rioting would've been justified. The melee around the convention was a police riot. Tragic, awful, dreadful time. Turning point in the creation of the goddamned mess we have today--militaristic oligarchs running everything including the Democratic Party.)

from what she was saying a few months ago? Or am I not remembering that correctly?

Regardless of how all of this plays out, SBS seems to have injected some badly-needed fresh ideas and perspectives into the party. Based on that alone, his campaign has been an important one.

just said some nice words about her, some time back. I find her hedging of her bets now surprising and very hopeful. She definitely has her ear to the ground.

Simply fabulous.

Last edited Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:23 PM - Edit history (1)

She was obviously in on "the deal" that put Obama in the White House, permitted a short-lived Democratic Congress and simultaneously immunized Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld, et al, from prosecution--or even investigation--for their many war crimes and grand thefts.

I DO think there was a "deal," back when Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald was becoming a threat to Cheney, and more importantly, to Bush Jr., on the outing of CIA agents. The deeper battle was over nuking Iran, I believe. Result was Rumsfeld was ousted, Cheney put on a leash (esp. re nuking Iran) and Bush Jr. served out his term. (Pelosi was the envoy to Israel to inform them of no nuking of Iran. She traveled to Israel and the ME shortly after Rumsfeld was ousted. And, after that, all talk of nuking Iran went away. Remember?)

"The deal" was put together (in my opinion) by Bush Sr. and his rep, Leon Panetta (who then became Obama's CIA Director), military brass (who opposed nuking Iran) and others. I think Congress people like Pelosi were 2nd echelon in "the deal." But when Pelosi came out with the statement, "Impeachment is off the table," it was pretty clear to me that she was AT "the table," even if only as a leashed reporter to the public, not as a decision-maker.

Anyway, my point here is, she is fairly deep into the unseen part of our government. This could mean that Sanders has a CIA okay. I've been looking for evidence of it, or not (i.e., that he has no chance because of CIA opposition). I would guess that he's okay with the Unseen Ones. This is not a lot of evidence, but it is something.

It very well could be that CIA upper analysts have concluded that violent revolution is a real threat in the U.S. if some pressure on the poor majority is not relieved.

And I don't think the CIA likes the Clinton's. (Are the Clinton's trying to run their own "shop" like Rumsfeld was??). (The Clinton Foundation?) I had this feeling back in '08. They didn't want her to win, and maybe aided Obama?

I could have it all wrong, or partly wrong. A lot of this is (necessarily) guess work. But when Pelosi speaks, I listen (because of that "off the table" remark, and the trip to Israel after Rumsfeld was ousted, and the sudden end of talk of nuking Iran). We need to bring as much savvy to analyzing what our government (seen and unseen) is up to, as they bring to analyzing what-all the rest of us are up to.

gives one a lot to think about - wondering who is behind Pelosi? How far up does she go?

Thank you, Ms. Pelosi, for putting it into words.

Thank you, NWCorona for the OP and thread!

I wonder how he's doing these days.

I suppose there's also a "chance that he may win the nomination", at least when this was filmed last year.

the D'Alesandro's, her father and brother, both named Tommy were mayors here (I'm from Baltimore too, and remember the family well, being dominant local figures), so I'm not surprised that her instincts would be more savvy than most pols.

It's very interesting to me that she has remained neutral, and that she made this statement.