Democrats, Can We Agree?

paulsurovell said:

Hillary's lead in CA down to 10 points, 54.5 to 44.5 as the counting continues.

http://bit.ly/1UmK08u

Wow! Maybe it will get to 9!

unixiscool said:

carrielogo said:

I'm sure the Blue Nation Review found Hillary to be full of compassion and caring for women and children.....because it is owned by the guy that runs the super-pac "Correct the Record" for Hillary.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/david-brock-blue-nation-review_us_564f0f3de4b0879a5b0a7bc5

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/02/hillary-clinton-moms-black-lives-matter


Here is one from Mother Jones about how much Clinton cares and why she has the deep support of African Americans is that good enough for you? 

I especially liked the video that was pro Sanders in the story

carrielogo said:

I'm sure the Blue Nation Review found Hillary to be full of compassion and caring for women and children.....because it is owned by the guy that runs the super-pac "Correct the Record" for Hillary.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/david-brock-blue-nation-review_us_564f0f3de4b0879a5b0a7bc5

Blue Nation published it. The writer is the founder of the Crooks and Liars site. She originally wrote it under a pseudonym.

paulsurovell said:

Julian Assange intends to publish more Hillary emails:

Please try to control your glee! 

ridski said:

carrielogo said:

I'm sure the Blue Nation Review found Hillary to be full of compassion and caring for women and children.....because it is owned by the guy that runs the super-pac "Correct the Record" for Hillary.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/david-brock-blue-nation-review_us_564f0f3de4b0879a5b0a7bc5

Blue Nation published it. The writer is the founder of the Crooks and Liars site. She originally wrote it under a pseudonym.

And the mothers that had their children killed, are they liers also? 

"They all described an intensive courtship by the Clinton campaign that began quietly, through back channels and outside the glare of the national media. Hamilton got her first meeting with Clinton after she promised on Facebook to shut down a Clinton rally with a protest in Milwaukee last spring. When the two met, they hugged for three minutes, and Hamilton cried on Clinton's shoulder. Reed-Veal met Clinton at a Congressional Black Caucus dinner. "She walked up, held my hand, and she said, 'What is it that you want?'" Reed-Veal recalled. She got a personal letter from Clinton afterward. Then she got a second letter, inviting her to a Democratic debate. After a Texas grand jury decided not to indict anyone for her daughter's death, she got a third letter from Clinton.

Clinton sealed the deal, they explained, when she met with the five of them last fall in a conference room in Chicago. It was a low-key affair. The candidates' staffers shooed reporters from the room before it began, and Clinton showed up with a notepad to jot down what she heard. They were told they had 30 minutes; the meeting lasted for two hours. "She knew which cases went to jail," Fulton said, when she told the story at the second stop of the day, a church in Sumter. "She knew specifically what happened in our tragedies. She knew that information and she knew because she cares. She cares. Not only does she care about victims of gun violence but she cares about women, she cares about African Americans. She cares!"
"We sat there and collaborated with her and her staffers," Reed-Veal recalled, sounding a little awed. "Our concerns are implemented in her policy. God is good! He was in the room. The Lord was was in the room! And Hillary was that mother, that grandmother, that sister."

Anyone ever notice the correlation of the rise of Bernie and Bernie Bros attacks and the fall of Clinton by the under 30's?

The Sainted Bernie always seems to get a pass from his acolytes. I wonder if they think this guy also lied

I followed him carefully when I was editor of the Burlington
Free Press in Vermont. Sanders was the state's sole congressman, lived
in Burlington, and would periodically visit with the newspaper's editors
and publisher.
Considering that the Free Press'
editorial positions were very liberal, reflecting the nature of a very
liberal Vermont community, one might think that meetings with Sanders
were cordial, even celebratory.
They weren't. Sanders was
always full of himself: pious, self-righteous and utterly humorless.
Burdened by the cross of his socialist crusade, he was a scold whose
counter-culture moralizing appealed to the state's liberal sensibilities
as well as its conservatives, who embraced his gun ownership stance,
his defense of individual rights, an antipathy toward big corporations
and, generally speaking, his stick-it-to-them approach to politics.

My most memorable encounter with Sanders was during an
editorial board session during a period when the Vermont Progressive
Party was reconstituting itself to challenge for more seats on the
Burlington City Council.
Sanders had been mayor of
Burlington from 1981 until 1989, institutionalizing progressive
government in the city and other Vermont enclaves. Although he has been
in Washington since his election to the House of Representatives in
1991, he remained the titular head of the movement, yet refused to
endorse a progressive slate seeking City Council seats or the new
leadership orchestrating the campaigns.
After discussing
his favorite issues — corporations, government reform, health care and
the like, I asked about his unwillingness to endorse his fellow
progressives. He said it wasn't his role. I suggested voters might
expect him to weigh in. He disagreed, clearly annoyed at the persistent
questioning. Finally I suggested that he had a larger moral
responsibility to the progressive movement.
At which
point he jumped out of his seat, told me to go f*** myself and stormed
out of the edit board meeting. OK, maybe my persistence bordered on
hectoring. But I felt he ought to provide an honest answer. My suspicion
was that he resented others for assuming his mantle of progressive
leadership and wouldn't acknowledge them.

http://lansingcitypulse.com/article-12189-the-trouble-with-bernie.html

BG9 said:

The Sainted Bernie always seems to get a pass from his acolytes. I wonder if they think this guy also lied

I followed him carefully when I was editor of the Burlington
Free Press in Vermont. Sanders was the state's sole congressman, lived
in Burlington, and would periodically visit with the newspaper's editors
and publisher.
Considering that the Free Press'
editorial positions were very liberal, reflecting the nature of a very
liberal Vermont community, one might think that meetings with Sanders
were cordial, even celebratory.
They weren't. Sanders was
always full of himself: pious, self-righteous and utterly humorless.
Burdened by the cross of his socialist crusade, he was a scold whose
counter-culture moralizing appealed to the state's liberal sensibilities
as well as its conservatives, who embraced his gun ownership stance,
his defense of individual rights, an antipathy toward big corporations
and, generally speaking, his stick-it-to-them approach to politics.

My most memorable encounter with Sanders was during an
editorial board session during a period when the Vermont Progressive
Party was reconstituting itself to challenge for more seats on the
Burlington City Council.
Sanders had been mayor of
Burlington from 1981 until 1989, institutionalizing progressive
government in the city and other Vermont enclaves. Although he has been
in Washington since his election to the House of Representatives in
1991, he remained the titular head of the movement, yet refused to
endorse a progressive slate seeking City Council seats or the new
leadership orchestrating the campaigns.
After discussing
his favorite issues — corporations, government reform, health care and
the like, I asked about his unwillingness to endorse his fellow
progressives. He said it wasn't his role. I suggested voters might
expect him to weigh in. He disagreed, clearly annoyed at the persistent
questioning. Finally I suggested that he had a larger moral
responsibility to the progressive movement.
At which
point he jumped out of his seat, told me to go f*** myself and stormed
out of the edit board meeting. OK, maybe my persistence bordered on
hectoring. But I felt he ought to provide an honest answer. My suspicion
was that he resented others for assuming his mantle of progressive
leadership and wouldn't acknowledge them.

http://lansingcitypulse.com/article-12189-the-trouble-with-bernie.html

His beef seems to be that Bernie refused to endorse a slate of candidates and that Bernie said go f*** yourself when the author hectored him.

OK, I'll stipulate to that.

Dennis_Seelbach said:

paulsurovell said:

Julian Assange intends to publish more Hillary emails:

Please try to control your glee! 

I appreciate your concern.

NJ Democratic Party leadership rejects unity:

http://www.bluejersey.com/2016/06/kumbaya-over-bernie-sanders-nj-chair-wisniewski-summarily-dropped-as-dnc-member-2/

Republicans dream of having a system like the DNC to stifle contrarian voices.  

Radical minority voices are often tempered. That's the purpose of the electoral college, of the super-delegates, whether you like it in this particular case or not.  The Republicans only wish they had more super delegates for that very reason. Once they are not a minority, they are heard. They are being heard now given some good ideas.  What exactly is the problem, other than sour grapes?

Sanders delegates are in the minority, so what's the point of the purge other than to piss people off? 

There is that about dissent which does not sit well with  the rulers of the tribe.

Luckily their heads will remain attached to their shoulders

Batista frequently regretted that he had not executed Castro while he had him in prison

The Congressional Black Caucus opposes Sanders' call to abolish superdelgates and to open primaries.

"Sanders did a lot of things right in this campaign, he did a lot better than expected. At the same time he seemed to have a lack of understanding or lack of relationships with black leaders that you saw ultimately hurt him in South Carolina and other states with big black electorates," Thornell said. "And this is something that the CBC is going to be very passionate and push back against. This is a way that African-American officials can represent their district and have a say in the process. They're not going to go along with this at all." 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/bernie-sanders-black-caucus-superdelegates-224502

paulsurovell said:

NJ Democratic Party leadership rejects unity:

http://www.bluejersey.com/2016/06/kumbaya-over-bernie-sanders-nj-chair-wisniewski-summarily-dropped-as-dnc-member-2/

Politics is not a childs game. It can get tough.

Wisnieski was dumped because he represented a group (Bernie et al.) which denigrated the DNC. The consensus was "we can do without you."

Its like any team. You denigrate your team, you're out.

BG9 said:

paulsurovell said:

NJ Democratic Party leadership rejects unity:

http://www.bluejersey.com/2016/06/kumbaya-over-bernie-sanders-nj-chair-wisniewski-summarily-dropped-as-dnc-member-2/

Politics is not a childs game. It can get tough.

Wisnieski was dumped because he represented a group (Bernie et al.) which denigrated the DNC. The consensus was "we can do without you."

Its like any team. You denigrate your team, you're out.

Well then I guess they don't want my vote.  I tried.

I honest to God don't understand how intelligent and largely like-thinking people can consider NOT voting for Clinton, allowing for the possibility of a Trump Presidency. 

KevinF said:

I honest to God don't understand how intelligent and largely like-thinking people can consider NOT voting for Clinton, allowing for the possibility of a Trump Presidency. 

Not wanting to go into the myriad of reasons not to vote for her

It is called Freedom of Choice

Of course if you do not vote for the anointed one

You are told you will be electing the Devil incarnate

I think the Dems and the Republicans work this thing out between themselves

You take this year and this year then we will come swinging back for the next four years

author said:

KevinF said:

I honest to God don't understand how intelligent and largely like-thinking people can consider NOT voting for Clinton, allowing for the possibility of a Trump Presidency. 

Not wanting to go into the myriad of reasons not to vote for her

It is called Freedom of Choice

Of course if you do not vote for the anointed one

You are told you will be electing the Devil incarnate

I think the Dems and the Republicans work this thing out between themselves

You take this year and this year then we will come swinging back for the next four years

It's just math. Either Trump or Clinton will be president. Ever action, or inaction, is benefitting one or the other. Do what you like, but don't cry because the world won't conform to your preferences.

PVW said:

author said:

KevinF said:

I honest to God don't understand how intelligent and largely like-thinking people can consider NOT voting for Clinton, allowing for the possibility of a Trump Presidency. 

Not wanting to go into the myriad of reasons not to vote for her

It is called Freedom of Choice

Of course if you do not vote for the anointed one

You are told you will be electing the Devil incarnate

I think the Dems and the Republicans work this thing out between themselves

You take this year and this year then we will come swinging back for the next four years

It's just math. Either Trump or Clinton will be president. Ever action, or inaction, is benefitting one or the other. Do what you like, but don't cry because the world won't conform to your preferences.

I cry for my country

And thank you for giving me permission to do what I want

I thought I already had it

author said:

PVW said:

author said:

KevinF said:

I honest to God don't understand how intelligent and largely like-thinking people can consider NOT voting for Clinton, allowing for the possibility of a Trump Presidency. 

Not wanting to go into the myriad of reasons not to vote for her

It is called Freedom of Choice

Of course if you do not vote for the anointed one

You are told you will be electing the Devil incarnate

I think the Dems and the Republicans work this thing out between themselves

You take this year and this year then we will come swinging back for the next four years

It's just math. Either Trump or Clinton will be president. Ever action, or inaction, is benefitting one or the other. Do what you like, but don't cry because the world won't conform to your preferences.

I cry for my country

And thank you for giving me permission to do what I want

I thought I already had it

You know what, I should have known better than to respond. Not living in Maplewood, I've never participated in the post office threads, but I've peeked in, and it's on me for being foolish enough to engage you. Sorry about that, won't happen again.

PVW said:

author said:

PVW said:

author said:

KevinF said:

I honest to God don't understand how intelligent and largely like-thinking people can consider NOT voting for Clinton, allowing for the possibility of a Trump Presidency. 

Not wanting to go into the myriad of reasons not to vote for her

It is called Freedom of Choice

Of course if you do not vote for the anointed one

You are told you will be electing the Devil incarnate

I think the Dems and the Republicans work this thing out between themselves

You take this year and this year then we will come swinging back for the next four years

It's just math. Either Trump or Clinton will be president. Ever action, or inaction, is benefitting one or the other. Do what you like, but don't cry because the world won't conform to your preferences.

I cry for my country

And thank you for giving me permission to do what I want

I thought I already had it

You know what, I should have known better than to respond. Not living in Maplewood, I've never participated in the post office threads, but I've peeked in, and it's on me for being foolish enough to engage you. Sorry about that, won't happen again.

Live and learn  And don't insult a poster like me by telling him not  to cry about any subject

It is just bad form

I don't much like Clinton, but prefer her to Armageddon. 

dave said:

I don't much like Clinton, but prefer her to Armageddon. 

A bit backhanded, but thank you.

nan said:

BG9 said:

paulsurovell said:

NJ Democratic Party leadership rejects unity:

http://www.bluejersey.com/2016/06/kumbaya-over-bernie-sanders-nj-chair-wisniewski-summarily-dropped-as-dnc-member-2/

Politics is not a childs game. It can get tough.

Wisnieski was dumped because he represented a group (Bernie et al.) which denigrated the DNC. The consensus was "we can do without you."

Its like any team. You denigrate your team, you're out.

Well then I guess they don't want my vote.  I tried.

Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

author said:

KevinF said:

I honest to God don't understand how intelligent and largely like-thinking people can consider NOT voting for Clinton, allowing for the possibility of a Trump Presidency. 

Not wanting to go into the myriad of reasons not to vote for her

It is called Freedom of Choice

Of course if you do not vote for the anointed one

You are told you will be electing the Devil incarnate

I think the Dems and the Republicans work this thing out between themselves

You take this year and this year then we will come swinging back for the next four years

Actually, the Dems and the Republicans don't work this thing out between themselves.

That's obvious when we see how the parties enable the right to vote. The Dems try to make it easy to register and vote whereas the Republicans pass laws obstructing voters.

We also see that in our current senates obstruction to Obama's SC nomination and the many appeal and district court nominations. The Republicans are hoping for a Republican president, even if he should be Trump, to nominate and stack the courts with "Republican" appointees. Which can affect the courts for a generation.

I also happen to believe should Gore have won instead of Bush we would have been much better off.

The NY Times story on Venezuelan food riots and rationing remind me of Bernie's comment that bread lines are good.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/20/world/americas/venezuelans-ransack-stores-as-hunger-stalks-crumbling-nation.html

Other shops stay open, like the bakery in Cumaná where a line of 100
people snaked around a corner. Each person was allowed to buy about a
pound of bread.

Bernie's bread comment that lining up for food is a good thing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJBjjP8WSbc

Here's the complete context of that interview.

https://youtu.be/_6liJbu9ZCY

Hillary's lead in Maplewood up to a ratio of 2.4 to 1.

http://villagegreennj.com/election/numbers-hillary-bested-bernie-maplewood/