@Not Henry Kissinger @Not Henry Kissinger
years I didn't vote for the DINO 'Democrat'. I wanted her to lose. She's the icing on the Neo-liberal cake.

EDIT: to fix the usual typos.

I fully embrace the claim that I and other Berners were the cause of Hillary's loss.

And I'd do it again.

@chuckvw
The shit list:
Bernie Sanders
Julian Assange
Glenn Greenwald
Edward Snowden
Keith Olbermann
etc

Elizabeth Warren and Rachel Maddow better watch their backs.

[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLNFsl130_Y]

Some of their foreign correspondents--except the guy doing Venezuela--are pretty good.

They had a smarmy young "journalist" on last night purportedly reporting on "why the Democrats can't unite". She framed it with a recent Sanders speech calling for single payer, and described him as "Bernie Sandersing around". No shit. Her real words. The Bernie wing, according to apprentice reporter, is pulling the party apart and not heedful enough of "the center"... She'll surely make better money over at MSNBC...

@detroitmechworks @detroitmechworks invariably made people harmonize in my experience. Well, on occasion. Um, oh! Never.

Thinking about the Dem strategy just leads me to: Where there's smoke, there's a smoke screen.

Because you claim, hmmm, gee, they made you lose, after you ignored them, denigrated them and called them names.

So, is this to bring them back, because I know from plenty of anecdotal evidence that people are brought around to your way of thinking through condescension, arrogance, appeals to authority, and outright name calling?

Or is this just another round of the MSM self fellating in an attempt to salve their conscience after elevating an ugly man to power on the orders of the person who they completely failed to win the election for?

Because honestly, that's all people who don't drink the DNC koolaid see now. Blah blah, you're stupid, come together you blithering idiots, can't you understand I am trying to help your racist, sexist, homophobic, muslim-hating ass?

@LaFeminista
The caucus99percent

Never have I seen a collective more desperate in what they want to believe is the actual reality. They get damn nasty when you point it out, I spoken to more receptive toddlers in a middle of one of their major tantrums[one of my nieces can throw an absolute classic, youtube worthy].

Keep this up and they'll will lose even more states, governorships, representatives and senators and probably even their holy grail; the oval office.

If they pick Hillary again its assured. They are just nuts enough to do so, believe me.

@LaFeminista Apparenly they meant some kind of alternate, bizzaro world reality.

Never have I seen a collective more desperate in what they want to believe is the actual reality. They get damn nasty when you point it out, I spoken to more receptive toddlers in a middle of one of their major tantrums[one of my nieces can throw an absolute classic, youtube worthy].

Keep this up and they'll will lose even more states, governorships, representatives and senators and probably even their holy grail; the oval office.

If they pick Hillary again its assured. They are just nuts enough to do so, believe me.

@Dr. John Carpenter

Even more so than Democrats feeling entitled to votes of certain demographics (Her whole run was one of entitlement, after all), the bottom line is, Her didn't bring in the votes. Even in 2012 when enthusiasm about Obama was lower and the Republicans had a much less divisive ticket, he still brought people into the polls. Her never did.

I know this is anecdotal but I knew exactly one Her supporter (and my gut tells me it was more of an anti-Sanders and anti-Trump thing than actually being pro-Her) and everyone else I know who told me they voted for Her was essentially scared or shamed into it. I've been voting since the early 90s and I've never seen the polls that empty. I knew she was toast that day.

So they can continue to blame BernieBros, but what is it getting them? Continue to say progressives are being divisive because we just won't shut up and get in line. Expect to lose by an even bigger margin when you try to force Her (or a demographically acceptable clone) on us again. Considering it's still CW for Democrats that Nader cost Gore the election in 2000, I'm not shocked we're seeing many of the same plays again.

PS: the link to the source for the quote about the PUMAs who voted McCain goes back to the sad sack Newsweek "Here's the Proof BernieBros elected Trump" article. Admittedly, I wouldn't have glanced at that one otherwise. Oy, it made my head hurt.

@ggersh "Picked" in, shall we say, a variety of interesting ways, which went far afield from simply not getting enough votes. Probably FSC wouldn't have advanced to the general in an honestly run election, but, of course, one can never be sure.

the D's picked the only one that could lose
to tinyhands, need anything be said?

@featheredsprite Once in a while, my old boss used to bark at me "Do something! Even if it's wrong. Just do something!"

[Trotsky? I'm not sure.]

We had a revolutionary moment, when the populace would vote against the Establishment.

The Dems suppressed the left-of-establishment vote, so the population had to vote for the right-of-establishment candidate.

ANYTHING but the same old stuff.

@snoopydawg
So would you be if someone compared you to a Hillary Wannabe. Exactly who is picking on corn cobs? What did corn cobs ever do to them? Stop picking on corn cobs!

Sanders-Trump voters didn’t much approve of Obama either.

This isn't the word I would use for how I feel about this Empty Suited Sociopath.

There is a lot in the last article you linked to, it's hard not to know where to begin

Union leader RoseAnn Demoro has equally strong views about what will fail Democrats: Ryan’s corporate-friendly approach, which she complains the party has clung to since Bill Clinton entered the White House. “In any other place they would have fired the entire group of people and started from a different narrative after the last election,” said the executive director of National Nurses United. “Not the Democrats. They have lost a thousand seats in the last decade and they are still staying the course.”

As I have stated before, I think this was done intentionally. How else can you explain how after they lost so many seats in 2010, they didn't change their platform.
Voters knew that they had both houses of congress and the presidency and that Obama could have passed any of the legislation he ran on during his campaign, but he spent so much time on the ACA only and then the republicans won back the house.
This was one reason why I stayed home in 2010 and I why I didn't vote for Obama in 2012.

California Sen. Kamala Harris is among those caught in the crossfire. Activists on the left created a vivid meme that attacked her as a “centrist corn cob” — an insult progressives hurl at politicians they accuse of twisting themselves into positions palatable to the center. They cited her decision while California attorney general not to prosecute billionaire Steven T. Mnuchin, now Trump’s Treasury secretary, for misdeeds state investigators uncovered at the California bank Mnuchin ran. Their meme went viral after Center for American Progress President Neera Tanden, a longtime advisor to Hillary Clinton, called on Sanders to tell his supporters to knock it off.

She's Obama with boobs. She had a slam dunk case against Mnuchin for his foreclosing on thousands of Californians, including an older woman who owed his company $.27 and Harris thought that was okay business practices? Oh hell no!

“Sandersism is the only cause on offer for Democrats right now,” Cowan said. “It didn’t win in the primary. It hasn’t been winning since the primary. It’s incumbent on Democrats to create and offer a true alternative to this.”

The reason Sandersism didn't win in the primary was because It Was Stolen From Him!
And still the democrats would rather have Trump win again than let a Bernie type candidate win and drag the party to the left.

@Shahryar Problem is, once I've caught somebody cheating, I don't play cards with them anymore.

I mean, I'm not sure how many of those votes were real. And I can't be.

Maybe I can't be sure ever, but particularly once you've caught a politician's campaign bribing an official to purge over 100,000 people off the voting rolls, well...not really sure I'd put it past them to flip votes as well.

the numbers are from the next day after the election, I believe, and many millions more were counted. Hillary Clinton didn't win the popular vote by as much as Obama did but it wasn't quite the collapse that's suggested.

Obama's first election was when he pretended to be a "progressive". Note the dropoff between 2008 and 2012. Obama beat McCain by 10 million votes, Romney by 5 million. Hills "beat" Trump by 3 million. Obama's vote total in 2012 was 65,916,000. Hillary's in 2016 was 65,845,000.

@psychodrew

I voted Stein, too. In Colorado.

I voted for Jill Stein in Pennsylvania. No regrets.

@doh1304 bought and co-opted by some evil people for their own purposes. It like when a trusted natural product gets bought up by a big conglomerate, and then they keep the name, but degrade the product. Once everyone realizes that it's now fake, the reputation is shot forever.

actually, the collapse in total Democratic votes isn't (just) HRC's fault. As gjohnsit says, the bleeding began in 2009, and the blame can be placed on the entire corruptocrat cabal.

@Meteor Man
another part of it was not known to me and I am glad to have learned that. MLK, integrity and courage.

Take Dr. Martin Luther King. Rather than meekly stand by and instruct his followers to give Democratic leaders the benefit of the doubt, King risked his reputation to excoriate the U.S. government’s—and, by extension, President Lyndon Johnson’s—prosecution of the Vietnam War.

In his famous “Beyond Vietnam” speech in 1967, King called the U.S. government “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today.” He accused U.S. soldiers of being forced to be “on the side of the wealthy, and the secure, while we create a hell for the poor.” (me: still true to this day)

At the time, some questioned his boldness. Other civil rights leaders immediately distanced themselves from King, including the NAACP, whose board of directors unanimously voted that mixing civil rights and the antiwar movement was a “serious tactical mistake.” The Pittsburgh Courier, a black paper, accused him of “tragically misleading” African Americans.( me: of course those tactical mistakes ... they are more important than integrity, WTF)

The turn against King was most pronounced among the white community, the mainstream media and the political establishment. The New York Times and Washington Post both ran editorials harshly criticizing King, with the Times claiming that “to divert the energies of the civil rights movement to the Vietnam issue is both wasteful and self-defeating”—in other words, urging him to stop being critical and let the administration do its job.

President Johnson, once King’s ally, echoed this sentiment, appalled that King would criticize him instead of being grateful. “What is that goddamned nigger preacher doing to me?” he erupted upon hearing the speech. “We gave him the Civil Rights Act of 1964, we gave him the Voting Rights Act of 1965, we gave him the War on Poverty. What more does he want?” It marked the end of King’s relationship with the White House.

Good to know about that. Sometimes you have to end relationships.

No, not anyone here. In These Times just caught up with c99%:

While some media commentators want to shield Democrats from criticism, holding politicians’ feet to the fire is a longtime successful tradition on the U.S. Left

With great details:

For instance, while Harris says all the right things about criminal justice and mass incarceration now, she frequently worked against reform in California. She repeatedly opposed meaningful reform of the state's uniquely harsh three-strikes policy, putting her to the right of her Republican opponent in 2010, and championed a policy that sent parents to jail for truant kids.

She also resisted efforts to make her office investigate police killings, to the frustration of many Californians of color. Her critics in the state saw her as a cautious, ambitious politician who stood on the sidelines on criminal justice reform.

It's also telling what Harris was and wasn't zealous about prosecuting. Harris repeatedly worked to keep an innocent man in jail who had already served more than a decade for a crime he didn't commit. She defended a prosecuting attorney who slipped a falsified confession into an interrogation transcript and later went after Backpage—an online classified website used by sex workers—during an election year, putting them back in harm's way, looking for work on the streets.

And while she now touts her toughness on bankers, her Mortgage Strike Force prosecuted a troublingly small number of cases—less than some county district attorneys in other states.

'nuff said:

http://inthesetimes.com/article/20451/kamala-harris-left-democrats-debate

@Dopeman That's actually a very American reaction.

We are quite gullible, generally speaking (though less so than pre-2010), but most of us, once we perceive a cheat or a fake, really despise them.

crossover appeal with Libertarian types. This is something I not only read about while it was happening, but experienced first hand with a close friend of mine.

The guy (to this day) has his garage/mancave plastered in Ron Paul banners. Once Rand Paul was out he supported Bernie. I'll never forget the opinion of Bernie he shared with me:

"I'm not down with all the socialist shit, but Bernie is the most honest politician I've seen on the national stage since Ron Paul."

I'm no Ron Paul fan, but that's quite a compliment from a guy who considers Ron Paul a god.

He didn't like Trump or any of the establishment Republicans but he hates Hillary with the heat of 1,000 suns. On election day he held his nose for Trump to stop Hillary.