local news and the local news WILL continue to cover Bern-Hard Sanders, because Bernie WILL continue to produce yoooj rallies.

Also keep in mind that Hillary is a shitty candidate who gaffes semi/weekly....yes I know Democratic primary voters are to dumb to vote their interests but ya never know until ya try.

I'm not giving up I will be voting for Bern-Hard in NY on April 19th and I will continue to win votes from family and friends in my native California!!

Let's bring her campaign to heel!

on Trump and the General Election, and is taking a bit of time off the campaign trail to fund raise, etc.

It was very explicit--she's in General Election mode.

BTW, from a couple pieces that I've read, it appears that she's not going to take DT on, directly. Surrogates will do most of the dirty work.

He would eviscerate her if she did, I imagine. To some extent, her campaign is going to take on his 'sexism.' It blew up in her face last time, and WJC was reported to be running from reporters at the rope lines [for a couple of weeks], in order to evade questions regarding Monica, etc. So, I'm a bit surprised at that tactic.

From what I've seen and heard, Trump may mostly ignore her, because he says she's got no enthusiasm behind her campaign. It could be that he will concentrate on Bernie (for a while), because he considers him to be a bigger threat. That is what he said in interviews this past week, when he was talking about the Chicago protest. (Now, that was before last night's election results. His tactics may have changed. He's like a chameleon, so who knows?)

OTOH, if FSC does attack him, I can't imagine that he would let it go unanswered.

I'll be interested to see how far FSC's 'crew' goes, too. I think I know that DT has no boundaries. Will FSC?

Time will tell . . .

(Music City) Mollie
elinkarlsson@WordPress

It was awful.

Thanks for signing up, and sharing that wonderful quote

After all, it always does. It's that in a Clinton vs. Trump race, I just can't bring myself to care. Not that I want Donald Trump to be president--far from it. I just don't want any more Clintons, either. The former would obviously be more damaging in the short term, but I feel like Clinton could actually be worse in the long run. Does anyone actually think Trump could govern? His bull-in-a-china-shop presidency would be like a national purge of our worst demons, Republicans would end up even more chagrined than they were after Bush, and any whiff of overt racism and egotistical militarism would be politically toxic for a long time. But with a Clinton presidency, in a way you get the worst of both worlds: neoliberalism cementing its stranglehold over what is still technically the leftmost of our two major parties, and the Republicans absolutely frothing at the mouth to defeat her, which they will. Soundly. And then what?

So I guess the question is, do we want to eat our shit sandwich now, or eat it later? How do we want the republic to die, in one big bang, or by a thousand tiny cuts?

I can see Donald standing up with a handful of cancelled checks, all made out to Hillary. He reads them, one at a time, and then states what he received in return for them.

Trump is going to destroy her! She only thinks she's suffered from the attacks of republicans. Trump will go where no republican has gone before. And it will be ugly! He has so many avenues of attack that he'll probably have some difficulty deciding which one he wants to attack he on first. And many of the things he'll be attacking her on, put him firmly to the left of her positions.

Hillary is likely to lose in a landslide to a candidate who has one of the lowest approval ratings in presidential history. But then again, I guess the same could be said for Trump. Two losers are now the leadings for the POTUS. How far we have fallen!

Hillary is probably just stupid enough to think that she can bully Russia. She'll go wild with "regime change" and/or invasion in even more countries.