The Clinton Victory Thread

[Teague]

Hillary thinks Willie's Teflon rubbed off on her. It didn't. If she comes up against Trump he'll savage her.

And he'll lose in one of the greatest landslides of all time. He's running an overtly misogynistic campaign and "savaging her" will just feed into that. As somebody put it the other day "By November Ivanka will be voting for Hillary". Ann Coulter will be about the only woman left to support him.

Will it?

Are republicans coming out to vote in greater numbers now because of the buffoonery of Trump? This could be a problem if Clinton gets the nomination and squashes the hopes and dreams of real progressives who may just not bother turning up to vote - especially if they have to wait 5 hours. Arizona could be lost just for the fact they fucked up the voting so badly. Add that they lose Sanders as a choice that's 2 negatives to think about that will keep some people away.

Meanwhile, people who like Trump are loving him and probably can't wait to get out and vote for him.

If anything, this election has been far from normal or predictive so really anything can happen.

Trump is only getting a small percentage of the overall electorate. Even amongst Republicans there are as many voting against him as for him and that's only going to get worse in a general election.

Honestly I don't think he really even wants to win (the general election). I still think this is largely a publicity stunt to see how far he can get and thus he's not going to do what it takes to win. In fact he's doing the opposite of what it would take to win. If he ends up the nominee I think he'll get even more outrageous so that he can push the envelope further while ensuring he'll never actually have to be president.

I'm willing to bet that if it comes down to him and Clinton that at some point he'll call her a cunt in an interview or even a live debate. That's the level of "campaigning" I would expect from a Trump general election effort. And it will get him some votes, but it will drive away far more.

To be very clear when I say it will be a landslide for the ages I'm not saying Clinton is some fantastic candidate. But she'll more or less get the votes Obama got which was more than enough for comfortable victories while Trump could get the lowest percentage of the total vote of a major party candidate in a two way race in history if he keeps going as I expect he will.

Yeah I more or less said the same too lol - I wonder if he's surprised himself he got this far.

I have no doubt that Trump is going to lose whoever is up for running. People who say they're voting Clinton to make sure Trump doesn't get in are fooling themselves. Trump is never getting in so it's not an argument to use.

[Teague]

But she'll more or less get the votes Obama got which was more than enough for comfortable victories while Trump could get the lowest percentage of the total vote of a major party candidate in a two way race in history if he keeps going as I expect he will.

This is spot on. I believe that the reason the GOP are desperate to get Trump out of the race is exactly this.

If things continue as they are (and the prognosis for the GOP is mainly deterioration) Clinton could win so big in November that the balance on Capitol Hill is greatly altered. I expect to start seeing pundits and polls about how many new Democrats will be in Congress and Senate after the election.

I sincerely hope that Sanders supporters do come to see how much that could improve the likelihood of his agenda getting traction in Washington DC.

Tom

And if Clinton doesn't crush Trump in a general, if she's the candidate, it's going to look embarrassing and if she loses.....omg Women in the US prepare to be set back another 20 years.

In fact, people had better vote Bernie because if she loses to Trump the women's movement would take a massive hit, maybe not even recover! It's not worth the risk to undermine it so badly so best vote in Sanders.

See what I did there?

[Columbus]

See what I did there?

Yes indeed.
You started with a wildly implausible scenario and then drenched it in emotional appeals.

That seems to be standard operating procedure for many of Sanders' staunch supporters.

I too want to see his agenda make headway. Our main disagreement is who is better able. You think it Sanders and I think it Clinton plus Sanders.
Tom

[ScholasticSpastic]

You started with a wildly implausible scenario and then drenched it in emotional appeals.

That seems to be standard operating procedure for many of Sanders' staunch supporters.

Sadly, I agree. It's an embarrassment for me because I'm also a Sanders supporter. I don't think he has a snowball's chance, but I support him even so. Because I'm getting really tired of voting against people while not having someone to vote FOR. After the Primaries, I expect I'll be back to voting against people. But for now it's a nice change, and I appreciate it.

[Columbus]

I don't think he has a snowball's chance, but I support him even so

As well you should, if you believe in his policies.
I want him to get to Philadelphia with a bunch of support. That will give him clout and make furthering the agenda feasible.

But at the end of the day, it's the DNC v GOP in November. People who threaten to vote GOP out of spite or not vote undermine Sanders more than Clinton.
Tom

[Teague]

See what I did there?

Yes indeed.
You started with a wildly implausible scenario and then drenched it in emotional appeals.

That seems to be standard operating procedure for many of Sanders' staunch supporters.

I too want to see his agenda make headway. Our main disagreement is who is better able. You think it Sanders and I think it Clinton plus Sanders.
Tom

Nope, I was pointing out the argument Clinton supporters use for voting Clinton over Sanders.

[ScholasticSpastic]

But at the end of the day, it's the DNC v GOP in November.

This is what's broken. Neither the DNC nor the GOP are government entities, nor are they bound by law to represent the people of these United States. They are private organizations which have been allowed to operate as if they were a part of the government for far too long, suckling like the parasites they are from the teets of the common man. Extant political parties are to our government as religions are to our society- they take credit for, and subvert, what we would have had anyway if they'd never existed while doing incalculable harm to those they claim to help.

[Columbus]

Nope, I was pointing out the argument Clinton supporters use for voting Clinton over Sanders.

Pointing it out is not the same as arguing against it.

I believe that if Sanders got the White House it would be by a squeaker of a vote. He would likely bring more Republican candidates to Capitol hill whose mission would be to block Sanders at every turn. And Sanders would not even have much support amongst the Democrats because he is not one and they have their own agendas.

Sanders counters this by promising to "call out" the obstructionists and shame them. Given the state of the government, I don't see how anyone could believe that is an effective plan. Gimme a break!
Tom

[laklak]

Hard to shame people without any.

[Willie71]

Nope, I was pointing out the argument Clinton supporters use for voting Clinton over Sanders.

Pointing it out is not the same as arguing against it.

I believe that if Sanders got the White House it would be by a squeaker of a vote. He would likely bring more Republican candidates to Capitol hill whose mission would be to block Sanders at every turn. And Sanders would not even have much support amongst the Democrats because he is not one and they have their own agendas.

Sanders counters this by promising to "call out" the obstructionists and shame them. Given the state of the government, I don't see how anyone could believe that is an effective plan. Gimme a break!
Tom

You think he's planning to use shame? Maybe you could try to better understand his p,an before you dismiss it.

[Columbus]

Nope, I was pointing out the argument Clinton supporters use for voting Clinton over Sanders.

Pointing it out is not the same as arguing against it.

I believe that if Sanders got the White House it would be by a squeaker of a vote. He would likely bring more Republican candidates to Capitol hill whose mission would be to block Sanders at every turn. And Sanders would not even have much support amongst the Democrats because he is not one and they have their own agendas.

Sanders counters this by promising to "call out" the obstructionists and shame them. Given the state of the government, I don't see how anyone could believe that is an effective plan. Gimme a break!
Tom

You think he's planning to use shame? Maybe you could try to better understand his p,an before you dismiss it.

This is the best explanation I have heard for how he is going to get his agenda through Capitol Hill. Most of his plans require congressional approval. Sanders will be up against not only the GOP that has successfully blocked Obama. He will also be up against the majority of the Democrats.

Please describe a broad explanation of how Sanders is going to overcome that degree of obstruction in Congress.
Tom

[laklak]

What else could "call out" mean? Executive orders only go so far, and with all the GOP and probably half the Dems against him anything he did would be rolled back in short order.

Probably the best thing we can hope for is another 4 years of fucking very little. I can live with that.

[Willie71]

Nope, I was pointing out the argument Clinton supporters use for voting Clinton over Sanders.

Pointing it out is not the same as arguing against it.

I believe that if Sanders got the White House it would be by a squeaker of a vote. He would likely bring more Republican candidates to Capitol hill whose mission would be to block Sanders at every turn. And Sanders would not even have much support amongst the Democrats because he is not one and they have their own agendas.

Sanders counters this by promising to "call out" the obstructionists and shame them. Given the state of the government, I don't see how anyone could believe that is an effective plan. Gimme a break!
Tom

You think he's planning to use shame? Maybe you could try to better understand his p,an before you dismiss it.

This is the best explanation I have heard for how he is going to get his agenda through Capitol Hill. Most of his plans require congressional approval. Sanders will be up against not only the GOP that has successfully blocked Obama. He will also be up against the majority of the Democrats.

Please describe a broad explanation of how Sanders is going to overcome that degree of obstruction in Congress.
Tom

Drawing attention to the obstructionism when people are up for re-election. Getting cooperative congress people is part of the "revolution." This has been his position from the beginning. This is why a handful of superdelegates gave changed their votes this week. The constituents made it clear to vote with the people or look for a new job.

[Columbus]

Drawing attention to the obstructionism when people are up for re-election. Getting cooperative congress people is part of the "revolution."

What method is going to change that by November? For a lot of candidates, simply obstructing Obama was plenty to get reelected on.And the Democrats, as a whole, aren't particularly on board either.
If the supporters of Sanders agenda( as opposed to Sanders himself) want a revolution it is going to take time, and investment of energy over a long haul. One election is not going to change everything. Will the people who want Sanders' agenda still be around if they don't get their way immediately? Time will tell.
Tom

[Willie71]

Drawing attention to the obstructionism when people are up for re-election. Getting cooperative congress people is part of the "revolution."

What method is going to change that by November? For a lot of candidates, simply obstructing Obama was plenty to get reelected on.And the Democrats, as a whole, aren't particularly on board either.
If the supporters of Sanders agenda( as opposed to Sanders himself) want a revolution it is going to take time, and investment of energy over a long haul. One election is not going to change everything. Will the people who want Sanders' agenda still be around if they don't get their way immediately? Time will tell.
Tom

Now you are getting it. Sanders has said from the beginning that he cannot do this just by getting elected. It won't change by November.

Clinton is even more hated by republicans. How is she supposed to get anything done without the revolution?

[Columbus]

How is she supposed to get anything done without the revolution?

That's my point. She will get a lot more done working with revolution and so will "the revolution". That's why I am sure Sanders will bebacking hher by the end of the convention. They are probably negotiating their "we're all in this together to Win" speech right now. Because it is true, and most people can see that. The current best outcome for the revolution is for Clinton to agree to a bunch of stuff from Sanders agenda, then blow away the GOP in November and get to Washington DC with the revolution under way.

The worst case scenario would be for Sanders to eke out a win in Philadelphia, and then lose to Cruz/Kasich. I don't think that likely, but he is unlikely to have a Congress willing to do business with him either. I honestly do think he will be more strongly opposed even than Clinton, because he is comparatively weak, and the "OMG, the commies are coming!" will be strong. Clinton, OTOH, is willing and able to start breaking kneecaps on day one. And everyone knows it.

Tom

[Willie71]

How is she supposed to get anything done without the revolution?

That's my point. She will get a lot more done working with revolution and so will "the revolution". That's why I am sure Sanders will bebacking hher by the end of the convention. They are probably negotiating their "we're all in this together to Win" speech right now. Because it is true, and most people can see that. The current best outcome for the revolution is for Clinton to agree to a bunch of stuff from Sanders agenda, then blow away the GOP in November and get to Washington DC with the revolution under way.

The worst case scenario would be for Sanders to eke out a win in Philadelphia, and then lose to Cruz/Kasich. I don't think that likely, but he is unlikely to have a Congress willing to do business with him either. I honestly do think he will be more strongly opposed even than Clinton, because he is comparatively weak, and the "OMG, the commies are coming!" will be strong. Clinton, OTOH, is willing and able to start breaking kneecaps on day one. And everyone knows it.

Tom

Clinton doesn't want the revo,ution. If she did, she wouldn't be taking the money from Wall Street, or the fossil fuel industry. I don't see any knee breaking from her. She is pro corporate all the way. I honestly can't see where people get the idea she is for the regular citizens at all, based on her record, or from her campaign donators. Are you aware of the third way democrat philosophy?

I've posted this before. I just read this book, and it's on the top of my must read political books now.

[Nicko]

... and now for something completely different.

[Boyle]

How is she supposed to get anything done without the revolution?

That's my point. She will get a lot more done working with revolution and so will "the revolution". That's why I am sure Sanders will bebacking hher by the end of the convention. They are probably negotiating their "we're all in this together to Win" speech right now. Because it is true, and most people can see that. The current best outcome for the revolution is for Clinton to agree to a bunch of stuff from Sanders agenda, then blow away the GOP in November and get to Washington DC with the revolution under way.

The worst case scenario would be for Sanders to eke out a win in Philadelphia, and then lose to Cruz/Kasich. I don't think that likely, but he is unlikely to have a Congress willing to do business with him either. I honestly do think he will be more strongly opposed even than Clinton, because he is comparatively weak, and the "OMG, the commies are coming!" will be strong. Clinton, OTOH, is willing and able to start breaking kneecaps on day one. And everyone knows it.

Tom

So you've said this before, and on this point I'm completely ignorant, but what sorta knee-capping politics does she do? That is, how do you know she will and what does that mean? Do you mean the DNC will be solidly behind her and so will threaten Democratic House Members and Senators if they don't vote along party lines?

ETA: I'm also confused 'cause if she's so competent a politician how the fuck is Sanders even relevant to this nomination cycle? Why is he able to do, well, anything? Is it just the sweet nothings in our ears that are corrupting us?

[Willie71]

Clinton has skipped campaigning in Wisconsin to focus on New York. She's willing to lose big in Wisconsin because not winning by 15 plus points in New York will be a total embarrassment to her and her campaign. In two weeks, Sanders has gone from -40 to -12, and he's attracting crowds of 15000 at his rallies.