Yes It’s a Live Blog: CNN Democratic Town Hall from Ohio State University
Posted: March 13, 2016 Filed under: 2016 elections | Tags: Bernie Sanders, Democratic race for President 2016, Florida, Hillary Clinton, Missouri, Ohio Primaries 137 Comments
OY!! Here we go again! There are some big races coming up on Tuesday and CNN has another Town Hall scheduled tonight for the two Democratic candidates for President. I’m going to sit through another one of these things. Please don’t leave me alone to it!!!
Just two days before key votes in Ohio and Florida, the final two Democratic candidates will appear in a CNN Town Hall tonight. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders is hoping for a strong showing in Ohio, where he currently trails former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by a fair margin.
The town hall is being co-hosted by both CNN and TV One. CNN’s Jake Tapper and TV One’s Roland Martin will be moderating the event and inviting questions from the attendees.
The broadcast will air on CNN from 8 p.m. ET – 10 p.m. ET from Ohio State University.
Florida and Ohio vote on Tuesday which are two big states. Thankfully, Florida is a closed state. Ohio has a semi-open primary. This means:
Under Ohio election law, you declare your political party affiliation by requesting the ballot of a political party in a partisan primary election.
According to Nate Silver’s Poll of Polls, Florida has a 99% chance of going to Hillary. She has a 98% chance in Ohio. Remember, voting by switching affiliations for strategy purposes is important. As we’ve seen, the NRA actively encourages its voters to cross party if necessary to vote against Hillary and for Bernie. Bernie’s voting base was 7% Republican in Michigan and he nabbed a lot of unaffiliated while losing Dems by 12%. It will be interesting to see what happens there.
Here is the list of RCP recent polls for further details of each data point. The most recent poll of Missouri has Hillary up but Missouri has not be polled a lot so one data point should not be considered the be all and end all of statistics judging the state of a race.
At last this is a town hall because I could just cut and paste any townhall or debate from any where and come up with the answers to tonight’s townhall form Sanders. Even with fact checking and corrections and complete horror about the internalized sexism and racism, it still the same stuff. I’m not looking for anything but the repeat of 70s class frame. I’ll probably faint if I hear any wee bit of modern socialist economic theory or intersectionality of sexism, racism and income differences.
I’m assuming that Hillary will have to explain when she tried to categorize the Reagan response to the AIDS crisis at Nancy Reagan’s funeral. They eventually responded but only after a lot of folks died and a lot of opportunity was wasted. Nancy did do behind the scenes work but only after Rock Hudson and Roy Cohen were seriously ill and dying. Before then, it didn’t seem to even register. But, here’s the crux of Hillary’s response in a much more appropriate format. It’s not a soundbite. It’s a short essay. It recognizes that things that went on prior to Nancy’s change of mind.
Yesterday, at Nancy Reagan’s funeral, I said something inaccurate when speaking about the Reagans’ record on HIV and AIDS. Since then, I’ve heard from countless people who were devastated by the loss of friends and loved ones, and hurt and disappointed by what I said. As someone who has also lost friends and loved ones to AIDS, I understand why. I made a mistake, plain and simple.
I want to use this opportunity to talk not only about where we’ve come from, but where we must go in the fight against HIV and AIDS.
To be clear, the Reagans did not start a national conversation about HIV and AIDS. That distinction belongs to generations of brave lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, along with straight allies, who started not just a conversation but a movement that continues to this day.
The AIDS crisis in America began as a quiet, deadly epidemic. Because of discrimination and disregard, it remained that way for far too long. When many in positions of power turned a blind eye, it was groups like ACT UP, Gay Men’s Health Crisis and others that came forward to shatter the silence — because as they reminded us again and again, Silence = Death. They organized and marched, held die-ins on the steps of city halls and vigils in the streets. They fought alongside a few courageous voices in Washington, like U.S. Representative Henry Waxman, who spoke out from the floor of Congress.
We also will have to continue this crazy right wing induced meme that Hillary cannot be trusted. Bernie’s been fact checked so many times you’d think people
would get the idea that what he says is way far-fetched and not particularly trustworthy. Here’s the latest fact check on his tirades on job losses and NAFTA which are way exaggerated. Both Hillary and Bernie are way more honest than any of the Republicans. But why is it only Hillary has the trust issue?
Bernie Sanders wasn’t asked about his honesty or trustworthiness on Tuesday night. Instead, after that question to Clinton, he was asked, “Senator Sanders, you have demanded that Secretary Clinton release the transcripts of her paid Wall Street speeches. Why is this important? Do you have reason to believe that she says one thing in private and another in public?”
Did somebody say Wall Street? The good senator, of course, perked up immediately and happily hit the softball question out of the park, with all the now-familiar notes of righteous indignation.
No other candidate for president has been asked in debates about his perceived honesty and trustworthiness. Maybe it’s because other candidates are presumed to be honest and trustworthy, or maybe there’s a presumption voters don’t care about this trait in others.
Don’t play the woman card, right? We are sick and tired of hearing about double standards. People are not going to vote for Clinton just because she is a woman. If she loses, it’s because nobody trusts her – just look at the polls.
If you actually look at the Washington Post poll referenced on Tuesday night, it’s worth noting that only 27 percent of people found Republican front-runner Donald Trump honest and trustworthy.
And Sanders? Well, he wasn’t included in the poll questions about honesty and trustworthiness. Seriously. The honesty and trustworthiness questions were only asked about Clinton, Trump, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.
Apparently we are to assume that Sanders is honest and trustworthy, or that he is unlikely to be the nominee – based, you know, on the polls.
Pollsters are either convinced by their own flawed polling that Clinton is the presumptive nominee, so they don’t even bother polling Sanders’ degree of trustworthiness, or they don’t believe Sanders’ degree of trustworthiness is relevant.
But only polling Clinton on whether she is “honest and trustworthy” and then using the answer against her in a debate against Sanders reinforces the myth that she is less trustworthy than him, and it surely helps him win one “stunning” victory after another.
I just mostly judge Bernie by the fact that everything he promises is not deliverable except with a vast revolutionary army. You continue to read that he’s not really a 
credible candidate but how does that not translate into untrustworthy?
But as appealing as Sanders may be, he is not credible as president. Elizabeth Warren would have been a credible candidate, but Sanders isn’t. The campaign he has been waging is a symbolic one. For example, the proposals he has made for free college tuition and free, single-payer health care suggest what might be done if the United States underwent radical change. Those ideas would be excellent grist for a seminar. But they are not the proposals of a candidate who is serious about getting things done as president—or one who is serious about getting elected in the country we actually live in.
I don’t find him appealing at all now. He reminds me of the cranky uncle no one wants to invite for holidays because he lectures them, finger wags, and grouses each year on the same damn things. The only difference between Sanders and the generic cranky uncle is that Sanders should’ve been able to do something about even a sliver of some of it by now. Does this have something to do with it? He’s missed a lot recently which is partially due to his campaign.
From Jan 2007 to Mar 2016, Sanders missed 136 of 2,870 roll call votes, which is 4.7%. This is much worse than the median of 1.7% among the lifetime records of senators currently serving. The chart below reports missed votes over time.
You can look at the analysis on Leadership at the same link (GovTrack) and find out some other things too. For example, his policy emphasis actually appears to be Armed Forces and National Security. It’s almost twice as important as his second area which is health.
But, Rubio actually isn’t the one who missed the most votes.
Unfortunately for Mr. Trump, that data point is a bit out-of-date. So far this year, Marco Rubio’s missed 90 percent of votes — a large proportion. But it’s actually the best record among the senators still running for president. The worst? Bernie Sanders.
But what has really gotten me recently is that not only are a good deal of his supporters nasty, Bernie keeps getting nastier.
Tuesday — a day when five states hold primaries — should give a better indication of whether Sander’s tough talk is paying off.
One of those contests is in Illinois, and Sanders isn’t holding back as he campaigns here. In Chicago on Friday, Sanders even took aim at Clinton for her close association with Mayor Rahm Emanuel, whose approval ratings are in the tank, particularly among black Chicagoans.
“I want to thank Rahm Emanuel for not endorsing me. I don’t want his endorsement!” Sanders screamed to the delight of a crowd estimated at 9,000 people. “I don’t want the endorsement of a mayor who is shutting down school after school and firing teachers.”
To drive home his point, Sanders held a news conference the next day devoted entirely to Emanuel, telling reporters that if he were Clinton, he would have refused the mayor’s support.
So, I have to admit that I expect Bernie to be nasty and I expect that Hillary will continue to be critizied and asked to apologize for everything her husband ever did, everything Barrack Obama ever did, ad infintum all while we hear how’s she’s an untrustworthy person.
The one thing I’d like to hear some one ask him about is this. He’s not really been an active pusher of any bills through congress. But, he really pushed on this one. How is this acceptable human behavior?
Sanders voted to dump Vermont’s nuclear waste in a majority Latino community in Sierra Blanca, Texas
In 1998, the House of Representatives approved a compact struck between Texas, Vermont and Maine that would allow Vermont and Maine to dump low-level nuclear waste at a designated site in Sierra Blanca, Texas. Sanders, at the time representing Vermont in the House, cosponsored the bill and actively ushered it through Congress.
Located about 16 miles from the Mexican border, Sierra Blanca’s population is predominantly of Mexican ancestry. At the time, the community was about two-thirds Latino, and its residents had an average income of $8,000, according to the an article in the Bangor Daily News.
The low-level nuclear waste would include “items such as scrap metal and worker’s gloves… as well as medical gloves used in radiation treatments at hospitals,” according to the Bangor Daily News. Clinton, then the First Lady, did not have a vote on the matter.
I can’t imagine any decent human being doing that to poor, disenfranchised people.
So, let’s see how it goes tonight. I hope she finishes him off on Tuesday. I can’t take any more of these where the nasty one isn’t Donald Trump.
My featured artist tonight is Ed Murawinski.
Grab your popcorn and join us!!!!
Friday Reads: Republican Debate proves Adulting is Hard
Posted: March 11, 2016 Filed under: 2016 elections, Hillary Clinton 73 CommentsGood Afternoon!
Sometimes the way things work in this country really confuses me. Do you realize that our most well paid people either play with balls, play dress up and make believe, rely on their parents’ money, or gamble for a living? No wonder so many of them have such a difficult time adulting. What really confuses me is when they convince themselves they’re grown up enough to do something substantive like lead the country or fund some idiot to run the country the way they desire. The Republican debate last night basically highlighted a group of toddlers trying to act all grown up. It didn’t work for me.
Trump must have decided that he needed to prove he could adult last night. It didn’t really lead to any more substantive talk on actionable policy even though CNN pundits tried to convince each other that it did. Every thing was still grandiose abstractions. It did allow little Marco Rubio to apologize for his 7th grade locker room antics last time. Additionally, we got a peek at what an absolutely fanatical and slimy a person we have in Ted Cruz.
The upcoming problem is that the General Election is not the Republican primary. How can Hillary continue to face petulant toddlers and the pundit parents that continue to enable them?
At last night’s debate, Donald Trump lorded it over his rivals with supreme confidence. Gone was narcissistic, rambling, insult-spraying Trump. In his place stood calm, unifying, presidential Trump. The Donald noted with satisfaction that his foes were mostly laying off of him. “I can’t believe how civil it’s been up here,” he said, by which he really meant, “all you losers have surrendered to me, and I’m loving every minute of it.” And Trump may be right: it’s possible that by next week, he will be on a path to winning the nomination outright.
But if there is anything last night’s debate really revealed, it’s that Trump may not have any idea what is about to hit him soon enough. If Trump does become the nominee, he will run into a buzz saw of reality otherwise known as the general election, and he may not know how badly mangled he’ll get.
Last night’s debate is being widely described as a shift in tone: rather than lob schoolyard insults at each other, the GOP candidates had a real policy debate. And that’s true. But in the process, the debate really revealed the limitationsto the scrutiny Trump has faced on policy in the context of the GOP primaries — and that foreshadows, by contrast, just how brutal the scrutiny of Trump on policy will be in the general election, once those limitations are removed.
Consider a few of the main attacks that Trump had to endure last night. When Trump vaguely promised to keep entitlements solvent and to cut “waste, fraud and abuse,” Marco Rubio made a spirited case against Trump’s budgetary hocus pocus, repeatedly saying the numbers “don’t add up.” But Rubio was constrained from pointing out a key reason Trump’s numbers don’t add up — Trump’s tax plan would deliver a huge, deficit-busting tax cut for the rich — because Rubio’s plan does the same thing. Democrats speaking to a general election audience will be freer to attack Trump on this front.
Republicans continue to offer up policy that has never worked. What confuses me is how their voters don’t see that Trump’s tax plan is the same old, same old that all Republicans offer up. Are they all so wrapped up watching the shiny objects neatly wrapped up in ribbons of xenophobia, racism, misogyny and bigotry towards the GLBT community?
Here’s a nice little mini-scenario from my literally and figuratively sinking state of Louisiana. Business subsidies and cuts in taxes to the rich have gutted our ability to provide basic services and come any where near the ability to balance the budget. We just even elected a blue dog Dem as governor. However, the usual suspects have decided the way to try to close the gap is by sales tax increases on everything including food.
The poor in this state are paying for taxcuts to the rich. That’s the only Republican policy any of them have besides distracting their base with abortion controls here. It’s the local version of shiny object. Look ! We’re robbing you blind but we’ll restrict abortions even more to make you feel all holier than thou! This is a lot of the same crap that occurred on that stage last night. Government is the problem so you’re never going to get that bridge fixed, but hey, no trust fund baby will experience the evil death tax and look over there! We’ll build a wall because Mexican Rapists!!!
Louisianans will pay more and get back less under a compromise struck Wednesday over the state’s enormous budget gap.
The deal raises sales taxes by 25 percent — from four cents on the dollar to five — and applies the higher rate to a number of transactions that had previously been exempt from sales taxes.
It also falls $830 million short of fixing the state’s problems, making further cuts likely to services that have already been gutted.
Because the sales tax applies to consumption rather than income, the hike Louisiana lawmakers agreed to will be regressive: While people in the top 20 percent of the income distribution will pay 41 percent of the total cost of the tax hike according to the Louisiana Budget Project, the sales tax mechanism takes a bigger bite out of a poor family’s income than a rich one’s. Politicians are making poor people shoulder a load caused primarily by ex-Gov. Bobby Jindal’s (R) tax breaks for the rich.
The broad sales tax hike will raise $1.1 billion against the nearly $3 billion shortfall over the next 16 months. Lawmakers scrounged another $81 million from alcohol and cigarette tax hikes. These, too, are disproportionately targeted to low-income consumers who are more likely to smoke than wealthier people.
That’s not to say the deal was a complete rout for the underclass. Businesses lost some sales tax exemptions, and Democrats thwarted a campaign to raise the sales tax rate by twice as much.
The sales tax bump is temporary, scheduled to revert at the end of fiscal year 2018 according to the language of the bill. But with more red ink still on Louisiana’s horizon, lawmakers may be tempted to prolong the pain for shoppers in their state.
A slate of smaller business and sales tax tweaks will raise another $35 million or so. Much of the revenue raised by the combination of bills is listed as “uncertain” according to Associated Press. But state leaders expect these yet-unwritten tax provisions, including a sales tax for online purchases, to raise hundreds of millions more dollars.
The package still falls $30 million short of what Louisiana needs to fund all state services from now until the end of June, and $800 million shy of what’s needed for fiscal year 2017. Lawmakers faced a combined $3 billion gap over those two periods when Gov. John Bel Edwards (D) called them into the special session that closed about three quarters of the total hole.
Key state services are going to disappear into that remaining quarter of the budget hole. The $30 million shortfall this year will force cuts to agencies like the Department of Chilldren and Family Services, which was already at about half strength after massive cuts late in Jindal’s term.
How dumb can people that vote Republican continue to be? That’s what I keep asking over and over. Most Americans can see things slipping away. Why are they looking for love in all the wrong places?
Ted Cruz has turned into the darling of the National Review and the Luntz Focus Group. If there ever was an example of some one who can’t adult, it’s Ted Cruz. Do not follow this link unless you want to wind up at the Blaze where belief in the bizarre is a full time, ongoing concern.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) earned a 100-percent score from conservatives in Frank Luntz’s focus group when he talked about eliminating bureaucrats in Washington who are “killing jobs” at Thursday night’s GOP debate.
No Republican seems to understand what it takes to actually run a country or create an environment where there are jobs these days. They might as well stand up and say that little green men from mars taking money from you create jobs because that’s just about as a real. Like I said, the National Review just endorsed him. That’s proof they believe in little green men from mars creating jobs. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised given that most of them still think the math-disabled Stephen Moore is an economist.
Let’s not forget. Ted Cruz is an end timer. He’s as besotted with as much end the world religious nonsense as the wackiest ayatollah in Iran. Every child likes a good fairy tale. But at some point and especially that point where some one wants to be the leader of the free world, you have to give up childish things.
Rafael Cruz is a pastor with Purifying Fire International Ministry, although in January 2014, as Ted Cruz was preparing his presidential swing, Rafael Cruz scrapped the group’s website after various blogs began identifying the ministry as rooted in “a radical Christian ideology known as Dominionism or Christian Reconstructionism.”
Dominionism calls on anointed Christian leaders to take over government to make the laws of the nation in accordance with Biblical laws. Rafael Cruz, at the Pastor Larry Huch’s New Beginnings mega-church in Bedford Texas, outside Dallas, on Aug. 26, 2012, in a Dominionist sermon proclaimed his son, Ted Cruz, to be the “anointed one,” a Dominionist Messiah who would bring God’s law to reign.
At a Dominionist pastor’s meeting held at the Marriott Hotel in Des Moines, Iowa, on July 19 and 20, 2013, the following “anointing prayer” was read over.
So to pull all this logic together, God anoints priests to work in the church directly and kings to go out into the marketplace to conquer, plunder, and bring back the spoils to the church. The reason governmental regulation has to disappear from the marketplace is to make it completely available to the plunder of Christian “kings” who will accomplish the “end time transfer of wealth.”
Then “God’s bankers” will usher in the “coming of the messiah.”
The government is being shut down so that God’s bankers can bring Jesus back. In an editorial published in the Washington Post on Feb. 4, on the heels of Cruz’s victory in the Iowa GOP primary, John Fea of the Religion News Service published an op-ed piece noting the frequent references Ted Cruz makes in stump speeches to his father “the traveling evangelist” Rafael Cruz.
“During a 2012 sermon at the New Beginnings Church in Bedford, Texas, Rafael Cruz described his son’s political campaign as a direct fulfillment of biblical prophecy,” Fea wrote. “The elder Cruz told the congregation God would anoint Christian ‘kings’ to preside over an ‘end-time transfer of wealth’ from the wicked to the righteous. After this sermon, Larry Huch, the pastor of New Beginnings, claimed Cruz’s recent election to the U.S. Senate was a sign he was one of these kings.”
Please let all that sink in as we consider if Trump–whose bullying behavior and racism has attracted the endorsement of the KKK–is really the worst alternative that the Republicans have emanated from they’re “tell them anything as long as we get our tax cuts” philosophy to life. The Republicans haven’t been too upset by the sight of a young black woman being assaulted or a black man being cold cocked. But, damn, assault one of their own and it’s on!!!
Brietbart tries to square the circle about the apparent assault on their reporter, Michelle Fields, allegedly by Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski.
Their gist – it may have been a security guy on the grassy knoll, not Lewandowski [Ben Terris, WaPo eyewitness, stands firm.]:
The Scrum: Video Emerges to Suggest WaPo Reporter Ben Terris Misidentifies Lewandowski in Fields Incident
…
Contrary to what Donald Trump said Thursday evening after the GOP debate, the incident certainly happened. However, the person who made contact with Fields was likely not Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski.
As Trump campaign spokesperson Katrina Pierson said Thursday on the Fox Business Network, “someone probably did grab her,” i.e. Fields, though Pierson claimed it could not have been Lewandowski.
Audio of the incident, published on Politico, shows Fields asking Terris if the individual who pulled her left arm was, in fact, “Corey.” Terris says it was — an assertion he later repeated in print: “I watched as a man with short-cropped hair and a suit grabbed her arm and yanked her out of the way. He was Corey Lewandowski, Trump’s 41-year-old campaign manager.”
However, Lewandowski was not the only “man with short-cropped hair and a suit” walking near Trump. And he was walking on the opposite side of Trump from Fields, and Terris.
More video is likely to surface [Here is MSNBC – see UPDATE]:
People regularly get assaulted at Trump Rallies. Have you ever heard of that kind of thing before?
A 78-year-old white man punched a black protester in the face at a Donald Trump rally and was charged with assault, media said Thursday, in chaotic scenes on the presidential campaign trail.
John McGraw — who later said that next time “we might have to kill him” — was also charged with battery and disorderly conduct after the event Wednesday night in North Carolina, the Cumberland County sheriff’s office told the local TV station WRAL.
The incident was condemned by Bernie Sanders, who is vying with Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for the White House.
“No one in America should ever fear for their safety at a political rally. This ugly incident confirms that the politics of division has no place in our country. Mr. Trump should take responsibility for addressing his supporters’ violent actions,” Sanders said.
Multiple videos of the assault show McGraw abruptly punching the young black man in the face as he was walking up a stairway with other protesters being escorted out by police, amid cries of “USA! USA!”
McGraw was not arrested until Thursday morning, as video of the assault gained widespread attention. He was released after posting a $2,500 bond, CNN reported.
So, why do all these Republicans find it so difficult to adult? Are we truly watching them fall apart? Can we get enough turnout by the rest of us to end this now? Is this the Republicans “McGovern” moment? Is it a repeat of the Goldwater campaign? Nate Silver discusses this election and “The Party Decides” which is a 2008 book by the political scientists Marty Cohen, David Karol, Hans Noel and John Zaller.
Nonetheless, truly disastrous nominations like McGovern’s have been rare. Instead, parties have usually nominated candidates who, as the book puts it, are:
- “Credible and at least reasonably electable”;
- “Representatives of their partisan traditions.”
You might describe these two dimensions (as we sometimes have) as “electability” and “ideological fit.” The goal for a party is to find a candidate who scores highly along both axes. George W. Bush in 2000, for example, was acceptable to all major factions of the GOP, but he also began the race as a “compassionate conservative” with a highly favorable image among general election voters. It’s no surprise that Bush won his nomination easily.
At other times, the party must contemplate a trade-off between these goals. Sometimes, it will choose a candidate who breaks with party orthodoxy in important ways, but who has a lot of crossover appeal to general election voters. Bill Clinton in 1992 and John McCain in 2008 are good examples. Or, it may go for broke with an ideologically “pure” candidate whose electability is unproven. Sometimes, the gamble pays off, as it did for Republicans with Ronald Reagan in 1980, but there’s also the risk of winding up with the next Barry Goldwater. Note that Bernie Sanders and Ted Cruz, if chosen, would arguably8 fit into the category of ideologically pure but electorally dubious nominees.
There were no good candidates put forth by the Republicans this year. We’re actually getting to the point where we’re down to perhaps the worst two and the party is getting behind the crazy person over the malignant narcissist. Actually more telling is that Carly Fiorina got behind Ted Cruz and Ben Carson is now behind Trump. What we found out about them pretty much gives us an indication of why they went after who they did. Fiorina’s crazy attachment to all the untrue things about Planned Parenthood showed that she was mean and completely irrational. Carson came off as an idiot savant. He was at least successful at something and much well thought of albeit I’m still not sure exactly how some one that spacey could do complex surgery.
Then, there’s Bernie Sanders.
It seems obvious to me that there’s only one person that gives the country a chance of a future in the race. Trump will sell us to the highest bidder. Cruz will blow us up to get to the end times. Sanders will ignore everything but his own 70s paradigm of the world and we’ll be lucky if anything gets done at all any where but in his mind.
The choice has never seemed more clear. I really hope Hillary’s life time experience of being denigrated and persecuted serves her well We’re going to have to make a huge wall around her because it can only get worse as we careen towards the General. We need to be adults backing the only adult candidate in the room.
These beautiful caricatures/political cartoons are drawn by Steve Brodner who also does wonderful commentary. I’m a yugggge fan. Visit his page for more wonderful drawings.
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
Live Blog: Live Blog Republican Debate Hell Realm
Posted: March 10, 2016 Filed under: 2016 elections, Live, Live Blog, right wing hate grouups | Tags: 2016, Democratic Debate from Florida, live blog, Republican 128 Comments
Good Evening!
Well, if last night’s Democratic Debate wasn’t enough over kill for you, tonight’s Republican debate should do you in.
The debate is hosted by CNN and takes place in the battleground state of Florida which is basically Rubio’s Last Stand or (hmmm) the Rubiocon. Did that come off more like a convention for dimbulbs or as I intended?
Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, John Kasich and Marco Rubio will face off at CNN’s presidential debate on Thursday night in a state that could make one of the four men virtually unstoppable — and spell doom for another.
Thursday’s debate here comes just five days ahead of the next week’s “Super Tuesday 3,” when there are more than 350 delegates up for grabs, including in winner-take-all contests in Florida and Ohio.
Both Trump and Rubio are predicting that they will be victorious here in the Sunshine State, and fully aware of how much is riding on Florida. For Trump, a win here would fuel his growing momentum and further grow his delegate lead; for Rubio, losing his home state could be the death knell for his campaign.
Cruz and Kasich will also take the debate stage at a crucial moment in their campaigns. Cruz is aggressively trying to convince the Republican Party to coalesce around him, arguing he is the only candidate other than Trump capable of reaching 1,237 delegates; Kasich, who still has not won a single state, is eying his home state of Ohio with fresh optimism after a new poll this week showed him ahead of Rubio nationally. A Fox News poll released Wednesday showed Kasich leading Trump in Ohio, but the front-runner topping Rubio in Florida.
How will Little Marcio and Lying Ted stand up against Big Donald? Also, is this just an opportunity for Kasich to apply for the VP slot?
Donald Trump is leading two of his Republican presidential rivals in their home states,topping Sen. Marco Rubio in Florida and Gov. John Kasich in Ohio, new CNN/ORC polls show.
Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, is far ahead of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in both states.
In Ohio, Trump holds 41% to Kasich’s 35%, with Texas Sen. Ted Cruz in third at 15% and Rubio in fourth with 7%.
And in Florida, Trump holds 40% to Rubio’s 24%, with Cruz at 19% and Kasich at 5%.
This debate could be ugly. Here’s our check off list per Gizmo.
The nuanced language and posture of each candidate.
Each candidate’s stated position on national security.
Dangerous rhetorical slip ups that could tilt the public’s perception.
Cruz’s aggressiveness towards Trump.
Rubio’s decision to dial back his negative attacks on Trump.
Underhanded compliments.
Zest for life from any of the four potential nominees.
Illness resulting from a grueling campaign schedule.
Statements about immigration.
The amount of perspiration coming from each candidate.
Hillary’s tweets during the debate.
Every time Cruz looks directly at the camera.
Zealous fans of establishment candidates in the audience.
Oligarchy.
Discussion of gun deaths in America and around the world.
International trade agreements.
Any direct attacks on Bernie rather than Hillary.
Cautious wording about deportation of undocumented immigrants.
Killer apps.
Interest in anything besides yelling.
Loud cheers for Kasich on moderate policy positions.
Love.
Every time Ted Cruz, a sitting Senator, says the word “establishment”
Racist stuff and all that.
Okay, that wasn’t serious. Well, kinda sorta. Let’s try that again.
Here’s the information on how to watch the Zodiac Killer Senator Ted Cruz and the others debate. If the others are still alive after Ted’s Dominionist Demons get to them.
Tonight’s Republican debate will air on CNN. But don’t worry: If you don’t have cable, you’ll still be able to tune in — an online live stream will be free and available to all at CNN.com. The network has said the event will kick off at 8:30 pm Eastern in Miami, Florida.
This debate is the final one before a crucial day of voting in the GOP race on Tuesday, March 15. Five states — Florida, Ohio, Illinois, North Carolina, and Missouri — will go to the polls that day, and about 15 percent of overall Republican delegates will be up for grabs. Even more importantly, both Florida and Ohio allot all their delegates to whichever candidate comes in first, so Donald Trump has a big opportunity to expand his already sizable delegate lead.
Trump also has the chance to knock Marco Rubio and John Kasich out of the race, which he’d likely do if he beats each man in his home state. And he could well pull it off. Polls show Trump up big in Florida and neck and neck with Kasich in Ohio.Rubio’s campaign appears to be in free fall lately — his performance in Tuesday’s elections was simply disastrous, and there’s been increasing speculation that he’ll drop out of the race soon. This debate is likely his last chance to turn his prospects around.
Do you think I’m tired of these freaking things yet?
So, here’s some good stuff to cheer you up about last night’s miserable excuse for a panel of human beings/journos asking questions of 
Democratic Presidential Candidates.
what the hell did we just watch?!
Dear Univision: Show Us On The Doll Where Hillary And Bernie Hurt You“Interrumpiendo La Vaca MUUUUUUUUUU!!!!”
It wasn’t just the questions themselves, either. Remember when Evan made that hilarious interrupting cow en Español joke yesterday? Yeah, so did the Univision debate moderators, apparently, because they spent the entire night doing it, repeatedly cutting off both candidates halfway through (not unreasonably long!) responses. Any time Bernie and Hillary started to go back and forth on a subject — y’know, to have a fucking debate — all three moderators brusquely attempted to force them to move on. At two separate points, Ramos told Bernie “You have 30 seconds,” then tried to cut him off before he hit 15. Even Hillary looked like she wanted to say “For fuck’s sake, let the man speak.”It wasn’t just that they were interrupted, either, it was how relentlessly dickish the moderators were about it. Four separate times (three for Bernie, one for Hillary), the candidates had clearly finished speaking, but the moderators made it a point to snap “YOUR TIME IS UP” anyway.So That Was The Most Badly Moderated Debate We’ll Ever See, Right?
God, we hope so.
Please make these debates stop. I’m not having fun any more. Please let me out of this deep well. And stop giving me lotion. I don’t want any more lotion. I just want to go one night without watching a dang debate. Here is my recap of the last one. Won’t that suffice?
If not, here is the Wednesday night Univision/Washington Post debate summarized for those of you who were not unexpectedly trapped when helping a seemingly friendly stranger move a large unwieldy piece of furniture into a van and forced to watch these debates FOREVER PLEASE HAVE MERCY SEND SNACKS AT LEAST.
Clinton: Thank you for having me. I’ve been looking forward to this debate.
Maria Elena Salinas: Secretary Clinton, why don’t people trust you?
Clinton: Maybe it’s because I just said that I was looking forward to this debate, which is either a bald-faced lie or a sign that I am some kind of a sociopath. We had one of these three days ago. Why would we have another one now? Did you just want to torment me by putting me in another situation where a man makes unrealistic promises and waves his arms while I have to smile and look unruffled, all the while living with the knowledge that somehow he was what the people of Michigan wanted, not me? What does he have that I do not have? Does this answer your question?
Salinas: Maybe?
Salinas: Secretary Clinton, why don’t people like you?
Clinton: HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO ANSWER THAT
SERIOUSLY
Ladies and Gentlemen! Start your popcorn poppers!!!
Live Blog: Returns of the Night
Posted: March 8, 2016 Filed under: 2016 elections, Live, Live Blog | Tags: Clinton, Hawaii, Idaho, Michigan primaries, Mississippi, Trump 195 Comments
Good Evening!
Tonight we’re waiting for the returns from the state of Michigan even though there are three other states voting. Hawaii, Idaho, and Mississippi are also voting although several of these are Republican voting events only.
The biggest prize is Michigan where the front-runners – Donald Trump for the Republicans and Hillary Clinton for the Democrats – will seek to consolidate leads over their respective rivals.
Both parties are also holding primaries in Mississippi on Tuesday.
In addition, the Republicans are voting in Idaho and Hawaii.
Billionaire businessman Mr Trump is well ahead in the all-important delegate count, but a poor debate performance and some recent losses to Texas Senator Ted Cruz have raised questions about the solidity of his lead.
It’s an important day for Republicans, in which 6 percent of the party’s delegates are at stake. And by the time the dust has settled tonight or (more likely) tomorrow, about 43 percent of the party’s delegates will be allotted overall.
But really, today is a prelude to the far more consequential contests taking place in one week. That’s because today’s delegates are allocated mostly proportionally, making it tough for any candidate to pick up a huge lead. Next week, though, Florida and Ohio will vote winner-take-all, and the outcomes there could have major implications for the future of the race, since Donald Trump has led recent polls of both states. If he wins those two, he could amass a delegate lead that will be very difficult for any of his rivals to surmount.
So expect Republicans to interpret tonight’s results mainly in terms of what they might mean for next week. Does Trump look mortal, as he did on Saturday, or will he rebound with a dominant performance? Is Marco Rubio truly in free fall, as some recent polls have indicated? Is the anti-Trump vote consolidating around Ted Cruz, or will it remain split?
As for Democrats, Hillary Clinton is up big in polls of both states voting today. A win in Mississippi tonight wouldn’t be a surprise, since she’s romped in the South so far, but it would let her continue to pad her lead in pledged delegates, which is already sizable. But if Sanders gets blown out in Michigan, that may indicate that Clinton is likely to win several other primaries in large, delegate-rich states outside the South — making analready tough delegate math challenge for Sanders even tougher.
Michigan is a state that’s undergone a vast change. It used to be the center of a great post-War industrial automobile industry but most of its lucrative union jobs are gone. The auto industry is on the mend but no 
where as powerful as it used to be in the country. It is perhaps a great test of the power of establishment vs. outsider revolution.
While Sanders has made awkward attempts to court African American voters, Hillary Clinton has deep ties to the community. She was the first presidential candidate to visit Flint, Michigan, a predominately African American city with toxic water.
Clinton hopes to appeal to people like Lawrence White, a 43-year-old state employee and owner of a small security firm who feels betrayed by every level of government and by both parties. “I’m not just singling out Governor [Rick] Snyder,” the African American Democrat told me in January. “All the politicians including the EPA are playing tit-for-tat, playing games at our expense. It’s everybody. It’s Republicans. It’s Democrats. It’s a globalization of not caring for the people of Flint.”
Just north of Detroit, in the suburbs of Oakland and Macomb counties, live the children and grandchildren of Reagan Democrats, white working-class voters who defected their party to support Ronald Reagan in the 1980s.
I grew up among Reagan Democrats; their racial and economic grievances were the soundtrack of my childhood. For people like Benson Brundage, a Macomb County contractor who told me in 2012 that welfare is racial “subsidization,” Donald Trump gives voice to their fears.
Mitt Romney dog-whistled at them in 2012. Now the former GOP nominee issuggesting that Trump is a bigot.
Polls show that all the midwestern industrial states favor Trump and Clinton. Here’s a list of the latest polls from RCP. It’s bound to be a dismal day for Marco Rubio. That’s pretty obvious. Is Kasich rising since these states should be favorable to him?
Ohio Gov. John Kasich has actually jumped ahead of Rubio for third place in Michigan, and is rising quickly, a Monmouth University poll out Monday showed. He appears to have worn well in last week’s Republican presidential debate, when he stayed out of the Trump-Rubio-Cruz scrum.
So imagine this scenario: Kasich beats Rubio in Michigan. Then, on March 15, Kasich wins his 66-delegate, winner-take-all home state of Ohio, and Rubio loses his 99-delegate, winner-take-all home state of Florida.
Find your presidential match with CNN’s 2016 Candidate Matchmaker
Suddenly, Kasich would become the leading moderate, establishment-type Republican in the race — and Rubio would lack a path forward.
There are a lot of “ifs” for that to happen. But for Kasich to stand any chance of turning what’s been a smaller-scale campaign that’s been much choosier about where he tries to compete into one with a real shot at quickly racking up delegates, Michigan is where it has to start.
Join us tonight for the returns! I’ve put up a picture from each of the states. As you can see, there couldn’t be a better example of the diversity in Americans and geography in the states voting tonight.
Mississippi returns will come in first at 8 pm est so get ready!!!
Monday Reads: “Excuse me, I’m Talking!”
Posted: March 7, 2016 Filed under: 2016 elections, Afternoon Reads, Hillary Clinton 55 Comments
Monday again!
So, we’re past Super Tuesday and heading towards the Ides of March. I didn’t think I’d learn much new from the Democratic Debate in Michigan last night. There may have not been any new information but there certainly was a lot of reinforcements of impressions and old information.
Y’all know me. I’m a nerdy girl. I always have been. I play piano. I paint. I love animation. I read The Hobbit in 4th grade for the first of many times and discovered Dr. Who in Grad school. I had a comic book collection as a kid. I was in every AP class in High School. I have a doctorate in financial economics which means I use the same damn math that Rocket Scientists and theoretical physicists use. I love anything nonfiction and documentary. I’ve worked at the FED, lots of banks, and I’ve taught university. I’ve been nearly the only damn woman in the work environment or class many, many times. I had to go through a lot to get there and stay there. I’ve been the brains behind a stupid CEO in quite a few states and cities.
So, believe me when I tell you that there’s always one old quack in the room that talks over women, gives nonverbal cues that what we say is unappreciated, and feels that his opinion is the only one that’s important. Every single one of those experiences came flooding back to me last night in living color accompanied by the ol’ heebie jeebies. Oh, and I’m white and any one whose been to my house prior to the flood of young white hipsters would likely call my neighborhood a “ghetto”. WTF?
Losers* Bernie Sanders: The senator from Vermont had effectively walked a fine line in the previous six debates when it came to attacking Clinton without coming across as bullying or condescending. He tripped and fell while trying to execute that delicate dance on Sunday night. Sanders’s “excuse me, I’m talking” rebuttal to Clinton hinted at the fact that he was losing his temper with her. His “Can I finish, please?” retort ensured that his tone and his approach to someone trying to become the first female presidential nominee in either party would be THE story of the night.
You don’t have to be a woman making her way in a primarily male environment for work to be continually hushed by men. We all know the rules of 
communication are different for us. We have to interrupt frequently to just get a freaking word in edgewise.
It seems the only thing of importance that happened at last night’s Democratic debate is that Hillary Clinton interrupted Bernie Sanders and he shushed her. This has erupted into a big debate on the Twitters and Facespace thing, but I actually think it’s an important topic we need to discuss.
The rules of communication are different for women and men.
Here’s the deal, guys: women don’t like to be shushed. At all. If my husband ever tells me to be quiet or shush — yes, it’s happened — it elicits an intense, visceral, negative response. It makes me furious. And when it happens in a professional setting? It pushes every feminist button I own.
Why? Because you’re telling me I’m not important. You’re discounting me. You’re saying my ideas don’t matter, and that I don’t have the right to express them.
Men interrupt each other all the time and I daresay they don’t have that same response. It’s just how they communicate. But men and women come at communication from very different places.
The way we communicate is one of the many subtle ways women are expected to take a subservient role in society. I know it looks like we’ve come a long way, baby — hey we can vote and wear pants, huzzah — but when you look at basic social interactions, we’re constantly sent the contradictory message that we are second place. We get talked over, our ideas don’t matter, our issues aren’t important to the country at large they’re “women’s issues,” so who really gives a shit. Our work is worth less. Our effort is less valuable. This is the world from a professional woman’s point of view.
“But Beale,” you say, “Hillary interrupted him.” Yes, she did. Of course she did. And this is another thing about the difference between male and female communication: professional women always have to assert themselves to express their opinion. Because women are talked over all the damn time, it’s something we’ve lived with for generations, and many of us have learned how to interrupt if we want to say something.
But, that wasn’t the only moment where we had our doubts about Bernie’s ability to absorb and be interested in the rights of Americans and the 
intersectionality of racism, misogyny, xenophobia and sexual preference. Those of us that experienced the “White People Don’t Know What It’s Like To Live In The ‘Ghetto’ ” moment last night nearly had a collective heart attack if we knew anything about code words used to race-bait since the adoption of Nixon’s Southern Strategy. (Follow that link to a great article by historian Heather Cox Richardson on how the Republicans got to their FrankenTrump Monster.)
Movement Conservatives fought to take control of the party from moderate Republicans. Movement Conservatives stood firmly against taxes and government activism, but they built their power by adding racism to their anti-government crusade. They argued that tax dollars redistributed wealth from hardworking white people to undeserving people of color and women. This argument proved a winner when Movement Conservative Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater’s only five states in 1964–aside from his home state—were in the Deep South. In 1968, Nixon captured Goldwater voters by adopting the Southern Strategy to assure white southerners that the days of federal enforcement of civil rights were ending. In 1980, Reagan began his general election campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi, where three civil rights workers had been murdered during Freedom Summer, and told the crowd, “I believe in states’ rights.” The message was unmistakable. He also used the image of the “Welfare Queen,” a black woman who stole tax dollars by making fraudulent welfare claims, in winning the presidency.
With a Movement Conservative in the White House, the faction’s leaders tied the Republican Party to tax cuts, the deregulation of business, and the end of social welfare policies. Then, when even racism did not produce enough popular support for their economic policies, leaders welcomed evangelical voters into their movement, promising them conservative social legislation in exchange for their votes.
Trump has just been refreshingly openly racist to the point that he’s publicly attracting white supremacists. It seems to be how he won Louisiana since his big supporter turn out was in David Duke’s old district. New Orleans’ segregationist suburbs gave him his win. No wonder he was so obtuse about Congressman Steve Scalise’s old Stormfront buddies. He’s dropped the old code words and gone straight for the hate.
Now, imagine our surprise when those code words show up on the lips of a candidate for the Democratic nomination in today’s Democratic Party which
is solidly supported by the country’s African American voters.
Social media lit up after U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders told debate watchers “when you’re white, you don’t know what it’s like to be living in a ghetto” during the Flint Democratic presidential primary debate.
The answer came after CNN anchor Don Lemon asked the candidates about possible “racial blind spots” they may have.
“(W)hen you’re white, you don’t know what it’s like to be living in a ghetto,” Sanders responded. “You don’t know what it’s like to be poor. You don’t know what it’s like to be hassled when you walk down the street or you get dragged out of a car.”
He then went on to call for an end to systemic racism.
But, the statement drew mixed reviews from those on social media.
I spent a good deal of last night and this morning trying to gently explain the entire concept to a really white young guy going to SFU.
So, here’s my nice young BernieBro’s whitesplain. I’ve withheld the name to protect the ignorant.
This is just an opinion, but I don’t think it was that offensive, especially in the context with which he used it by Sen. Sanders in that debate.
There are ways with which you should and should not use “ghetto” in describing something. Using it to describe the terribly unfortunate and specific living circumstances of some families is proper use of that terminology in my eyes.
Again, just my opinion.
I couldn’t let that go especially given this was posted to the page of a black democratic activist’s page and comment stream.
He answered the question on institutional racism by using code words and paradigms of white male privilege. Bringing single women into middle class livelihoods will not mean they will not be making 70¢ on the male dollar any more. Bringing black people into or beyond the middle class will not make access to jobs, education,loans or neighborhoods necessarily available. Poverty occurs across gender and racial lines but the experience of poverty or even middle or upper class livelihoods intersect with racism and misogyny which still exist despite income levels. We have plenty of poor whites in this country but when privileged white men use words like “ghetto” or “thug” we know they are code words specifically applied to the black community. It’s a way to apply the “n” word without speaking it. When white folks are unable to see these things it is because of blind spots they develop while living in a society that advantages whites. While I can never truly experience racism, I can watch and listen to others experience of it and learn about my blind spots and experience of privilege. It’s evident that Sanders has not done this in his many years of living and public service. A person with a tin ear cannot truly experience enough empathy to find ways of leading policy to places where problems are solved for all communities.
And of course, the usual “I have to have the last word cause I’m the guy in this conversation” keeps bringing back responses. I keep getting whitesplaining and mansplaining in one fell swoop. For some reason, these folks are convinced that Bernie was the white MLK. I have no idea why.
You bring up great points, but I disagree that Sanders hasn’t tried to look into his blindness and see past his privilege in order to and understand what poverty and living circumstances look like for poor black families vs other poor families, or even more specifically black folks in general (no matter their walk of life or income levels).
His work during his younger years in university more than establish that, which certainly carries in to a lot of his policies and thoughts as Senator.
To that end, I still don’t think that just because he’s privileged and white that he should be barred from using such terminology as “ghetto” when describing someone’s living situation. Like I said above, the way he said it seemed incorrect, but I seriously doubt that he would stick to that exact wording were he able to elaborate further on what it means to be poverty stricken, no matter your race or ethnicity.
I believe this for my before-mentioned point at the beginning.
You know me, I can’t let this go.
Ok. So my final point on this is to ask you to listen to what black people are saying rather than to rationalize in your mind that both you and Sanders couldn’t possibly be whitesplaining or under the influence of a blind spot.
At this point, my friend wakes up and takes up the lesson.
Kathryn: your last comment on this is spot on.
Sorry, but your defense of Sanders is sort of like when I hear my white friends say, “my grandad is not racist, but…”
While I don’t believe Sanders’s comment came from a place of malice, his experiences POST college activist days (because who hasn’t done crazy shit when they were in college?) have clearly left him out of touch with the black community. The dude was totally winging this answer. And you’d think that after being shut out by black lives matter, and after being crowned by white people as the white Dr. King, he’d be able to speak more intelligently on this subject.
But no. He is, as Clinton pointed out, a one issue candidate. If the topic doesn’t revolve around breaking up big banks, or if he’s unable to pivot to Wall Street, Sanders knows nothing.
Followed by:
Nah, Kathryn is right: Ghetto is a code word that is specifically applied to the black community by politicians. Bernie used it that way himself!
So, the old people in the room get this retort from our BernieBro. Notice how closely this first comment echos the republican meme about playing the race card? Isn’t that special?
There it is, whitesplaining. I guess that’s the trump card.
I did watch the debate, and I don’t understand why you’d think that I wouldn’t understand the moderators question, though, Lester.
I have a question for you though. Kathryn and yourself both mentioned that white males are of privilege, and in Bernie’s case also a politician, use that word to only make mention of the black community.
My question is, would it miraculously be ok for a white male in the middle class to mention ghettos when talking about poverty and living circumstances when, let’s say, maybe he came from the ghetto himself?
I just want to clear the air with that. That seems to be where a lot of this is stemming from.
He continues to be as obtuse as Bernie. Albeit, he’s young so he still has a chance, I suppose. There were many things that upset me last night. None of these things have made me into a Bernie Fan. Just the opposite.
One of the more interesting things I found out was that the NRA was happily tweeting support for Bernie last night. This continues to concern me mightily.
During the debate, CNN moderator Anderson Cooper argued that a suit brought by families of the victims from the Sandy Hook shooting against Remington may not go anywhere. He asked Sanders what he would say to those families.
Sanders replied that if a gun was legally purchased, he disagreed with holding the gun manufacturer liable.
“If that is the point, I have to tell you I disagree. I disagree because you hold people — in terms of this liability thing, where you hold manufacturers’ liable is if they understand that they’re selling guns into an area that — it’s getting into the hands of criminals, of course, they should be held liable.
“But if they are selling a product to a person who buys it legally, what you’re really talking about is ending gun manufacturing in America. I don’t agree with that.”
Hillary Clinton‘s campaign has sought to use Sanders’s position on guns against him. It has particularly lambasted his vote in favor of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) in 2005.
Critics say the law provides gun manufacturers with an unprecedented form of immunity that no other industry enjoys, but supporters maintain that it protects the firearms industry from frivolous lawsuits.
The NRA’s tweet for Sanders was quickly highlighted by Correct the Record, a super-PAC that backs Clinton.
Here are the remaining March Election Dates for your information.
Hawaii — Republican Party Caucus March 8, 2016
Idaho — Scheduled Elections: US President for Republican Party and US President for Constitution Party March 8, 2016
Michigan — Presidential Primary Election Day March 8, 2016
Mississippi — State Primary and Presidential Primary Election Day March 8, 2016
Washington DC — Republican Party Convention : Number of Delegates: 19 Total Delegates March 12, 2016
Florida — Presidential Preference Primary Election March 15, 2016
Illinois — Presidential Primary Election and State Primary Election Day March 15, 2016
Missouri — Presidential Preference Primary March 15, 2016
Northern Marianas — Republican Party Caucus : Number of Delegates: 9 Total Delegates March 15, 2016
North Carolina — Presidential Primary and State Primary Election Day March 15, 2016
Ohio — Presidential Primary and State Primary Election Day March 15, 2016
Virgin Islands — Republican Party Caucus : Number of Delegates: 9 Total Delegates March 19, 2016
Idaho — Democratic Party Caucus March 22, 2016
Utah — Presidential Preference Primary Election March 22, 2016
Alaska — Democratic Party Caucus March 26, 2016
Hawaii — Democratic Party Caucus March 26, 2016
Washington — Democratic Party Caucus March 26, 2016
A new poll shows Clinton way ahead in Michigan
Clinton Opens Up Huge Lead in Michigan (Clinton 66% – Sanders 29%)
There continue to be other lies mentioned by Sanders that keep getting repeated. First, he keeps at the how he tried to single handedly stop Wall Street from getting Big Banks when he voted for the Deregulation of Derivatives which was probably the one piece of deregulation law that had the most to do with creating the concentration in banking. Clinton first slammed him with it the CNN debate back on January 18. He’s not stopped the charade.
“You’re the only one on this stage that voted to deregulate the financial market in 2000,” Clinton said, making reference to his support for former President Bill Clinton’s Commodity Futures Modernization Act.
The law effectively gave bankers, or “sophisticated traders,” free rein from pre-existing oversight mechanisms when they wanted to make deals on the sidelines of the major stock exchanges, in “over-the-counter” trading.
Clinton himself would later cop to having made a serious mistake in signing the bill, saying he didn’t understand the extent to which these deals, if they went bad, could ripple across the global economy.
“Even if less than 1% of the total investment community in derivative exchanges, so much money was involved that if they went bad, they could effect 100% of the investments,” he told ABC’s “This Week” in 2010.
The new interesting slam to Sanders was Michigan specific. He voted against helping the Auto Industry because it might help Wall Street at the same time. He was against and for but somewhat against the very successful Auto Bailout. This is another nuanced vote where Sanders decided he wasn’t going to vote for the bill because “purity”.
The bank bailout was so big it had to be doled out in portions. In January 2009, Senate Republicans tried to block the Treasury Department from releasing the second half of the money, some of which was designated for the auto industry. Sanders, based on his opposition to the Wall Street bailout, voted against releasing that money as well.
That vote gave Clinton the opening she needed to hit Sanders as anti-auto bailout on Sunday. “If everybody had voted the way he did, I believe the auto industry would have collapsed, taking 4 million jobs with it,” she said.
(Side note: Having your votes picked apart by opponents is one reason whyit’s tough to run for president as a senator.)
Clinton is technically correct that Sanders voted against releasing the money that went to the auto bailout, but Sanders can also correctly argue that he supported the auto bailout when it wasn’t tied to the Wall Street one.
This back and forth likely isn’t going anywhere; expect both to claim as much over the next few days.
The Export-Import Bank conversation was even more interesting because Sanders actually agrees with Tea Party crazies on this who think it’s a waste of Tax Payer money. Let me get wonky on you. Remember I’m a nerdy girl and economist to boot!
Ex-Im exists to help American businesses sell to customers abroad. Recently, it’s not only not been costing taxpayers anything, it has returned significant amounts of money to the Treasury in the same way Fed profits do.. Bernie’s position threatens a significant number of US jobs. The competitive position of companies like Boeing would be impacted. Boeing specifically needs Ex-Im because it has one competitor on the global stage; Airbus. This industry is a classic duopoly. Airbus is a European entity that enjoys significant support from its own government when competing with contracts around the world. This is actually one area where every one is better off with our Government helping that corporation who couldn’t compete with Airbus given its subsidies. The bank has not relied on any taxpayer money since 2008.
Every year Congress sets a limit on the bank’s financial activities. The bank then borrows money from the Treasury to give out direct loans, which it pays back with interest.
Since 2008, the bank has not relied on taxpayer dollars to cover its operational costs and loan loss reserves. Instead, the bank charges customers fees and interest that it uses to cover those costs in full. Often, the fees generate a surplus, which the bank gives back to the Treasury. In the past five years, the bank has given back $2 billion.
Additionally, the bank’s default rates have historically been lower than private financial institutions — the current default rate is less than 0.25 percent.
The bank hasn’t been completely without losses, though. In 1987, several straight years of losses of more than $250 million to $300 million forced the bank to ask Congress for a $3 billion bailout.
The most recent losses were in the 1990s, following the 1997 Asian financial crisis, said Export-Import Bank Advisory Board member Gary Hufbauer, also a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a nonpartisan think tank.
Still, the bank has generated an overall profit of more than $5 billion for the Treasury since 1990. But just looking at cash flow doesn’t give us a full picture.
My final issue with the Bernie lies and tin ear comments is that he continues to insist that he does not take Super Pac Money. Sanders keeps earning Pinocchios for this one. Here’s a pretty comprehensive article on that from Time magazine.
I just would like to add one more thing about last night’s debate. The more I see and hear from the man, the more of an active dislike I take. He should quit before no Dem will work with him in Congress.
Sorry for the really long and late post but I had a helluva lot to say. I probably should’ve put up Nancy Reagan’s obit as a nicety but I still remember how political she was to Rock Hudson at the beginning of the AIDS crisis. I’ll let The Advocate talk about her mixed responses on that account.
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
peej
Carissa
bostonboomer
dakinikat
ecocatwoman
mablue2
Mama Lopez
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
Recent Comments