Hillary's Campaign Kickoff

[Nanker]

Well, I'm not going to buy it. I'll wait for the Cliff Notes.

[B-Man]

Media to give Hillary one last push...........

 

 

 

With just one week to go before this state's primary, supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders are starting to ask whether media coverage will skew results by declaring Hillary Clinton the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party.

 

"Here's what's really bad," said RoseAnn DeMoro, the executive director of the pro-Sanders union National Nurses United, after the candidate held an event with its members. "At 5 o'clock, evidently, there's this plan for the media, if Clinton wins New Jersey, to say: 'This is over. She's got it locked up.' That's a lie. That's a lie."

 

DeMoro was referring to not-so-secret plans for media outlets, which have been keeping their own delegate counts, to mark the moment when Clinton wins the 2,383 delegates needed to clinch the nomination. The Associated Press's count, the basis for many other media outlets, has Clinton at 2,312 — 1,769 won in primaries and 543 superdelegates. There are 12 delegates up for grabs in the U.S. Virgin Islands on June 4, and 67 more in Puerto Rico the next day. At her current pace, Clinton would hit the 2,383 target on June 7 at 8 p.m. Eastern time, when polls close in New Jersey and the state's 142 delegates are parceled out.

 

This year, the idea of a call that would come at 8 p.m. Eastern (5 p.m. in California) has infuriated Sanders supporters, many of whom argue that the superdelegates don't "count" until the party's convention in July.

 

It'll depress turnout on both sides," Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver said in the same MSNBC segment where Matthews explained the probable call. "It'll be an inaccurate description of the race, because all we have from superdelegates is essentially a poll."

 

 

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/05/31/sanders-backers-worry-that-clinton-will-clinch-nomination-before-californias-polls-close/

[DC Tom]

Media to give Hillary one last push...........

 

 

 

With just one week to go before this state's primary, supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders are starting to ask whether media coverage will skew results by declaring Hillary Clinton the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party.

 

"Here's what's really bad," said RoseAnn DeMoro, the executive director of the pro-Sanders union National Nurses United, after the candidate held an event with its members. "At 5 o'clock, evidently, there's this plan for the media, if Clinton wins New Jersey, to say: 'This is over. She's got it locked up.' That's a lie. That's a lie."

 

DeMoro was referring to not-so-secret plans for media outlets, which have been keeping their own delegate counts, to mark the moment when Clinton wins the 2,383 delegates needed to clinch the nomination. The Associated Press's count, the basis for many other media outlets, has Clinton at 2,312 — 1,769 won in primaries and 543 superdelegates. There are 12 delegates up for grabs in the U.S. Virgin Islands on June 4, and 67 more in Puerto Rico the next day. At her current pace, Clinton would hit the 2,383 target on June 7 at 8 p.m. Eastern time, when polls close in New Jersey and the state's 142 delegates are parceled out.

 

This year, the idea of a call that would come at 8 p.m. Eastern (5 p.m. in California) has infuriated Sanders supporters, many of whom argue that the superdelegates don't "count" until the party's convention in July.

 

It'll depress turnout on both sides," Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver said in the same MSNBC segment where Matthews explained the probable call. "It'll be an inaccurate description of the race, because all we have from superdelegates is essentially a poll."

 

 

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/05/31/sanders-backers-worry-that-clinton-will-clinch-nomination-before-californias-polls-close/

 

And I'm pretty sure Hillary's response to Bernie's supporters will be "Let them eat cake..."

[Nanker]

And, "get in the back of the bus. Elections have consequences." Never a bad choice to quote your own Party's President.

[B-Man]

So........after the press squawking, Hillary spends 8 whole minutes after an appearance answering "questions" from the (free) press.

 

 

I don't really have to tell you what happened, do I ?

 

 

 

 

Not ONE question about the E-Mail controversy, or the State Dept OIG report

 

 

 

"Hillary, Hillary!!! Whats your favorite color? Whats your favorite flavor of ice cream?"

 

 

 

Not a joke..................they did ask her how it feels to be historic .

 

 

.

Edited June 6, 2016 by B-Man

[B-Man]

Media to give Hillary one last push...........

 

"At 5 o'clock, evidently, there's this plan for the media, if Clinton wins New Jersey, to say: 'This is over. She's got it locked up.' That's a lie. That's a lie."

 

DeMoro was referring to not-so-secret plans for media outlets, which have been keeping their own delegate counts, to mark the moment when Clinton wins the 2,383 delegates needed to clinch the nomination.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/05/31/sanders-backers-worry-that-clinton-will-clinch-nomination-before-californias-polls-close/

 

 

 

A.P. decides that they can't wait til tomorrow, they recounted and at 9PM tonight have declared Hillary the winner of the dem nomination.

 

 

 

SO WITH THE CALIFORNIA PRIMARY TOMORROW, THE AP SUDDENLY DECIDES TO CALL THE RACE FOR HILLARY?

 

If I were a Bernie supporter, this would really piss me off, and with good reason. If I were a Bernie supporter in California, I’d make damn sure to vote tomorrow. . . .

 

 

 

Bernie's campaign replies:

 

 

 

 

 

Its apparently a terrible, evil idea to wait for a party nominee to actually become a party nominee before declaring him/her a party nominee

 

Either way it's an historic day.

 

Just Think.......This is the first time the presumptive nominee of a major party is the spouse of an impeached, disbarred president.

[/dev/null]

 

 

 

A.P. decides that they can't wait til tomorrow, they recounted and at 9PM tonight have declared Hillary the winner of the dem nomination.

 

 

 

 

Bernie's campaign replies:

 

 

 

 

 

Its apparently a terrible, evil idea to wait for a party nominee to actually become a party nominee before declaring him/her a party nominee

 

I caught a news ticker on NBC Sports streaming service during last nights Pens@Sharks Game 4 declaring Hiliary as the Presumptive Democratic Nominee. Not only did they run that across the screen they followed it up with REPEATING and said it again.

 

No need to wait for those silly proles to cast their votes

 

 

 

 

Just Think.......This is the first time the presumptive nominee of a major party is the spouse of an impeached, disbarred president.

Who was herself chided for negligence handling classified information. I say chided because your average citizen would be looking at time in Federal Pound You In The A$$ Prison for similar infractions

[GG]

 

I caught a news ticker on NBC Sports streaming service during last nights Pens@Sharks Game 4 declaring Hiliary as the Presumptive Democratic Nominee. Not only did they run that across the screen they followed it up with REPEATING and said it again.

 

No need to wait for those silly proles to cast their votes

 

 

I think it's the opposite. She didn't want the news coming out because now her supporters will stay home today and Bernie will cruise to more victories.

[Nanker]

I do hope that's the case. His supporters should cast their votes regardless of her usurpation as sponsored by the AP and other media sources.

[B-Man]

8 minutes of shame: Reporters covering Hillary embarrass profession with softball questions

 

Hillary Clinton stopped for an impromptu gaggle with reporters covering her campaign in California today. It was the first time the former Secretary of State graced reporters with her presence in over a month.

 

In the weeks preceding this brief royal audience with HRH HRC, reporters embedded with her campaign have had to cool their heels without the ability to get an answer on major stories involving the former first lady. You’d think journalists wanting to grill Clinton on issues ranging from the State Department IG report to a new book featuring a former Secret Service agent’s damning recollections of his time covering the Clintons in the White House would e sure to throw some tough questions at the woman who wants to be president.

 

You’d be wrong.

 

Allow me to break down each question the reporters asked in their precious eight minutes:

“You’re on the cusp of being the first female nominee of a major party. What does that mean to you and how are you reflecting on that?”

“No matter what happens tomorrow, Bernie Sanders says the convention in Philadelphia will be contested. Do you think there is anything you can do to change that at this point?”

“Is it setting in that you might be making serious history tomorrow?”

“Some prominent Democrats have come out saying ‘we maybe need to reevaluate the super delegate system more broadly. irrespective of what happens in this primary, do you support looking into that and, perhaps, getting rid of that?”

“Do you think Sen. Sanders will concede as you did in 2008?”

“What role would you like the president to play in your campaign?”

“Last night when you took stage in Sacramento, there was a woman standing next to me who was absolutely sobbing. And she said, you know, ‘it’s time, it’s past time.’ And you see the women, you see people here. People just come up to you and, {gasp} they get tears in their eyes. Do you feel… do you feel the weight of what this means to people?”

“Do you expect the president’s endorsement some time this week?”

 

 

And that was the end of reporters’ access to Hillary Clinton today. Now they’ll have to wait another month to grill her again.

 

No questions about how Mrs. Clinton has been lying about her email practices being “permitted” while at the State Department.

No questions about her former aide pleading the 5th amendment in a civil case about her email scam.

No questions about Sen. Sanders’ accusation yesterday about the cozy relationship between the Clinton Foundation, the State Department and countries like Saudi Arabia.

No questions about the upcoming book from a Secret Service agent saying she doesn’t have the “integrity and temperament to be the president.

No questions about the dismal jobs report on Friday and her campaign’s plan to merely continue the status quo of the Obama Administration that’s causing the lack of jobs.

No questions about the transcripts of her speech to Goldman Sachs and her refusal to release them despite the $675,000 she made for giving the remarks.

No questions about the fact that she is struggling to eek out a narrow victory (and might end up losing outright) in California, the most important state for a Democrat looking to unite her fractured party.

 

Maybe Hillary’s right. These reporters don’t deserve her time if they don’t respect the profession enough to ask her anything tougher than, “Is it hard being such a trans-formative and historical figure?”

[Deranged Rhino]

I think it's the opposite. She didn't want the news coming out because now her supporters will stay home today and Bernie will cruise to more victories.

That's not the play. The news will hit Bernie fans harder. They're younger and more apathetic if they think the election is over. Bernie fans in California, or voters who haven't decided yet, will have read those headlines before going to bed and either stay home or vote Clinton now to show party unity.

 

The coronation must not be interrupted.

[Deranged Rhino]

Perfect End to Democratic Primary: Anonymous Super-Delegates Declare Winner Through Media

 

Last night, Associated Press – on a day when nobody voted – surprised everyone by abruptly declaring the Democratic Party primary over and Hillary Clinton the victor. The decree, issued the night before the California primary in which polls show Clinton and Bernie Sanders in a very close race, was based on the media organization’s survey of “super-delegates”: the Democratic Party’s 720 insiders, corporate donors and officials whose votes for the presidential nominee count the same as the actually elected delegates. AP claims that super-delegates who had not previously announced their intentions privately told AP reporters that they intend to vote for Clinton, bringing her over the threshold. AP is concealing the identify of the decisive super-delegates who said this.

 

(snip)

 

This is the perfect symbolic ending to the Democratic Party primary. The nomination is consecrated by a media organization, on a day when nobody voted, based on secret discussions with anonymous establishment insiders and donors whose identity the media organization – incredibly – conceals. The decisive edifice of super-delegates is itself anti-democratic and inherently corrupt: designed to prevent actual voters from making choices that the party establishment dislikes. But for a party run by insiders and funded by corporate interests, it’s only fitting that their nomination process ends with such an ignominious, awkward and undemocratic sputter.

 

(snip)

 

That the Democratic Party nominating process is declared to be over in such an uninspiring, secretive, and elite-driven manner is perfectly symbolic of what the party, and its likely nominee, actually is. The one positive aspect, though significant, is symbolic, while the actual substance – rallying behind a Wall-Street-funded, status-quo-perpetuating, multi-millionaire militarist – is grim in the extreme. The Democratic Party got exactly the ending it deserved.

 

https://theintercept.com/2016/06/07/perfect-end-to-democratic-primary-anonymous-super-delegates-declare-winner-through-media/

Edited June 7, 2016 by Deranged Rhino

[GG]

Perfect End to Democratic Primary: Anonymous Super-Delegates Declare Winner Through Media

 

Last night, Associated Press – on a day when nobody voted – surprised everyone by abruptly declaring the Democratic Party primary over and Hillary Clinton the victor. The decree, issued the night before the California primary in which polls show Clinton and Bernie Sanders in a very close race, was based on the media organization’s survey of “super-delegates”: the Democratic Party’s 720 insiders, corporate donors and officials whose votes for the presidential nominee count the same as the actually elected delegates. AP claims that super-delegates who had not previously announced their intentions privately told AP reporters that they intend to vote for Clinton, bringing her over the threshold. AP is concealing the identify of the decisive super-delegates who said this.

 

(snip)

 

This is the perfect symbolic ending to the Democratic Party primary. The nomination is consecrated by a media organization, on a day when nobody voted, based on secret discussions with anonymous establishment insiders and donors whose identity the media organization – incredibly – conceals. The decisive edifice of super-delegates is itself anti-democratic and inherently corrupt: designed to prevent actual voters from making choices that the party establishment dislikes. But for a party run by insiders and funded by corporate interests, it’s only fitting that their nomination process ends with such an ignominious, awkward and undemocratic sputter.

 

https://theintercept.com/2016/06/07/perfect-end-to-democratic-primary-anonymous-super-delegates-declare-winner-through-media/

 

No matter how many times you repeat the trope, won't make it anymore true. Greenwald has a warped sense of reality, yet you continue to give him air. It's time for you to check your balance meter.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

No matter how many times you repeat the trope, won't make it anymore true. Greenwald has a warped sense of reality, yet you continue to give him air. It's time for you to check your balance meter.

 

What trope?

[GG]

 

What trope?

 

That the Hillary coronation is the result of a premeditated plan by Camp Hillary, DNC and the corporate illuminati that's been in the works for decades.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

That the Hillary coronation is the result of a premeditated plan by Camp Hillary, DNC and the corporate illuminati that's been in the works for decades.

 

That's not what I've been pushing and you know it. But it is a convenient way to dismiss what I'm saying.

 

It's funny you accuse Greenwald of having a warped view of reality yet you're the one going down with the neo-con ship; a political outlook better suited for the 19th century than the 21st.

[GG]

 

That's not what I've been pushing and you know it. But it is a convenient way to dismiss what I'm saying.

 

It's funny you accuse Greenwald of having a warped view of reality yet you're the one going down with the neo-con ship; a political outlook better suited for the 19th century than the 21st.

 

Neocon views are grounded in reality that the world is comprised of multiple factions who are fighting for relevance, and those fights are nasty and usually leave collateral damage by way of military & economic conflicts. The neocon view is that as the leading global superpower, the US should be more assertive to prevent these conflicts, because it's not in the USA's long term interests to have these conflicts fester unattended, as the cure will be far more difficult and costly than the prevention.

 

Greenwald OTOH thinks there's a sinister plot behind USA's every motive, yet he's living in bliss in that paragon of human rights, Brazil. If you believe his story, then AP is complicit with the pending Hillary coronation. By that measure, jw better get a free drink next time Clintons are in town.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Neocon views are grounded in reality that the world is comprised of multiple factions who are fighting for relevance, and those fights are nasty and usually leave collateral damage by way of military & economic conflicts. The neocon view is that as the leading global superpower, the US should be more assertive to prevent these conflicts, because it's not in the USA's long term interests to have these conflicts fester unattended, as the cure will be far more difficult and costly than the prevention.

 

Regime change: something America thinks it wants, until it doesn't. That's the neo-con legacy and it's incompatible with the US political structure -- unless you move America towards a more totalitarian regime. Which will be Cheney and the neo-con's legacy.

 

 

 

Greenwald OTOH thinks there's a sinister plot behind USA's every motive, yet he's living in bliss in that paragon of human rights, Brazil. If you believe his story, then AP is complicit with the pending Hillary coronation. By that measure, jw better get a free drink next time Clintons are in town.

 

That bubble you live in needs to become a bit more permeable. You continue to misconstrue not only what I'm saying, but what a relatively non controversial article is saying.

 

But it's easier to dismiss what's uncomfortable to your world view as folly than it is to actually consider it. I get it. I do.

[GG]

 

Regime change: something America thinks it wants, until it doesn't. That's the neo-con legacy and it's incompatible with the US political structure -- unless you move America towards a more totalitarian regime. Which will be Cheney and the neo-con's legacy.

 

 

At the root of Saddam's ouster was a forward look at the demographics and religious strife in the Mid East. It's a simplistic view that attributes the current state to the Iraq invasion. The fight was bound to happen sooner or later, and the hope was to establish a presence in a more moderate Iraq to lessen the damage. Clearly it didn't work. But don't be fooled that ISIS or the crap in Syria, Lybia, etc wouldn't have occurred if US just stayed out of Iraq.

 

 

 

 

That bubble you live in needs to become a bit more permeable. You continue to misconstrue not only what I'm saying, but what a relatively non controversial article is saying.

 

But it's easier to dismiss what's uncomfortable to your world view as folly than it is to actually consider it. I get it. I do.

 

 

I'll continue to misconstrue your logic until you provide more clarity, other than the trope about the Cold War leading to the Clinton coronation.

 

Edited June 7, 2016 by GG

[Deranged Rhino]

At the root of Saddam's ouster was a forward look at the demographics and religious strife in the Mid East. It's a simplistic view that attributes the current state to the Iraq invasion. The fight was bound to happen sooner or later, and the hope was to establish a presence in a more moderate Iraq to lessen the damage. Clearly it didn't work. But don't be fooled that ISIS or the crap in Syria, Lybia, etc wouldn't have occurred if US just stayed out of Iraq.

 

Who's arguing that? Not me. Again, you're projecting stuff I've never said onto me because you're unable to discuss any of this honestly.

 

All I'm arguing is that America fundamentally isn't built to support regime change -- which is the bedrock of the neo-con playbook. The only way to make America and regime change compatible is to move America from a democratic republic to something more totalitarian in nature. This is undeniable. The fact you continue to support this makes have to ask: Are you going to vote for HRC? She's the neo-con candidate in this election after all.

 

 

I'll continue to misconstrue your logic until you provide more clarity, other than the trope about the Cold War leading to the Clinton coronation.

 

Seriously, what the heck are you talking about. Iv'e never said the Cold War led to this. That's you projecting nonsense into the discussion because you're incapable of discussing things that challenge your world views. We've never agreed on much, but you used to at least be honest with your discussions. But now you're repeatedly adding things to my argument I've never said and passing them off as mine.

 

That's a poor debate tactic. Step your game up.