Saturday College Football Open Thread

Tough first week - I stand at 7-9 (-5 units) ATS. Today I turn it around. The picks (in bold):

Wake Forest vs. @ Syracuse -4; Army +7 vs @ Connecticut; Houston vs @ Louisville -13; Temple +7 vs @ Cincinnati; Fresno State vs @ Mississippi -30(3 units);East Carolina +21 vs @ Florida; LSU -4 (5 units) vs @ Mississippi State; Hawaii vs @ Ohio State -41 (3 units); South Florida +29 vs @ Florida State; UCLA vs @ UNLV +30; Oregon vs @ Michigan State -4 (3 units); Boise State vs @ BYU +3; Kentucky vs @ South Carolina -7 (3 units) ; Toledo vs @ Arkansas -23 (3 units); Notre Dame vs @ Virginia -13; Minnesota vs @ Colorado State +5 (3 units); Georgia -21 (4 units) vs @ Vanderbilt;Miami Ohio +31 vs @ Wisconsin; Buffalo + 17 vs @ Penn State; Bowling Green +8 vs @ Maryland; Oregon State +15 vs @ Michigan

Go Gators!

Open Thread.

< China Cancels Bon Jovi Shows | Saturday College Football Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Magic Number is 10... (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 02:05:58 PM EST
    Mets 4 Marlins 3...only being down 3-1 in the 6th feels like a lead for this team.  HUman Highlight Reel Cespedes goes yard again, D'Arnaud with the tying two run jack, and old man Wright chips in with two doubles and the game winning RBI.

    I'll be headed out to Flushing Meadows tonight as we go for 9 in a row with deGrom on the hill.  

    Cooler is packed, spliffs are rolled, a beautiful evening for a ballgame...Lets Go Mets!

    I give you a 5 (none / 0) (#54)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 09:28:36 PM EST
    for going to the game and pulling for your beloved Mets.

    And a 1 for being the kiss of death.

    The top of the Marlins lineup ate your lunch, drank your beer, and smoked your spliffs.

    Mets magic number remains at 10.


    Too true... (none / 0) (#59)
    by kdog on Wed Sep 16, 2015 at 09:24:55 AM EST
    the kdog K.O.D. is alive and well.  I accept full responsibility for the loss, shoulda damn well known better and stayed home!  

    F&ckin' reigning MLB Hit King Dee Gordon man, guy owns us.

    Bartolo takes the ball tonight to start a new win streak.


    meanwhile, my hapless (none / 0) (#57)
    by The Addams Family on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 10:06:13 PM EST
    bottom-of-the-barrel Oakland Athletics are improbably leading 17-6 in the top of the 8th in Chicago

    i don't begrudge the Mets' having Yo - Oakland doesn't deserve him

    too bad the A's can't average their runs over all their games for the season


    Cespedes... (none / 0) (#60)
    by kdog on Wed Sep 16, 2015 at 09:30:22 AM EST
    has taken NYC by storm...Fred "Coupon" Wilpon better have a blank check ready once the season ends or there will be pitchforks waiting for him on Opening Day next year.

    nice article (none / 0) (#62)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Sep 16, 2015 at 10:34:41 AM EST
    in this morning's NY Times about the Mets' deal for Yo

    Tigers fans want him back (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by jbindc on Wed Sep 16, 2015 at 11:45:59 AM EST
    HRC losing support of Demicratic women (1.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Politalkix on Mon Sep 14, 2015 at 06:52:55 PM EST
    Media flaws at the heart of the irony (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 09:24:07 AM EST
    Considering 51% believe she didn't follow gov't regulations when it's clear she did.  

    No Offense... (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 11:12:59 AM EST
    ...but when you are polling at 71% with any group, there is only one place to go.

    All this is what it is, the horse race.  I mean seriously where exactly is this 29% of women democrat voters going to go, the GOP, the proud misogynist ?  If it's Bernie, no skin off democrats back, they aren't losing voters they are just looking at like candidates.  Either way D's will be voting for D's when push comes to shove because the alternative isn't in reality an alternative.

    It's like the market, up and down, all anyone really cares about, except for the media, is the day you cash out and probably some lead up to that date.  This business where the candidate who has astronomical numbers in the summer is losing ground is only because she was in the stratosphere, now she is simply back to leading at more reasonable numbers.

    The article fails to mention her decline also coincides with other candidates getting into the race.  It would be odd for a single candidate's numbers not to drop when other competitors entered the race.  It also fails to mention where they actually went, it suggests Sanders, but doesn't back up the claim because they aren't interested in reporting anything but the Clinton slide.

    If they are Sanders, guess what, HRC gets them back the second she gets the nomination or Sanders gets her remaining numbers just as soon as he gets the nomination.  My guess, HRC will get those women back.


    Where? (none / 0) (#45)
    by Politalkix on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 06:48:34 PM EST
    "where exactly is this 29% of women democrat voters going to go"

    They can stay home. They can vote for a third party candidate. They can leave the choice for the President blank. And some may even vote for a Republican like Kasich (if he is nominated) as one of the women interviewed in the article mentioned. The woman who said that she would vote for Kasich over HRC had twice voted for BHO.


    Did she? (none / 0) (#49)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 07:13:21 PM EST
    Figures.  There are always going to be a few dim bulbs on the string.

    Get a life. (1.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 14, 2015 at 09:42:45 PM EST
    Oh, Kixie, you gave me a "1." (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 04:32:51 AM EST
    Did I hurt your feelings and bruise your ego?

    Good. Now, grow up, stop trolling and as I said, get a life.


    Panic (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Politalkix on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 06:32:54 PM EST
    seems to be setting in early among Clinton supporters. Ha Ha Ha!! They have started troll rating me for just posting a WP article. Another Clinton supporter who for years complained about BHO not going for "Medicare for All" is burning up space in DKos trying to convince people that voting for Bernie and "Medicare for All" means that they will have to pay 50% of their income in taxes. And the red baiting has already started link

    Pitiful Clinton campaign, pitiful supporters!!


    That hurts! (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 07:16:15 PM EST
    C'mon Politalkix.  YOU think so?!?  Why, if that wasn't from the brain/lips of a Clinton-hating CDSer, that might actually bother someone.

    But alas ...


    wrong again (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by The Addams Family on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 07:18:33 PM EST
    i gave you a troll rating for, you know, being an annoying TROLL

    that's what troll ratings are for


    I think (none / 0) (#44)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 06:48:02 PM EST
    you are engaging in wishful thinking. Can Bernie defend himself? That is the question if you think it's an "attack".

    Just be happy you only got a troll rating (none / 0) (#55)
    by ragebot on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 09:33:12 PM EST
    I posted a link to the same WaPo blurb and BTD deleted my post and said to stay on topic.

    "panic" - lol (none / 0) (#58)
    by The Addams Family on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 10:16:55 PM EST
    but really i shouldn't laugh, & probably you should panic

    #mold #Mom'sBasement #DelusionalThinking #ToxicTrolling


    Yes indeed (none / 0) (#3)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 14, 2015 at 09:23:31 PM EST
    "The period since the last survey coincides with news that the FBI is looking into the security of e-mail sent over a private server Clinton used when she was secretary of state, as well as an intense media focus on her response to the controversy. The episode has raised questions about her judgment and revived memories of the scandals that plagued the presidency of her husband, Bill Clinton, in the 1990s."

    It is of course the episode that is raising questions and reviving memories....not the endless yammering and lying about the episode...reviving memories of other invented-scandals.

    Can Clibton survive the Clinton rules? I guess we'll see in aboutv3 months when actual voting happens and any of this counts for something.


    so what? (none / 0) (#21)
    by The Addams Family on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 12:15:57 PM EST
    Florida also has a very, very good ... (none / 0) (#1)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 12:09:16 PM EST
    ... women's volleyball team, which is currently ranked No. 2 in the country, just behind defending national champion Penn State. Even though the Lady Gators lost last night to No. 16 Hawaii, I was really impressed by them, and would not be at all surprised if that's the only match they lose all season en route to an NCAA championship. Coach Mary Wise has assembled what could likely be her best team ever. If you're a volleyball fan, they're definitely worth the price of admission.

    Lady Noles beat UF women last year (none / 0) (#18)
    by ragebot on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 11:51:50 AM EST
    Nothing against the Lady Gators and they seem loaded last year.

    Gotta say Rubio seems to have screwed the pooch with this comment about FSU.

    Have to wonder how long before he drops out of the race.  


    The Gators have four All-Americans. (none / 0) (#30)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 02:08:07 PM EST
    They clearly ran into problems out here, and inexplicably looked gassed when it seemed as though they had the Rainbow Wahine on the ropes in the fourth set. They were up 13-7, but then flatlined and lost 25-17. Then in the tiebreaking fifth set, they got blown away, 15-9.

     Hawaii is a very good team and a legitimate Final Four prospect. They amped their game in that fourth set, the home crowd of 10,000 got very loud, and the Gators clearly lost their composure. Coach Wise was gracious in defeat, and told our local media that her own team needs to rise to the occasion during true moments of adversity, if they want to challenge for the NCAA title. That loss will be a good experience for Florida, if they learn that they have to finish strong and not panic when things stop going their way.



    Lady Noles (none / 0) (#56)
    by ragebot on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 09:38:01 PM EST
    are currently #18 and pre season were #16.  One thing I have noticed about NCAA women's sports is there seems to be a lot of transfers making it hard to keep up with current rosters.  Also a lot of European players, like a quarter of the team who seem to be able to transfer in at will.

    Not bloody likely (none / 0) (#7)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 09:42:31 AM EST
    To be clear, I like Bennie and agree with much of his populist rhetoric. However, the reality is much of what he proposes will not fly in Congress, let alone a majority of Americans, imo. People unfortunately are still too selfish to part w/their cash.

    For many years, government spending has equaled about 20% of gross domestic product annually; his proposals would increase that to about 30% in their first year. As a share of the economy, that would represent a bigger increase in government spending than the New Deal or Great Society and is surpassed in modern history only by the World War II military buildup.

    By way of comparison, the 2009 economic stimulus program was estimated at $787 billion when it passed Congress, and President George W. Bush's 2001 tax cuts were estimated to cost the federal treasury $1.35 trillion over 10 years.

    ....oops, Bernie (none / 0) (#8)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 09:47:20 AM EST
    small fonts will be the death of my eyesight

    It won't fly with congress (none / 0) (#24)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 12:39:04 PM EST
    might as well be the tagline for this site..

    Of course what we really mean is that it won't fly with the 1% that greases congress..


    I know, the realist in me knows (none / 0) (#9)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 09:47:58 AM EST
    it just won't happen...Obama could barely get that lame stimulus package through - remember The Deal?

    I suspect Hillary would be making proposals like this too if she were not a realist. Sometimes being a realist is not popular.


    Why do we do this every four years? (none / 0) (#10)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 10:00:55 AM EST
    By this, I mean get all excited about pie in the sky proposals to only be sorely disappointed when the pol once elected does not deliver?

    Pushing the candidates is one thing, deluding ourselves another entirely. Is it a fresh crop of dreamy eyed idealist freshman as the root cause or adults that never fully matured that cannot see the forest for the trees?


    As Gov. Mario Cuomo once observed, ... (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 02:39:46 PM EST
    ... one can campaign in poetry, but must govern in prose. To do that, one must take the long view, and not be impatient in thinking that change can occur overnight. Trust me, you don't want political changes to occur overnight, because the mercurial is a symptom of a system's instability. Look at what's happened recently in Australia, with four prime ministers in two years.

    Further, politics is increasingly being treated by our media as a vicarious form of public entertainment, when it's actually a very serious business. Thus, the voting public is perversely encouraged to become passive spectators to their own fate, rather than be active participants in its ultimate determination.

    And while there are no white knights in politics, one can rest assured that there are plenty of black ones. It's up to voters themselves to be discerning when casting their ballots, and not be easily seduced and lured by the call of the sirens.



    And, of course, you have to win (none / 0) (#39)
    by christinep on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 03:48:57 PM EST
    to govern.  Not to be crass, but the prelude may be poetic ... yet, it can only be philosophical prelude.  "Movements" centered on a few are philosophy; not governance.

    What you call maturity... (none / 0) (#27)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 01:33:29 PM EST
    could be called settling...some people are willing to settle for less than others.

    Our problem is we don't follow through, we vote and we think our civic duty is done.  Au contraire.  Voting is the least important part of the process for change...protest, civil disobedience, and if it comes down to it revolution, are how change happens.  Voting is how disappointment happens.


    I can appreciate that sentiment (none / 0) (#31)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 02:21:51 PM EST
    and agree our job is to follow up w/those we elect to office.

    Re: revolution, I'll be honest, I'd like to avoid open conflict in the streets if I could.  ;-) I've got a family with young children to look out for.

    Settle isn't what I'd call it, vested might be a better word.  Consider the pitchfork mentality re: Wall Street. I am vested, I've got a 401k I'm hoping will be there 20-30 years from now when I retire. The vast majority of people working on Wall Street are regular shmoes bringing home a paycheck. There are those that would screw these folks also, in the hopes of something "better" without actually knowing what netter is and how to implement it. Beyond that who am I to begrudge some other American their own right to self fulfillment? Isn't that what this country is supposed to be about? As long as a dollar is made fairly....

    My point here is there are D's of all stripes.  Some of us believe remedies should be sought through our legislative branch. To that end, we need candidates like Hillary and Bernie to lead with an agenda and more importantly have allies in Congress who can assist. Next, one should look to the likelihood the proposals will garner support.

    The democratic process is how we effect change. The main problem we've had the last 8 years is an ineffectual congress.  That is where the change needs to occur.

    I disagree that voting leads to disappointment. That's true only if expectations do not align with reality and one disregards electability. IMO.


    Right there with ya... (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 02:54:41 PM EST
    regarding revolution...it's bad, but not nearly that bad! I'd like to see change, even radical change, but I don't wanna die for it.

    Our problem isn't an ineffectual congress so much as a corrupt congress in a corrupt system.  Nothing will ever change till we get the money out of politics.  Till then, we're just jerking off every 2-4-6 years, Supreme Court and some social wedge issues aside.  And I don't see how we get the money out of politics by voting...that will take protest on a grand scale or revolution.  

    It explains why Trump and Bernie are so hot right now...they don't take money and they speak freely, people are dying of thirst for that sh&t.  It's also the reason neither one has a real shot at office, they don't take money and they speak freely.

    Though I think if Trump stays in it long enough he will start taking big money like the rest.  Right now he doesn't have to spend on ads, the media is his free ad campaign, but when the field thins and the Super PACs start running a plethora of ads against him, he's gonna have to start begging to keep up, or go bankrupt again, and this time personally.


    Agree with this (none / 0) (#38)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 03:43:57 PM EST
    but the only way to get the money out of politics is legislatively or via legal challenge decided by our judiciary.

    It explains why Trump and Bernie are so hot right now...they don't take money and they speak freely, people are dying of thirst for that sh&t.

    I would submit people are always "dying of thirst for that sh&t."  Like the mirage in the desert, too often people are drawn to that which is right in front of them, i.e. short term feel good, instead of the long slog needed to reach real relief.


    Too true... (none / 0) (#61)
    by kdog on Wed Sep 16, 2015 at 10:00:19 AM EST
    which is why the money won't be removed from politics..."moderate" and "electable" legislators and executives like the checks, judiciary is appointed by same executives and confirmed by same legislators.  Rinse and repeat, see ya on TL in 50 years b*tchin' about money in politics;)

    iow, a slog is fine if you're slogging in the right direction.  Slogging towards the status quo is slogging to stand still.


    There (none / 0) (#64)
    by FlJoe on Thu Sep 17, 2015 at 10:14:14 AM EST
    is also the fact the media is a huuuge beneficiary , they will do nothing to kill their golden goose, probably go out of their way to protect it.

    I think we should always be talking about (none / 0) (#34)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 02:46:16 PM EST
    and pushing for what we see as the ideal solution to problems, and Bernie probably has been talking about his issues forever and getting no attention until he got on the presidential stage.

    I get that change is a long process...but you don't want to discourage people by pointing that out up front, or no one will take the first step.  So I am somewhat forgiving about not delivering on pie in the sky ideas.

    Long term goals are different than the emergency economic measures I think were warranted in 2009. But even then, the congressional majorities would not do what needed to be done.

    Presidentin' is HARD.


    Seeds need to be planted (none / 0) (#48)
    by MO Blue on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 07:05:35 PM EST
    And nourished long term.

    Nothing has ever been accomplished by "I can't or we can't."


    I would (none / 0) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 10:07:28 AM EST
    rather have someone who was a realist from the beginning that someone who wasn't. Yeah, offering pie in the sky might be good short term but the anger and disillusionment from what it causes long term is not a good thing.

    I Think on the Right... (none / 0) (#13)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 10:55:33 AM EST
    ...this has been playing out for decades, the candidates promising things like marriage amendments, ACA repeal, biblical law, turning over Roe, things that are simply not going to happen.  

    But instead of these people saying wait, what I want isn't going to happen, they get behind another charlatan promising deportation of almost 5% of the country in two years, gigantic walls, all of it while lowering taxes, and maybe even another war.  Never mind the details or the math, this time they have their savior.

    So here they are again angry that the prior scam artists did what scam artist do, don't deliver and believing scam artist number two will this time, without a doubt, deliver.  He can't and won't.

    So expect even angrier idiots next time around when the GOP does what it does, nothing but empty promises.  Or worse, a broken economy and a trillion plus dollar war that no one can actually state what it was really about.

    For me I am pretty satisfied with Obama's report card.  Did he deliver on everything, no, that would be an absurd expectation, but he delivered plenty and with many things he never campaigned on.


    I think (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 11:03:20 AM EST
    Obama has done some good things.  But there are some big things he gets credit for that happened not BECAUSE of his leadership, but IN SPITE of it.  Gay marriage comes to mind - the ball really started rolling after JOE BIDEN made an off the cuff remark that the WH had the backup.

    Even his health care plan was based in a throwaway remark he made in a debate - he actually didn't have a plan!

    His report card should list where things got done because he reacted to something as opposed to having a goal and working towards that goal.


    I Agree... (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 11:28:47 AM EST
    ...especially with everything related to LGBT, but he gets credit in my book, even though of it wasn't on his radar at election what-so-ever.  He pushed it through the military and than ran with it.

    He appointed SCOTUS justices that allowed the tide to change for many things.

    Same, somewhat with immigration.  But this also include a lot of Executive orders that will not stick.

    But you also have the economy which for some reason isn't being pushed like it should.  We were seriously hurting, and while it's shameful no one at Wall Street was held accountable or the whole housing fiasco, I will take this economy, as fragile as it is, over any GOP economy.

    The war, not really Obama's choice, but I like being out of the ME. I like the deal with Iran,  I like the way we are being overtly cautious.  He did get OBL, which now is more like a footnote than an actual achievement.

    ACA is better than nothing, and while I don't like how he continuously negotiated, aka caving it, we have it and many folks are getting medical treatment that weren't.

    He failed to close GITMO, and IMO he did so on purpose, bet he has helped place some of the detainees around the world.  The forced feeding is bothersome.

    Overall he's been pretty good for the middle class and certainly good for the poverty and non-American class.  He's been great in not getting back into the nonsensical spreading of democracy in the ME.

    I would vote for him again given the chance in 2008/2012 even though that hope he promised us fizzled out pretty quickly, but has come back to some degree.


    I think (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 12:32:48 PM EST
    You could tout those achievements from any Dem pres over a Republican.

    As for Gitmo - I think he didn't close it because when he made the infamous, "I will close within one year..." He truly had no idea what he was talking about.  When he said that, I was done listening, and found it truly to be a frighteningly naive comment from somene who wanted the top job.


    I knew (none / 0) (#25)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 01:03:35 PM EST
    Obama wouldn't do it because he didn't have the gumption to do it. Like so many other things once the GOP started to scream he dropped the idea.

    Hillary even sent him a memo telling him how to do it and he wouldn't do it.


    You Could... (none / 0) (#26)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 01:28:38 PM EST
    ...but since he was the one, he gets the credit.  What the alternative, had HRC won she would have done the same things, so give a sliver of the pie ?

    It's his achievements whether any other D could have done it or not, he gets the pat on the back for at the very least, being the D that actually won, giving him ownership of D achievements.

    GITMO, the second the Commander in Chief asked Congress for permission in POW matters I knew he had no intention of closing it down.  While I hold it against him, he certainly didn't open it, and the legal monsters it created aren't necessarily his to own.  He owns not closing it after campaigning that he would, those people deserve fair trials, and not finding a solution is a stain on Obama.

    Also, and this is probably true for any President during Obama's term, National Security and how it relates to spying on US citizens is something he has failed at.  Along with the Big Brother mentality in regards to whistle-blowers and agencies flat out lying about what they are/were doing.  It's his to own.


    Here's the thing (none / 0) (#12)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 10:50:32 AM EST
    Yes, she is more moderate on foreign policy than Dems would like.  But she's much more liberal on domestic issues than she gets credit for (she's definitely more liberal than Bill or Obana ever were).

    And guess what?  That's where more voters are too.

    So, if you don't nt like her or what she has to say or what her plans are, then don't vote for her.  But also realize that a) no candidate will fit your bill 100%, and b) if there's a candidate you like, you must think of the general election and ask, "Can my candidate win?  If not, why not?  Because while his ideas may sound good, are they actually workable and realistic?"

    I like a lot (but not all) of what Bernie Sanders has to say.  I would be proud if he were ever president.  But if his ideas are so great, how come he hasn't been able to convince 50 other Senators of how great they are and how is he going to get a majority of a full (Republican) Congress to agree with those ideas?


    Agree with this (none / 0) (#16)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 11:16:38 AM EST
    And guess what?  That's where more voters are too.

    Seems to me every 4 years some forget that. First step - win.


    Yep (none / 0) (#23)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 12:35:10 PM EST
    I think reading this type of blog some mes gives us a skewed view of  what it means to be a "Democrat".  There isn't just one type, and no Dem candidate will win if they just appease and speak to bloggers and people who comment on them.

    HRC (none / 0) (#43)
    by Politalkix on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 06:36:54 PM EST
    is not going to win a GE.

    Well (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 06:51:52 PM EST
    then Bernie certainly can't win a general election. Muslims and atheists are more popular than socialists. But if you're willing to learn that lesson the hard way I guess you'll have to.

    Let's talk about that on January 20, 2017 (none / 0) (#47)
    by christinep on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 06:55:35 PM EST
    AFTER Hillary Rodham Clinton is sworn in as the first woman President of the USA.  
    How sweet it will be ....

    Meanwhile, dear politalkix, try to get a grip.  No need to demean, name-call, and all that ... go work for your candidate ... and, we'll all talk later.  


    Because YOU say so - heh (none / 0) (#52)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 07:18:56 PM EST
    Why not ask Roger Stone what he thinks?

    Same thing.


    A teensy comment from me (none / 0) (#32)
    by christinep on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 02:22:58 PM EST
    I "like" Bernie too. Yet--to rephrase the famous quote--"primaries are not beanbag."  Sooner rather than later, there will be a few punches thrown.  That is what happens, what is supposed to happen in any primary.

    For example: Froma Harrop has an interesting piece in the National Memo now.  It is not very complementary of Sanders, in some respects.  But then, neither Clinton nor Sanders are saints ... they are both grown-up politicians pushing for an advantage.


    My understanding about the (none / 0) (#36)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 03:07:32 PM EST
    Sanders campaign is that its goal is to generate a groundswell of support for progressive, just, fair policies that cannot be ignored by the powers that be.  That instead of concentrating on "just win," which has the effect of facilitating the power structure to keep doing what it likes to do - helping themselves - it wants to make it - if not impossible, than much more difficult - for the power structure to continue to ignore the people.

    Now, I have a feeling that many of you from the just win/Congress won't go for it/aim low school will say that winning is everything, that we can't have any chance of getting what we want if we don't first win.  And that's true, but the problem has been for some time that we, the people, have been led to believe that if we did our part to ensure the wins, that they would do their part and fight to get us what we want.

    That's where this has all broken down.  We keep doing our part - although I still think it's inexcusable how few people actual participate in the voting process - and we too often get a pat on the head for thanks, and attention turns to serving the corporate masters or grooming themselves for more lucrative work down the road.

    That Sanders is trying to change that dynamic is the kind of good thing we've been wanting and needing someone to captain.  It's why we wanted someone to challenge Clinton from the left.  That way of looking at things helps the effort regardless of whether Sanders is the nominee, or Clinton is.  If Sanders bows out, I have to think he will encourage his supporters to hold Clinton to a higher standard than "just win."  At least I would hope so.

    I appreciate that we aren't going to get everything we want just by electing our preferred candidate.  We know about the gridlock and the never-ending efforts of the GOP to block any and everything just because, but we still need a voice, and I think that's part of Sanders' attraction.

    If we were smart, we'd work on building both Clinton and Sanders up, getting behind both of these candidates to shape them into what we want, because we're going to need whichever one eventually prevails to be the strongest candidate, not one weakened by attacks from within.


    Progressive, just fair policies are awesome (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by vicndabx on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 04:38:54 PM EST
    the problem is the republic as it was set up is designed to be adversarial.  That those who disagree with you (or us) can leverage the inattentiveness of voters is a feature, not a bug.    

    the problem has been for some time that we, the people, have been led to believe that if we did our part to ensure the wins, that they would do their part and fight to get us what we want.

    That's where this has all broken down.  We keep doing our part - although I still think it's inexcusable how few people actual participate in the voting process

    "Fight" is subjective.  You and I (and thus the electorate) will all have a different idea about what fight means.  This again is a feature, not a bug.  In the 20+ years I've been following politics, to believe that you will "get what you want" IMO represents a fundamental misunderstanding of how our republic was designed to work.  There is no way in such a disparate nation that compromise will not be a significant part of any legislative advancement.

    IMO, this misunderstanding leads to disappointment and disillusionment with the process.  I agree we need to push the candidates, but that push must always be weighed against the governing and legislative process setup so long ago.  Consequently, the choice should always be for the candidate with the greater likelihood of building the broadest coalition.


    My main (none / 0) (#37)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 03:25:55 PM EST
    problem with Obama mostly is that he doesn't even try. It's like he's afraid of failure. So afraid that he doesn't even want to try.

    The problem with "not winning" is you have to be willing to sacrifice everything for long term goals and it might take a long, long time to get rights back.


    The problem is (none / 0) (#40)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 03:57:01 PM EST
    Bernie wants fairness, but doesn't care as much about growth.  That's not really a feasible economic platform (see how well the economies of socialist countries are doing around the world, especially outside of the small, homogenous European countries).

    Also saying you value fairness over growth isn't a good long term political strategy.  There sure are a lot of small business owners who might like to vote for the Dems, and who might agree with Bernie, but will protect their pocketbooks first.

    HRC has a better message, I think, when she calls for growth and fairness to go together.  And while it's good to have a robust debate, the whole point is to get elected so you can govern.  Bernie Sanders can say what he wants - he'll never win the presidency, which is why he's popular with white, middle to upper class liberals.  And if those are the only people who voted, he'd be a shoo-in.  But thst isntbthe case. It's great to have aspirations, but then you have to be realistic too.

    And let's also remember that the press hasn't started driving onto any candidate's plans at this point, so who knows how that will go.


    New GOP Florida Poll (none / 0) (#19)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 12:10:43 PM EST
    Trump 28
    Carson 17
    Bush 13 (Former 2 term Florida Governor)
    Rubio 10 (Current US Senator from Florida)
    Cruz 9
    Fiorina 7
    Kasich 5
    Huckabee 3
    Christie 2
    Walker 2 (Jim's pick to win the nomination)
    Jindal 1
    Santorum 1
    Gilmore/Graham/Pataki/Paul < 1%

    Based on polling trends, I offer these (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by KeysDan on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 01:46:49 PM EST
    candidates debate advice for their Republican voters:

    Trump, Keep on doing what you are doing. Do not change a thing, whatever you do, do not appear presidential. Your promise for repeal of Obamacare and replacement with "something terrific," is brilliant policy; and, in case some missed your genius on foreign policy, repeat whenever you get the chance your admission,  as you did earlier to CNN, that you do not know the difference between Hezbollah and Hamas, but you will when its appropriate. The candor of your foreign policy deficiencies will be endearing and your claim to get up to speed when you need to should clinch the deal.

    Carson.  Republicans are naturals for extremes and extremists.  Your number one competitor is bombastic; you need to market your somnambulism.  It separates you from the pack with the ease of a scalpel. Stay away from policy, not your forte.  Announce you are adopting Bellini's La Sonnambula as our campaign theme music. They won't know what you mean, but it will be praised as being profound.  Genius, really.  

    Fiorina. You have skyrocketed off the kid's table, based on your facility with foreign policy, cunningly staying away from business. .  Good to keep on a track on which you have no experience and let them wonder, than to move to one in which you have, and remove the need to wonder.

    And, keep this quip up your sleeve if Trump says, once again, that you can't be president because of your face:  "Gee, and you guys are such handsome devils--except for Jindal, he is handsome, but no devil." (brings up that creepy exorcism thing Bobby has going).  Not directly at Trump, and will get a good laugh and kudos for quickness.

    The rest of the lot get some general advice:  It will not matter what you really say, what will matter is that you say it loudly and show that you will kick a$$.  Who's?  Everyone's.  Start with Obama, move on to others.   Stay away from facts, they are not appreciated.  Or statistics. Optics are fine--like Jeb's! superman shirt under his dress shirt, but have a T-shirt emblazoned with Bush/Cheney, or a depiction of a Mexican family being deported.--be sure to include infants and children.  

    The Pope is topical and a really good target, get him and Sanders at the same time with that socialism and all.  A good (well, any) email joke will bring the house down and get you out of a jam--like answering a thoughtful question.  Drop some names that are bound to help--Cardinal Raymond Burke, Kim Davis, Poland Spring.    Good luck, and break a leg.


    New Florida Dem Poll (none / 0) (#20)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 12:15:10 PM EST
    Clinton 55
    Sanders 18
    Biden 17
    O'Malley 2
    Chafee 1
    Webb 1

    Charlie Pierce regarding (none / 0) (#53)
    by MO Blue on Tue Sep 15, 2015 at 07:19:20 PM EST
    Webb candidacy:

    The New Hampshire State Democratic Convention will be held this weekend. All the candidates, including Jim Webb, who currently is engaged in running the party's first stealth presidential campaign, are scheduled to speak.......y