home

W. Va: Sanders Wins But Gains Little

A now familiar (and tired) scenario repeats itself in West Virginia: Sanders wins the primary but gains next to nothing.

Sanders has won 19 states to Clinton's 23, but she is 94 percent of the way to winning the nomination — just 145 delegates short of the 2,383 required.

Clinton needs to win just 14 percent of the delegates and uncommitted superdelegates at stake in the remaining contests, and she remains on track to capture the nomination in early June.

I'm really starting to dislike Sanders now. Every day he seems older, more stooped and more out of touch to me. He's far outlived his usefulness as a promoter of progressive values. He is now being divisive and harmful to Democrats. Democrats need to focus their energy on beating Republicans in November. Sanders isn't letting them.

Trump didn't have a national infrastructure to compete in November. He's just started to create one. Hillary and the Democrats should be focused on increasing her lead over Trump, and expanding and energizing their voter base, not responding to Bernie Sanders.

Sanders is not a Democrat. He should come back in 2024 and run as a third party candidate. He'll only be 83.

< El Chapo: Extradition Decision Moves to Foreign Affairs Dept | Biden Thinks He'd Have Made the Best President >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    That's spot on, Jeralyn. (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed May 11, 2016 at 01:55:42 AM EST
    Jerry Roberts and Phil Trounstine of Calbuzz sum up what many of us are presently thinking:

    "It's time to call Bernie Sanders out for what he is: a fraud.

    "Not that he hasn't done some good for the Democratic Party and the country: he has. By raising income inequality, campaign finance reform, the minimum wage, universal health care, Wall Street excesses and other left-liberal critiques, Sanders has fired up young voters and nudged Hillary Clinton slightly to the left.

    "Bernie's gone from being a crusader for lefty ideas to an ego-tripping old crank who just can't get enough of the rush that comes from people paying serious attention to him for the first time his political career.

    "Speaking of ego-tripping old cranks, we might do the same, if we had people throwing tens of millions of dollars our way while countless millennial women hung on our every word, no matter how many times we'd said the exact same thing, skimming the surface of complex policy notions with a few tired phrases while actually having little practical idea what we were talking about.

    [...]

    "Sanders's argument - that even if Clinton is ahead in the popular vote and the delegate count, he'll try to persuade super-delegates to support him because he's more electable, is an assault on his own rationale for his candidacy: wider, more open and transparent democracy. His hypocrisy is staggering: after railing against the whole idea of super-delegates, he's now suggesting they should be his savior.

    [...]

    "Which is why Sanders -- if he truly wanted to defeat the GOP nominee -- would return to running for his causes and against Trump and Cruz and stop attacking the all-but-certain Democratic nominee. But that doesn't appear to be Sanders's intention because, as we said, he's not a Democrat and he's in essence running a scam.

    "We have to agree with David Plouffe, Obama's former campaign manager, who tweeted out the other day: 'Sanders has run a stunningly strong campaign fueled by passionate supporters. But raising $$ stating you have path to nomination is fraud.'"

    Aloha.

    This is what makes this (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 11, 2016 at 07:26:16 AM EST
    A dangerous situation.  Way more than 2008 IMO.  Hillary was a democrat who always had putting a democrat in the White House as job one.  

    Sanders has really gone off the rails.  That quote sums it up pretty well.  First it was about influencing the dialogue.   Then it was about winning.   Then it was about shaping the platform.  Now it clearly about nothing but stroking the old geezers ego.

    Honestly I think it's all about this weird year and the strange political environment.  People just seem to need to vent.  Trumo was the vent in the right, Bernie on the left.  In any normal year he would have been gone and forgotten months ago.  

    I honestly don't care much.   I think the general election has moved on.   Bernie is down to the last desperate band of hangers on and the venters.  IMO the hangers on are probably lost to us, if they were ever possible at all.  The venters will vent and then actually vote.  Screw Bernie.  No one who matters cares any more.

    Parent

    Bernie (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2016 at 08:11:39 AM EST
    is not trustworthy.

    Worse than that though is the fact that he's conning these young people making them cynical about politics.

    Parent

    The people... (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by kdog on Wed May 11, 2016 at 08:17:43 AM EST
    old, young, and in between don't need any help from Bernie Sanders to be cynical about politics.

    Bernie's run is but a brief respite from the cynical norm.  

    Parent

    Ask yourself this (5.00 / 4) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 11, 2016 at 08:22:35 AM EST
    If Hillary was the one begging for donations for a "campaign" that everyone knew had, and has not for months had, zero chance of ever winning and was clearly about nothing but getting as much money as possible for as long as possible, what do you think the reaction would be from yourself and the Bernista types?

    Parent
    I don't think Bernie is begging... (3.00 / 2) (#15)
    by kdog on Wed May 11, 2016 at 08:49:29 AM EST
    so much as the people are begging to keep him going, advocating for the issues they care about.

    That being said, I'm not crazy about this "still have a path talk".  The only path is a FBI indictment or other uber-scandalous bombshell, and I foresee neither.  And I also think Bernie has some shady people working for him who perhaps do only care about keeping the paychecks coming. And that reflects poorly on Bernie, point taken.  The game can't be decontaminated in a day.  

    Back to the subject of my original comment...what do you think Team Clinton is thinking taking the equivalent of over 10 years labor as a Walmart "associate" from Alice F&ckin' Walton?  Whose "victory" is this "victory fund" funding?

    Gotta wonder...though to be fair, I suppose 350 grand to Alice Walton is like 27 bucks to me.  Or 27 cents.

    Parent

    No (5.00 / 3) (#17)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2016 at 08:59:08 AM EST
    Bernie is begging and begging for money. Can you imagine what the same people would be saying about Hillary if she burned through their donations like Bernie has? Can you imagine what the same people would be saying if Hillary had made a stupid trip to see the pope? Already there's been massive excuses for Bernie taking help from Karl Rove.

    If you think Bernie is helping, he's not. He's actually doing nothing but showing the left wing of the party to be something that should not be taken seriously.

    Parent

    Actually what Bernie is doing now (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by jbindc on Wed May 11, 2016 at 09:01:42 AM EST
    Is pretty much fraud - asking people to continue to give him money when all it will do will line the pockets of Devine and Weaver.

    Shameful.

    But maybe this will stop.  He said in an interview yesterday that he isn't sure that he'll run ads in California-the staye with biggest prize of delegates.

    He's out of money.

    Parent

    Sanders also is lining the family pockets (5.00 / 2) (#101)
    by Towanda on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:19:18 PM EST
    with his fraudulent claim to have a chance.

    He pays Jane Sanders $80,000 per month as a "senior adviser" to the campaign.

    Parent

    i believe you but... (none / 0) (#103)
    by linea on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:53:24 PM EST
    do you have a citation?  i cant make use of this information in future discussions without a verified source.  {smile}

    Parent
    You (none / 0) (#159)
    by Towanda on Sat May 14, 2016 at 03:47:42 PM EST
    can google for it faster than I can cut and paste it for you.

    Parent
    If that's fraud... (1.00 / 2) (#19)
    by kdog on Wed May 11, 2016 at 09:09:48 AM EST
    I don't know what you call 350 grand from Alice Walton!

    Oh I know what you call it, "the way it is, shut up and vote for it".

    No thanks.

    Parent

    With (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:28:51 AM EST
    all due respect why is okay for Bernie to take literally millions from Karl Rove and the Koch family but 450K from one Walton is just awful?

    Parent
    Karl Rove... (1.00 / 2) (#31)
    by kdog on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:50:10 AM EST
    spending cash doing Machiavellian Karl Rove things is a far cry from the "Victory Fund" cashing a 350,000 check from one of America's great crime families.  Or checks from the private prison lobby and Wall St. and Verizon.

    Classic false equivalence GA.

    Parent

    Just (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:55:25 AM EST
    as I figured. It's okay for Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers to spend millions supporting Bernie but 450K in a victory fund is just too much.

    Do you see why politicians don't take Nader voters seriously?

    Parent

    That's ok... (none / 0) (#39)
    by kdog on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:12:24 AM EST
    I don't take oligarchal Democrats seriously...so we're even! ;)

    But you know damn well oligarch Rove isn't supporting Bernie with that money, he's supporting the GOP in his typical shady way...don't be so Warden Norton obtuse.  

    Parent

    Yes (5.00 / 3) (#62)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2016 at 12:57:03 PM EST
    they might not be supporting him for president if he won the nomination but they're not supporting Hillary either. They see him as the weakest candidate and their chance at winning a general election therefore they have been running ads for him. He was offered the chance to denounce their support at one of the debates and he refused. So apparently he has no problem with what they have been doing. He'll take support even if comes from the likes of Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers.

    Parent
    And that, my friend, ... (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 12, 2016 at 06:44:35 PM EST
    ... is the very essence of political self-marginalization.

    Because while the self-marginalized insist repeatedly that they embrace, live and breathe the concept of change, they don't really love it so much that they'd necessarily put forth any noticeable personal effort to achieve it -- particularly if it means compromising their self-perceived virtue by working with those whom they consider to be "oligarchs," "insiders," "toadies," "lackeys," "shills," etc., etc.

    Rather, they would appear to prefer instead that others fight the good fight for them while they provide the color commentary, which often consists of second-hand political spin and tertiary hearsay they picked up elsewhere.

    People who disdain working within "The System" as a means to bring about meaningful reform are, at heart, risk-adverse personally to the point of self-fulfilling apathy. It's just so much easier and safer to gravitate to those fringe candidates on the margins like Jill Stein, who traffic in comforting left-wing platitudes and otherwise harbor absolutely no hope of affecting any outcomes whatsoever. That way, they don't have to take any responsibility for the results, and their political hymens remain perfectly intact. How Ivory Snow of them.

    Those who will, tend to try and try again despite the risk of failure. Those who won't, don't but nevertheless, sure do like to b*tch a lot.

    ;-)

    Parent

    Off the rails, kdog (none / 0) (#160)
    by christinep on Sat May 14, 2016 at 06:15:55 PM EST
    I know, I know (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by jbindc on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:57:14 AM EST
    HRC all bad, Bernie all pure - even when he isn't - but then, it's just time for excuses.

    Still would live to see his tax returns, though.  If he's as poor as he claims, then what is he hiding? Investments in companies he derides?  Jane's fishy income from Burlington College and his campaign?

    What does have to hide?

    Parent

    How do you propose... (none / 0) (#40)
    by kdog on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:15:01 AM EST
    Sanders stop Karl Rove?  Challenge him to a duel?

    And ya forgot rape fiction...you're slipping JB!

    Parent

    Will you say "uncle" (none / 0) (#161)
    by christinep on Sat May 14, 2016 at 06:23:22 PM EST
    Because, kdog, that is where your posts are leading at this point :)  (We all know now that Sanders is an average politician ... who got lucky.  

    BTW, what I really believe is that he has the opposite problem of Trump in terms of releasing a series of tax returns ... that is, Sanders is probably bringing in more $$$$ than his followers might like to believe (at least, top 5&) while his evil twin Trump undoubtedly isn't the Big Billionaire that he brags about and that his followers swoon about in finding it so comforting.
    It is nice to know that you are so loyal to the candidate you select, kdog ... but, finally, isn't it starting to resemble stubbornness.  You talk a lot about being open--and you say it well--and, now, it is ok to take a new look with an open mind.

    Parent

    Bernie is saving his money (none / 0) (#72)
    by jondee on Wed May 11, 2016 at 02:09:48 PM EST
    so he can buy a villa next to Oscar de la Renta's and drown out the sounds of Kissinger and Hillary strangling little Cambodian and Honduran children by playing Thin Lizzy full blast.

    Parent
    He's done (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by jbindc on Wed May 11, 2016 at 02:26:49 PM EST
    Bernie's California state director quit today - 27 days before the primary.

    I think the well is running dry.

    Parent

    Re the California (5.00 / 2) (#111)
    by Nemi on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:51:13 PM EST
    state director quitting, I've seen speculation on Twitter about whether it had anything to do with the deplorable demonstration recently by Bernie-supporters outside a Hillary Clinton rally - the one Bernie Sanders wouldn't denounce - and whether it had to do with him, the director, organizing it or on the contrary opposing it?

    Parent
    No Bernie t.v. ads here yet (none / 0) (#105)
    by MKS on Thu May 12, 2016 at 12:21:52 AM EST
    and time is running short.

    Parent
    K-dog (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by MKS on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:36:24 AM EST
    You don't vote for the Democratic Nominee anyway.

    So, let us get on with defeating Trump.

    Parent

    There are many (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by CoralGables on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:44:50 AM EST
    that take pride in being able to wake up the morning after election day and saying, "Don't blame me, I didn't vote for her/him".

    They vote for the likes of Jill Stein, Roseanne Barr, Ralph Nader, Mickey Mouse. The list goes on and on.

    Parent

    I take pride... (none / 0) (#73)
    by kdog on Wed May 11, 2016 at 02:18:11 PM EST
    you bet, but you couldn't be more off if you think it's an "I told you so!" thing.

    Parent
    An "I must be different" thing? (none / 0) (#162)
    by christinep on Sat May 14, 2016 at 06:31:37 PM EST
    I came this close... (none / 0) (#49)
    by kdog on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:44:21 AM EST
    this time MKS! ;)  Y'all almost nominated somebody I could vote for.

    By 2024 your party might get it right, but there's lots of work to do between then and now...ungerrymander the House, primary challenge some crap Dems, and hold HRC 2.0 to her leftward swing.

    Parent

    The rich know the value of money (none / 0) (#43)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:31:39 AM EST
    and exactly what they are purchasing with it.

    Parent
    Bernie (5.00 / 4) (#22)
    by FlJoe on Wed May 11, 2016 at 09:42:55 AM EST
    has become a false prophet, insisting that he, and he alone can defeat the "oligarchy". IMO he is doing real damage by insisting that Hillary and the entire Democratic party is part of this "oligarchy"(i.e. the enemy.

    Parent
    IMO... (3.50 / 2) (#30)
    by kdog on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:46:30 AM EST
    he's telling it like it is...the Dems decided sometime around '92 that if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em.

    I don't hear the "he and he alone" bit you hear, from Day 1 he's said nothing but it's up to you and I to take our democracy back from oligarchs, and that the task is much bigger than any particular vote in any particular primary or election.

    But we've been talking in circles for months.  We'll just have to agree to disagree as to whether Hillary Clinton and Dems like her are part of the problem or part of the solution.

    Parent

    You (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by FlJoe on Wed May 11, 2016 at 03:52:37 PM EST
    and Bernie are always leaving out the electorate, who were voting in droves for Republicans since the days of Reagan and still are. There is a reason why very few people like Sanders have been elected over the last 50 years, people were not buying what they were selling.  Maybe times are changing, but only time will tell and in any case it will definitely not come as quickly has his BS revolution seems to promise.

    Parent
    Prior to 1992 (5.00 / 3) (#88)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:54:56 PM EST
    the party lost three presidential elections in a landslide. I'm guessing that made you happy?

    Parent
    Good reminder (5.00 / 2) (#92)
    by ruffian on Wed May 11, 2016 at 05:54:24 PM EST
    I honestly thought back 90-91 that I would not see another Dem POTUS for a generation. That is how powerful the Reagan legacy seemed. Now that generational and demographic shifts have occurred that have produced a liberal shift in the culture wars  enough to win some elections even though the country has not shifted leftward on economic issues (middle class tax increases to pay for that free college and health care anyone? no, I thought not)  it is easy to forget that going to the center economically was the ONLY way to win elections in the 90s. Elections that saved social security and kept the SCOTUS from being 9-0 GOP.  

    Parent
    What you call people (1.00 / 2) (#74)
    by jondee on Wed May 11, 2016 at 02:23:49 PM EST
    who bust Walmart unions, think poor people should be grateful to get 12 dollars an hour, call poverty-stricken mothers "dead beats", and who adhere to the neoliberal gospel of outsourcing and shareholder profits over clean air and water?

    What do call someone -- or something -- that unashamedly cackles about Gaddafi being kicked to death and shot in the street?

    Samantha Power was right the first time.


    Parent

    too obtuse for me. sorry. (none / 0) (#97)
    by linea on Wed May 11, 2016 at 09:08:44 PM EST
    wiki says Samantha Power is the United States Ambassador to the United Nations and she "focused on such issues as... the promotion of women's rights and LGBT rights..." what was she right about the first time?

    Parent
    Samantha Power was a (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by NYShooter on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:51:07 PM EST
    senior aide to Barack Obama in his 2008 election bid. Hillary Clinton, of course, was his Primary opponent. Obama's campaign was known for its cult-like following, in his staff, as well as his following. Obama gained a well-earned reputation for condoning a "frat-boy" atmosphere (replete with generous doses of adolescent mysogeny) in his "inner circle."

    Ms. Power became well known for describing Hillary as a "Monster." While Jon favreau, a senior Obama speech writer displayed his intellect and maturity by groping a cardboard Hillary cut-out.

    Parent

    But don't leave out his act of contrition (none / 0) (#119)
    by FreakyBeaky on Thu May 12, 2016 at 07:42:34 PM EST
    i said close to the same thing when he (5.00 / 4) (#69)
    by cpinva on Wed May 11, 2016 at 01:49:37 PM EST
    announced he was running last summer. sadly, he will be known for hubris and opportunism at the end of his public career. the longer he stays in, the less anyone will care what he has to say at the convention, self-defeating his whole (supposed) purpose in running to begin with.

    Parent
    May is not the time to (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by ExPatObserver on Wed May 11, 2016 at 03:32:58 AM EST
    look at who is faring best in the national polls. This is the time for the party to nominate its champion. For better or worse, Hillary is the nominee.

    good god, one of the Sanders spokespeople is on (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by ruffian on Wed May 11, 2016 at 05:38:51 AM EST
    NPR saying no one is going to the convention with enough pledged delegates to win. Uh, no.  Host not helping "isn't he making Hillary seem even more unlikeable?'

    At least no one will be able to claim Hillary is only winning because she is a media darling!

    Just like Obama! (none / 0) (#32)
    by jbindc on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:53:11 AM EST
    This is such a dumb argument. (none / 0) (#173)
    by Anc260 on Sun May 15, 2016 at 05:06:42 PM EST
    And people refuse to stop saying it.

    They think superdelegates don't count but then argue that a candidate needs 2383 pledged delegates to win. 2383 is half of ALL delegates, including superdelegates. It therefore represents 58% of all pledged delegates.

    If you're using 2383 as the target then you must include superdelegates. If you think superdelegates don't count then the target should be 2026, which is half of all pledged delegates.

    Hillary will easily hit both of these targets.

    Parent

    Exactly. And instead of challenging the ridiculous (none / 0) (#174)
    by ruffian on Sun May 15, 2016 at 06:13:42 PM EST
    statement about delegate count, the interviewer went right to the personality question. Lazy journalists are going to be even more of a factor in this election than most - so many shiny objects.

    Parent
    Sanders (5.00 / 4) (#6)
    by mogal on Wed May 11, 2016 at 07:45:32 AM EST
    I am disappointed with Rachel Maddow pushing Bernie at this point. My 76 year old husband says he is a worn out old man who is waiting to be paid off.

    Money & Politics (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Coral on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:59:39 AM EST
    Bernie's argument about running on small donations doesn't make sense when you get to the general election. We are talking billion dollar campaigns. Plus corporate funding for the party conventions.

    Huge problem. I agree with the basic point, that we should find another way to fund political campaigns.

    However until there is a fix across the board, a candidate refusing corporate and big money donations has precious little chance of prevailing in presidential election.

    Attacking Hillary for taking big money overlooks the huge amounts going to Republicans (including Trump) and to Senate, House, and state campaigns.

    I'd love to see realistic,logical, possible proposals for changing this dynamic.

    Without Democrats in control, there is little chance of getting campaign finance laws back into effect, or a Supreme Court that will uphold them.

    Wow (5.00 / 2) (#66)
    by smott on Wed May 11, 2016 at 01:22:42 PM EST
    Oh look, Sanders won another lily-white state.

    Does ANYBODY think that Sanders is now helping the Democrats win either the general, or critical down-ticket races that could flip the Senate and allow a potential Clinton presidency a chance to make meaningful improvements?

    Anybody? Bueller?

    No. No, he isn't. In fact, he is  the opposite of helping, he is actively damaging.

    Thanks, Ralph.

    Al Giordano (5.00 / 2) (#89)
    by Nemi on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:57:17 PM EST
    has tweeted a memo in 15 parts on "The Obama Coalition remains strong", storyfied by one of his followers, Denise C.

    1. Too much of the first chapter of 2016 was that some white "progressives" who didn't get on Obama train in '08 wanted their "white Obama."

     2. The absurdity of wanting any other kind of Obama when we already have the real one is a head scratcher for the ages.

     3. They were so desperate to have it that they overlooked the deep character & policy flaws of Sanders, evident for decades.

     4. I think that's why they lashed out most angrily at proven progressives (Lewis, Huerta, et al) who collapsed the lie of Bernie.

    ...



    I disagree (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2016 at 05:05:23 PM EST
    with the first premise. I think it's the same ones that bought into the fact that Obama was going to deliver unicorns and ponies and didn't and then because disillusioned are the ones that hopped on the Bernie train immediately. I think polling showed that the majority of the Bernie supporters were Obama supporters from '08. fell for the unicorn and

    The second part I would say since they didn't get their unicorn from Obama they started looking for another candidate that promised unicorns and that candidate was Bernie.

    3 and 4 I would say are pretty much on point.

    Parent

    I think he is also right (none / 0) (#113)
    by Nemi on Thu May 12, 2016 at 03:08:20 PM EST
    about #7. and #14., that those he calls the DudeBros are a minority, but one that has been hurting Bernie Sanders. And I believe he's also right, #9-11, in stating how important training and organizing is.

    Parent
    Rachel has her frownie face on about Sanders (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 08:32:30 PM EST
    in California. No TV ads, and the digital guy quit the campaign. Focusing on big rallies, students, and Latinos. Alrighty then.

    I don't think she buys their story (none / 0) (#123)
    by sallywally on Thu May 12, 2016 at 09:03:49 PM EST
    about why this is happening.

    Parent
    What is their story? (none / 0) (#124)
    by caseyOR on Thu May 12, 2016 at 09:12:35 PM EST
    Just basically that their internal data tells (none / 0) (#128)
    by ruffian on Fri May 13, 2016 at 07:06:57 AM EST
    them they will have better results with big rallies, and focusing on college students and Latinos.  

    Rachel was skeptical that they can do well without TV is a huge state like CA.  She is usually right about stuff like that - I think they really have run out of money to support big TV in that expensive market.

    Parent

    Interesting strategy (none / 0) (#136)
    by jbindc on Fri May 13, 2016 at 09:33:39 AM EST
    Since most colleges are out for the summer. And even though there are always some kids around for summer classes, the number of potential swooning and screaming rally attendees on campus is not the same as say, in March.

    Parent
    why do you think (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by CST on Fri May 13, 2016 at 09:18:04 AM EST
    I wrote that post?

    Also, "the likes of you"?  This $hit needs to stop on both sides.  Clinton supporters have taken a beating all over the internet, and sometimes that results in a bit of a backlash.  But at the end of the day, whether you support Bernie or Clinton, I'd like to think that we are all trying to move things in the same direction if we can get past the petty infighting.

    A little bit of history - I came to this blog in 2008 as an Obama supporter in the primary.  It was possibly even more pro-Clinton back then.  But arguing with people here did make me re-examine my  assumptions and also helped me hone my own arguments and support.

    Sorry Steve (5.00 / 3) (#138)
    by FlJoe on Fri May 13, 2016 at 09:45:43 AM EST
    I never heard anybody around here call Bernie, a corrupt, murderous corporate whore. Meanwhile that's pretty much all I have been hearing from Bernie and his supporters for month's.

    I started our respecting Sander's message but always considered his call for a "political revolution"  impracticable at best, dangerous at  worst. Virtually every time I laid out my reasoning I was attacked by Bernie supporters for being a sellout or worse.

    Early on I was willing to chalk it up to political passion and mostly let it go but now it seems that's all I hear from the  Sander's camp. Speaking for myself only I reached a breaking point and decided to point out the many hypocrisies in the attacks.  

    his comments conflating (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by Jeralyn on Fri May 13, 2016 at 01:19:10 PM EST
    Talkleft commenters with TalkLeft are being deleted. Commenters do not speak for TalkLeft. They speak only for themselves. This blog has certainly never engaged in name-calling against any candidate, including Sanders. False attacks on TalkLeft will be deleted.

    If someone sees a comment that violates the comment rules, they need to let me know and if I agree, it will be deleted. I do not read all comments, or moderate comments, but rely on readers to let me know when someone is blog-clogging or violating the comment rules.

    Parent

    Try to wrap your brain around this. (5.00 / 10) (#142)
    by mm on Fri May 13, 2016 at 10:48:38 AM EST
    This is a little hard to take,

    bringing unity to the Democratic voters

    a day after the Sanders campaign put out a memo stating,

    "Then we're going to have a contested convention where the Democratic Party must decide if they want the candidate with the momentum who is best positioned to beat Trump, or if they are willing to roll the dice and court disaster simply to protect the status quo for the political and financial establishment of this country."

    I'm sick of this crap from Saint Bernie. It just pi**es me off royally to watch this accomplished brilliant woman who has had to deal with a relentless raft of manure thrown her way since she was first lady of Arkansas to have to take it from supposed progressives who sound like they were born last Tuesday.

    Ronald Reagan: ever heard of him?  Let me tell you, after living through 12 years of the Reagan Revolution, you're damn right I was happy to have Bill Clinton win the WH and bring some competence to the job. And for his entire 2 terms he was attacked by right wing groups funded by shadowy extreme rightwing billionaires.  And to me it sounds like the Sanders supporters have swallowed every piece of BS they served up.

    News flash:  the Clinton scandals weren't true.

    The Sanders' campaign continued personal insults and attacks are outrageous and he has crossed the line too many times to count.  

    Nobody questions Bernie's commitment to his issues and sincerity, while Bernie and his team go right for the jugular, constantly questioning her sincerity, her honesty and integrity and her commitment to progressive values.  She doesn't need lessons from Saint Bernie on working for progressive causes. This is her entire adult biography.

    Hillary Clinton boasts a long continuous biography of working for progressive goals.  

    Make no mistake. Even in 1972, this took considerable guts. The segregated academies were the outward sign of the vicious backlash against the triumphs of the Civil Rights Movement that only would intensify over the following decade as the Republican party, and the conservative movement that would come to be its essential life-force, discovered that, in many important ways, the whole country was Southern. The backlash was even more virulent at the local level. If Undercover Hillz blew her cover, very bad things could have happened to her.

    He makes speeches and comments that Clinton should "be meeting with ordinary people, hearing what's on their mind", which is kind of hard to take since that is precisely what she has been doing for the past 10 months. Maybe Bernie didn't notice as busy as he's been renting out college basketball arenas.

    She has taken gutsy positions on issues like the NRA gun lobby that recent prior Democratic nominees have shied away from, and which she knows will guarantee relentless assaults from these powerful lobbies in the general and gets no credit from supposed progressives.

    Sanders has gotten a free ride this primary season from Secretary Clinton, the republicans and the media.

    Now, his entire argument for SD to switch to him is that he is polling slightly better than Clinton vs Trump. He lives in a glass house chucking boulders at this woman, confident that she won't return fire.  To me that is the sign of a dishonorable coward.

    Hillary Clinton is about to go up against the most vulgar, sexist, unqualified man ever nominated by the other party and he plans to unleash Unholy Hell on her.  He is now regularly quoting Sanders at his campaign events.  The media is going to be on his side.  And that man just won every single county in the state of PA this past Tuesday.

    It is time we all get behind her.


    Why would a candidate not continue (none / 0) (#145)
    by Steve13209 on Fri May 13, 2016 at 12:03:48 PM EST
    to try to convince SuperDelegates to vote for him at the convention? It is WHAT THEY ARE FOR! To make sure the electorate doesn't nominate a candidate that is popular, but might not win the Presidency.

    The pledged and super delegates will choose the Nominee and the people will decide if that person is better than Trump.

    If Bernie et al can convince the SD's, then fine. From what I read here, it will never happen, so why the whining? What he is doing is political, but I doubt will have much affect on the voters.

    If you are concerned about the Sanders campaign going against what they said earlier in the campaign, let me refer you to Clinton's positions on TPP, Keystone, $15 minimum wage. It's a campaign not a book.


    Parent

    I guess you missed my point (5.00 / 2) (#149)
    by mm on Fri May 13, 2016 at 12:53:50 PM EST
    Let him knock himself out trying to get the SD's to switch to his losing campaign.  Fine.

    But how is he going about doing it?

    Pointing out differences in the candidate's policies
    ???

    Not really. Please don't insult my intelligence and pretend you don't understand.

    Parent

    There (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by FlJoe on Fri May 13, 2016 at 12:09:27 PM EST
    were some who used that or similar language, it's even worse at other sites.

    Many times it is not about policy at all when it comes to Hillary, even when she takes a more progressive stance on some issue it is instantly labeled a lie.

    here, there (5.00 / 3) (#148)
    by FlJoe on Fri May 13, 2016 at 12:41:53 PM EST
    and everywhere she is considered to be lying when she comes out against the keystone pipeline or the TPP, nobody is trying to say she is more progressive than Bernie on anything. There are few if any elected officials that are to the left of Bernie on most issues.

    There just seems to be this issue with many of Bernie supporters that anyone not hewing to Bernie's agenda is Republican Lite at best.

    the comment you are replying (none / 0) (#151)
    by Jeralyn on Fri May 13, 2016 at 01:12:46 PM EST
    to was deleted. The commenter is hijacking the thread and demanding people answer his questions. That's not acceptable. This is not his blog.

    Parent
    To Steve 13209 (5.00 / 3) (#150)
    by Jeralyn on Fri May 13, 2016 at 01:11:06 PM EST
    You have made over 150 comments arguing for Bernie Sanders on this blog in the past month. That's all you comment about.

    You are a blog clogger, and are shilling for a candidate I do not support.

    This is my blog, not your blog. We have comment rules. Please limit yourself to 4 comments a day on Bernie Sanders. All in excess will be deleted.

    If you want to shill for Bernie, you will need to get your own blog.

    The honest (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 13, 2016 at 02:13:01 PM EST
    truth is almost every blog out there is a Bernie blog. So it's not like there is a dearth of them to comment on.

    Parent
    I'll limit myself to just one more, Jeralyn (none / 0) (#154)
    by Steve13209 on Fri May 13, 2016 at 02:59:39 PM EST
    Your blog your rules. Enjoy yourselves.

    Parent
    If ya can't beat Trump... (3.67 / 3) (#9)
    by kdog on Wed May 11, 2016 at 07:58:02 AM EST
    without 350 grand from Alice F*ckin' Walton of all people, you should just pack your sh&t and go home.

    Has the Clinton campaign missed the memo about how voters feel about this crap?  Or at least voters outside the TL bubble.  Talk about tone deaf and out of touch...not to mention penny wise pound foolish.  It's gonna cost 500 grand to spin away the terrible PR for accepting the 350 grand!

    What (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2016 at 08:10:00 AM EST
    are you gonna do when you got 40% of Bernie voters saying they won't even vote for him if he's the nominee?

    Parent
    No, it won't. (5.00 / 3) (#64)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed May 11, 2016 at 01:15:45 PM EST
    First off, most people don't even know who Alice Walton is. Second, she gave $350,000 to the Democratic National Committee Victory Fund, and not to Hillary Clinton's campaign or political action committee.

    Yes, I know that Big Orange has been calling it "Clinton's DNC Victory Fund," which is likely where you got this little tidbit of information. And this year, it's called the "Hillary Victory Fund." But that's somewhat misleading, because the DNC Victory Fund concept actually long pre-dates Hillary Clinton's candidacy. The prior two election cycles, the was the Obama Victory Fund.

    The DNC Victory Fund was developed in 1996 as a means to channel donor monies to help various state Democratic Party organizations. Our party's presidential nominees raise money for the Fund in order to provide direct support during the general election this fall at that state party level. This in turn supports the down-ticket slate of Democratic candidates running for the state legislative and local offices -- you know, those trivial sideshow races that Bernie Sanders apparently considers unimportant, because unlike Mrs. Clinton, he hasn't raised any money to help them.

    (The Victory Fund is a joint effort between the presidential candidates, the DNC and at present, 33 state Democratic parties. Bernie Sanders late last year signed a similar joint fundraising agreement with the DNC and ostensibly set up a "Sanders Victory Fund" to that effect, but according to FEC filings that committee has since remained inactive.)

    Finally, until enough people across the political spectrum start showing that they actually care about campaign finance reform, at least enough  to make a difference and force much-needed reform to the process rather than simply complain endlessly about it online, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever for Democrats to unilaterally disarm themselves financially in the face of a well-funded (and looney-tunes) GOP juggernaut.

    There's been altogether too much talk about "revolution" by those lounge chair "activists" of the 101st Virtual Reality Brigade, aka "The Fighting Keyboardists," who otherwise aren't willing to truly commit themselves personally to the long-term efforts necessary to bring real change about.

    And why should they, particularly when it's far easier to instead invest themselves emotionally in some starry-eyed left-wing messiah who makes grandiose promises about sticking it to The Man, yet honestly hasn't a friggin' clue how to actually effect those changes that are so vitally necessary to make a real difference.

    Dogs bark, and the caravan passes.

    Parent

    Good God.. (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by jondee on Wed May 11, 2016 at 03:33:06 PM EST
    another leaf-storm of verbiage of Emersonian length to say, basically, "nobody cares because I don't care"

    Did Alice Walton-Koch-Kissinger donate all that money when Obama was running, Herr Spinmeister? No, as a matter of fact, she didn't.

    So what is it exactly about Hillary that suddenly warms the cockles of all these here-to-fore scorched earth Free Market, neocon wingnut's hearts?

    Oh well, I suppose if they've all uniformly determined who Amerca's next great liberal/progressive hope is, who are any of us to argue, eh?

    Parent

    Question (5.00 / 2) (#84)
    by FlJoe on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:43:01 PM EST
    for all the Bernie's supporters, will he tell the DNC to give all that money back if he wins the nomination?

    Perhaps he has forgotten this

    A lavish Martha's Vineyard Democratic fundraiser that Bernie Sanders attended in 2007 featured lobbyists for many of the industries he now rails against on the presidential campaign trail, according to a guest list obtained by MSNBC.
    hobnobbing with such working class heroes as
    Some are government relations executives directly employed by corporations such as the financial firms Blackrock and Prudential Financial, or the defense contractor Raytheon. Others represent large Washington law and lobbying firms, such as DLA Piper, Patton Boggs, and Akin Gump.

    Some names stand out, like John Breaux, the former Democratic senator from Louisiana turned mega-lobbyist who has worked for Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Wal-Mart, Chevron, ExxonMobil and more. Then there's former Texas Lieutenant Governor Ben Barnes, who has represented many petrochemical and pipeline companies as well as Stanford Financial, the now defunct financial firm felled by an alleged Ponzi scheme.

    or maybe he forgot all about this  

    2006, when Sanders ran for the Senate, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee pumped $37,300 into his race and included him in fundraising efforts for the party's Senate candidates.
    The party also spent $60,000 on ads for Sanders, and contributed $100,000 to the Vermont Democratic Party -- which was behind Sanders even as he ran as an independent.
    Among the DSCC's top contributors that year: Goldman Sachs at $685,000, Citigroup at $326,000, Morgan Stanley at $260,000 and JPMorgan Chase & Co. at $207,000.
    and for the cherry on top
    During that 2006 campaign, Sanders attended a fundraiser at the Cambridge, Massachusetts home of Abby Rockefeller -- a member of the same family whose wealth he had one proposed confiscating.
    Bernie knows all about big money in politics and has played the game for years, he has just managed to convince you suckers otherwise.

    Parent
    Ooh (none / 0) (#79)
    by jbindc on Wed May 11, 2016 at 03:43:43 PM EST
    Alice Walton (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:48:32 PM EST
    Also founded and funded The Crystal Bridges Museum.

    Which is a treasure and a wonderful thing.  Alice gets a lot of slack from me.

    Parent

    ... you ain't going to make it with anyone, anyhow. To equate the heiress and philanthropist Alice Walton with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is both ignorant and hyperbolic, and serves only to highlight your own growing inability to discuss things rationally without devolving into an online tantrum. Until you stop screaming down the halls and flinging poo indiscriminately at people, nobody who's serious is going to take seriously anything that you say.

    Parent
    If you go taking advice from Henry K.. (none / 0) (#164)
    by jondee on Sat May 14, 2016 at 08:55:28 PM EST
    you might eventually find yourself at the Hague..

    Don't stand in the doorway, don't block up the hall, Donald.

    Parent

    Ni, what he was saying (none / 0) (#137)
    by jbindc on Fri May 13, 2016 at 09:36:50 AM EST
    Is that, as usual, you seem to have no real clue as to what you are actually talking about.

    Parent
    I don't think it matters (3.50 / 2) (#10)
    by Belswyn on Wed May 11, 2016 at 08:08:47 AM EST
    1. It seems to me Sanders's strategy is to try to go into the convention and influence the platform. I don't begrudge him his efforts to do this, if he comes out of the convention strongly supporting Hillary. The alternative is for him to go away, and people to nurse their bruised egos for a few months and then to support Hillary. I'm not sure which one is better, but I think Bernie is going for the first one. At least I hope he is.

    2. He's winning states that Dems won't win in the general - so what?


    He (none / 0) (#100)
    by sallywally on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:02:42 PM EST
    Is not acting like he is going to turn to Hillary.

    Expressing an attitude I suppose is common among Bernie supporters, I saw Michael Moore saying that it will be up to Hillary to bring Bernie's followers around, by offering to take on a bunch of his policies.

    Parent

    Ha, yes, you must be Bernie to get Bernie's (5.00 / 2) (#107)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 12:08:20 PM EST
    supporter's support. It is not enough to share his goals and differ on tactics and the merits of specific policies.

    I had to stop following Moore's twitter feed a few weeks ago.

    Parent

    Sanders is not the news (1.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed May 11, 2016 at 07:35:23 AM EST

    The news is Hillary getting only 36% of the vote. What an embarrassment. Perhaps bragging about throwing coal miners out of work was not the best considered comment.

    Why would you expect Trump supporters (5.00 / 4) (#7)
    by Farmboy on Wed May 11, 2016 at 07:47:37 AM EST
    to vote for Clinton? 44% of those who voted for Sanders in WV plan to vote for Trump in the general. Open primaries allow for this sort of mischief.

    As for the coal miner comment, as always, context matters.

    Parent

    More interesting (5.00 / 4) (#21)
    by CoralGables on Wed May 11, 2016 at 09:20:53 AM EST
    almost 40% of Sanders voters yesterday said they wouldn't vote for Sanders if the GE were Sanders vs Trump.


    Parent
    I think that means (none / 0) (#42)
    by athyrio on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:29:12 AM EST
    that Trump voters are trying to throw it to the least likely to win who is Sanders....

    Parent
    I would not (none / 0) (#20)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed May 11, 2016 at 09:17:49 AM EST

    But the dynamic here is Hillary turning nominal Dem coal miners into Trump supporters. Quite the change from eight years ago where she beat Obama by 41 points. Both Ohio and Illinois have many coal dependent jobs. The graveyard vote in Chicago may pull Illinois out for Hillary, but maybe not.

    Parent
    Then they are idiots (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by mm on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:09:52 AM EST
    nominal Dem coal miners into Trump supporters

    I had no idea until recently that Hillary Clinton was wholly and personally responsible for the loss of coal mining jobs in WV.  

    The reality of the market, however, suggests many West Virginia mining jobs -- whoever is president -- will never come back.

    For West Virginia coal, cheap and efficient natural gas is leaving it behind as a fuel for generating electricity. Many analysts project natural gas could remain in the range of $5 per unit of energy longer term.

    "Forget the clean power plan. You cannot build a coal plant that meets existing regulation today that can compete with $5 gas," Charles Patton, president of Charleston-based Appalachian Power, told a state energy conference recently. "It just cannot happen."

    Donald Trump says he will bring back the coal mines.  That's good enough for them.

    Bernie Sanders?  He has the greatest bestest plan to combat global warming.  And what does he see as the biggest obstacle?

    "we have an energy policy that is rigged "

    "Instead of engaging on this issue in good faith and allowing democracy to play out, executives and lobbyists for coal, oil, and gas companies have blocked every attempt to make progress on climate change"

    "The key is to stop funding the problem by subsidizing fossil fuels and instead accelerate our path to progress by showcasing our American innovation to accelerate the transition."

    It is no wonder all these out of work coal miners hate Hillary and chose the socialist from Vermont.  Perfectly understandable. <sarcasm>


    Parent

    Bernie isn't going to win (5.00 / 3) (#25)
    by CST on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:12:14 AM EST
    Maybe they know that and their only intention is to damage the eventual nominee.

    Parent
    i can guarantee you those jobs aren't coming (5.00 / 2) (#71)
    by cpinva on Wed May 11, 2016 at 01:56:19 PM EST
    back, and those mines will stay closed. Alpha Natural Resources is only the first in what will be a wave of coal extraction company closings/bankruptcy's, as the market for its product dies out.

    Ms. Clinton had nothing to do with this, and there's nothing she, or any other politician, can do to stop it, it is a natural progression of events.

    Parent

    On the other hand she is the only candidate promising a policy of throwing coal miners out of work.

    Link

    Parent

    Which you know, in fact, (5.00 / 2) (#99)
    by sallywally on Wed May 11, 2016 at 09:30:14 PM EST
    that she is not doing.

    Parent
    You obviously didn't listen to ... (5.00 / 2) (#120)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 12, 2016 at 07:46:08 PM EST
    ... what Mrs. Clinton actually said in that link. But then, you never do:

    "... and we're going to make it clear that we don't want to forget those people. Those people labored in those mines for generations, losing their health, often losing their lives to turn on our lights and power our factories. Now we've got to move away from coal and all the other fossil fuels but I don't want to move away from the people who did the best they could to produce the energy we relied on." (Emphasis is mine.)

    And she's absolutely right. By transitioning to renewable energy portfolio standards as we're doing, we ARE going to put a lot of coal miners out of work. There's really no point in deluding West Virginians to believe otherwise. Coal mining is an unsustainable industry at this point in our country's journey and further, it's turned much of West Virginia into a virtual Superfund site.

    A compassionate and empathetic leader does her best to transition West Virginia itself into more sustainable long-term economic ventures, through work force retraining and community reinvestment programs.

    And let's please get real here. 150 years of coal mining hasn't made West Virginians' lives better, because some of the very worst poverty anywhere in the nation has always been and can still be found in Appalachian coal country. All it's doing at present is further enriching the already wealthy.

    West Virginians deserve far better than your party's demagogy, empty platitudes and false pledges. And clearly, all you promise is more of the same.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Big Clinton supporter here, but I did (none / 0) (#125)
    by Cashmere on Thu May 12, 2016 at 09:44:41 PM EST
    hear a man from Appalachia state they are so tired of hearing themselves referred to as "those people".   I don't think Hillary meant anything demeaning, but it shows how sensitive things are in Appalachia and many areas that are struggling.  With that said, I think Hillary is held to a much higher bar than any other candidate.  

    Parent
    Like you said (5.00 / 3) (#130)
    by Nemi on Fri May 13, 2016 at 07:37:07 AM EST
    she is constantly held to a higher standard ... no matter the subject. So looking for quotes by Trump and Sanders mentioning "those people" - they've both said far worse more demeaning things with no reaction from the main stream media - I found not only Trump saying "those miners" but also this:

    His only seemingly allusion [to Global warming] came when he donned a miner's hard hat given to him, along with its endorsement, by the West Virginia Coal Association, and then, after taking it off, noted 1) that his hair had been mussed up; 2) that hair spray wasn't what it used to be; and 3) that "they" had claimed the old, more reliable hairspray (which contained chlorofluorocarbons-based aerosol propellants) had hurt the ozone.

    "So if I take hairspray and if I spray it in my apartment which is all sealed, you're telling me that affects the ozone layer?" he said. "I say, no way folks, no way, no way. It's like a lot of the rules and regulations you people have in the mines . . . for safety and stuff."

    [... eye roll ...]

    Trump concluded his rally with a remark that drove the crowd to near delirium, telling miners: "Get ready, because you are going to be working your asses off."

    The author sums up:

    Having made a clumsy comment about coal, Hillary Clinton then returned to Appalachia to try to explain to coal-mining communities her ideas on helping them stabilize their schools, health care, and pensions and aiding them in charting a path to the future.

    Donald Trump, by contrast, ignored any mention of climate change, dismissed other safety and environmental regulations as ridiculous, and promised, contrary to economic reality, that he would somehow restore their industry to its former status.

    Clinton got a lukewarm reception, while Trump was hailed as a hero.

    And yet, who actually took these hard-pressed people and their plight seriously?

    Who is trying to help them meet the real and unavoidable challenges the future holds?

    Or, to put it more broadly, who really treated them honestly, and with the respect they deserve?

    And as for Sanders:

    "We have a moral obligation to make certain that those people who may lose their jobs get new jobs," Sanders said.

    Not that we didn't already know ... about the different standards, that is.

    Parent

    I imagine (5.00 / 2) (#143)
    by sallywally on Fri May 13, 2016 at 11:33:46 AM EST
    lots of people use that terminology -- some with condescending intent, I'm sure. It's not all Hillary, but they may interpret it as condescending coming from her even though it's not.

    Parent
    For crony capitalists.. (none / 0) (#140)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Fri May 13, 2016 at 10:07:44 AM EST
    The coal miners recognize (none / 0) (#47)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:37:14 AM EST
    that Democrats are responsible the EPA that created this.

    Forget the clean power plan. You cannot build a coal plant that meets existing regulation today that can compete with $5 gas," Charles Patton, president of Charleston-based Appalachian Power, told a state energy conference recently. "It just cannot happen."

    Heck, Hillary bragged about it.

    Parent

    it must be so nice to always have simple answers (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by mm on Wed May 11, 2016 at 12:03:12 PM EST
    to complex problems.  Personally, those neat simple answers worry me.  It's how we ended up with GWB, the imbecile who thought with his gut.

    Aren't republicans generally in favor of increased natural gas (fracking) production?

    For West Virginia coal, cheap and efficient natural gas is leaving it behind as a fuel for generating electricity. Many analysts project natural gas could remain in the range of $5 per unit of energy longer term.

    The reality has pushed four of the top five coal producers in the country into bankruptcy proceedings. But let's imagine natural gas somehow struggles. Energy markets are, after all, volatile. The problem is, U.S. demand for electricity in general is soft.

    "In fact, it's been almost flat demand since the Great Recession," said energy economist Robert Godby of the University of Wyoming, "due to LED light bulbs, a lot of energy efficiencies. Also, the structural changes that are going on in the American economy. We don't have as much manufacturing and high electricity demand sectors as in the past."

    Let's imagine, again, coal prices still manage to rise. The eastern mines would still struggle to recover.

    "The coal seams are just getting thinner, so that means productivity is declining," said Ted Boettner of the West Virginia Center on Budget Policy. "So we can't produce as much coal with the same amount of people. We're just getting outcompeted by places like in Illinois and out west."

    Notice the dynamic interplay here?

    What is your magic answer?  Abolish the EPA?

    Parent

    Yes, that's his magic answer. (none / 0) (#65)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed May 11, 2016 at 01:21:48 PM EST
    Please be aware that you're addressing a guy who believes that climate change is nothing more than a left-wing hoax.

    Parent
    Please be aware (none / 0) (#67)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed May 11, 2016 at 01:31:10 PM EST
    that Donald is well known to be making things up.

    And since he knows that Jeralyn has asked that I not post on the subject he tries to take advantage.

    But that is not my belief or position.

    And he knows that.

    Parent

    Please be aware that the truth (none / 0) (#155)
    by jondee on Fri May 13, 2016 at 04:08:57 PM EST
    is as malleable as Silly Putty to Jim.

    Yes, he has stated here that he thinks the EPA should be abolished, and yes, he's also stated that human activity influenced Climate Change is a left wing hoax.

    Just be aware when debating with the man you're dealing with someone with an advanced degree from a wingnut radio university home study course for shut-ins, and you'll always know what to expect.

    Parent

    Not being a Repub I can't speak for (none / 0) (#68)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed May 11, 2016 at 01:39:24 PM EST
    them. But being for BOTH fracking and coal are not  mutually exclusive positions.

    And it was not the free market that drove the electric power producers to gas. It was EPA regulations that take the position that all carbon based fuels are bad.

    And that's what Hillary got caught saying. You can twist and turn but it is right there on video and infront of God and the voters.

    Color W VA red and PA and IL is in play. Thanks, Hill!

    Parent

    gibberish (none / 0) (#76)
    by mm on Wed May 11, 2016 at 03:19:45 PM EST
    Natural gas is carbon based.  Not all fossil fuels are created equal.

    Nobody said fracking and coal were mutually exclusive.

    Hillary made the mistake of accidently speaking the truth to these people, not the double talk BS they're getting from the hero baboon Trump.

    Parent

    I'd say she simply phrased (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by Suisser1 on Wed May 11, 2016 at 08:30:16 PM EST
    the truth poorly - in that it made it all too easy to take her comment out of context. Thinking people got that during the debate, but we all know how important that is.

    Parent
    Glad to see that you agree that Hillary (none / 0) (#85)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:48:16 PM EST
    spoke the truth. Accidentally.

    Is that what we should expect from her? The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

    Accidentally. ;-)

    And yes, NG burns cleaner than coal. It is also much more expensive and we have a limited amount. What will we use to heat our homes and run our factories after it is gone?

    But the actual truth is that it is the Demos EPA that issued the regulations that forced the power companies to go to NG.

    Now double post your answer but you can't evade the facts. Hillary said what she said.

    Parent

    gibberish (none / 0) (#77)
    by mm on Wed May 11, 2016 at 03:19:53 PM EST
    Natural gas is carbon based.  Not all fossil fuels are created equal.

    Nobody said fracking and coal were mutually exclusive.

    Hillary made the mistake of accidently speaking the truth to these people, not the double talk BS they're getting from the hero baboon Trump.

    Parent

    And, coal is so (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by KeysDan on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:06:40 PM EST
    dirty,  sending all those toxins and everything else it picked up over the years into the atmosphere upon burning.  Charcoal, as an example, is used as an antidote in certain poisoning because it adsorbs toxins so well to its surface and reduces absorption from the stomach.    

    Parent
    And is a crucial layer (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:26:35 PM EST
    In my large aquarium filter.

    LINK

    Parent

    For an aquarium (none / 0) (#98)
    by sallywally on Wed May 11, 2016 at 09:28:32 PM EST
    Of what size?

    Parent
    130 gallons (none / 0) (#108)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:01:06 PM EST
    Nice! (none / 0) (#114)
    by sallywally on Thu May 12, 2016 at 03:31:11 PM EST
    Saltwater?  I have a 40 breeder and a 20 long as quarantine, both freshwater.

    Parent
    Fresh (none / 0) (#115)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2016 at 04:38:16 PM EST
    I love salt water but I'm to lazy

    this is when I had breeding Arowanas

    Parent

    Wow, I find Arowanas charismatic (none / 0) (#122)
    by sallywally on Thu May 12, 2016 at 09:00:23 PM EST
    In a scary, threatening sort of way. I like to watch them in the fish store.

    I have mostly various fish that have survived with me for a number of years...neon, rummynose, diamond, redeye and blue tetras, five pearl danio, albino cories, five black kuhli loaches, and the Lady, a female Bozemani rainbow (I never had a male) who has lived in a 30, then a 55, and now the 40 breeder tank over the last 7 years.

    I have always wanted a pearl Gourami but fear I would do something fatal accidentally to the fish.

    Parent

    Technology (none / 0) (#87)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:53:29 PM EST
    Link

    Hillary position is just pandering to the far Left environmental groupies. She had read it off her teleprompters so often she forgot where she was.

    Parent

    LOL (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2016 at 07:51:31 AM EST
    Republicans have gone down the rabbit hole it would seem. Even with you guys messing in our primaries she still won with democrats in WV.

    Unfortunately telling the truth is not always popular.

    Parent

    Since Trump (none / 0) (#16)
    by jbindc on Wed May 11, 2016 at 08:58:33 AM EST
    Just said he has no plans to release his tax returns before November, my wish would be that this finally puts to rest the caterwauling about "the transcipts".  It won't, of course, because of the Clinton rules, but I wish it would.

    time for the primary infighting to be over (none / 0) (#23)
    by CST on Wed May 11, 2016 at 09:54:28 AM EST
    On both sides.  And yea, I know, this is a safe space for Hillary supporters on the internet.  But we've already alienated some long-term Bernie supporters who we need back on board.

    Time to make nice and beat Trump.

    Question? (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by CoralGables on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:30:01 AM EST
    Alienated supporters of Sanders? Or alienated the mopey/whiny wing? From what I've seen those that left never vote for a Dem anyway.

    Parent
    That is neither fair nor true, CG. (5.00 / 4) (#28)
    by caseyOR on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:36:24 AM EST
    Not a single one of the Sanders supporting TL commenters who left was mopey or whiny. They were some of my favorite TLers, and I miss them, miss their insights and humor and knowledge. I wish they would come back.

    And they are Democratic voters. Disillusioned with the state of American politics, and who among us isn't, but not Republicans. And never Trump supporters.

    TL is a better place when Anne and Zorba and MoBlue and shoephone and others are here and participating. I do so hope they come back soon.

    Parent

    I hope (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:42:29 AM EST
    they come back too.

    Parent
    Agreed, (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by KeysDan on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:59:27 AM EST
    Sorry that these wonderful TL commenters took, what I hope, is just a sabbatical. But, perhaps, I missed it, but I did not note a particularly hostile environment for a discussion of the Sanders/Clinton primary competition at TL.

     I admire Kdog, who continues the discussion offering his special perspectives, that always make me think deeper about my positions and consider other points of view.  The same, too, with the other, named commenters. They all are missed.

    Parent

    Not as much as I admire... (none / 0) (#46)
    by kdog on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:37:00 AM EST
    Clinton folks like you...who can support their candidate and still appreciate all that Sanders has done for liberalism/progressivism/whateveyacallit, after decades of Democrats falling over themselves running to the center.

    The third way is f*ckin' dead...and good riddance!

    Parent

    Thanks, (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by KeysDan on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:56:38 AM EST
    I always keep in mind that this is a primary competition. I am a Democrat and will support the winner.   To love Hillary it is not necessary to hate Bernie, and vice versa.  The competition has been wholesome and made Mrs. Clinton a better campaigner.

    i have come to the conclusion that Senator Sanders should drop out, now.  But, that was only after Trump became the presumptive nominee of the Republican party, and, it became clear that the road to the Democratic nomination for Sanders is futile-- its continuation will do more harm that it can do good.  

    Parent

    I did not dislike Sanders initially, but I do now. (5.00 / 4) (#59)
    by Cashmere on Wed May 11, 2016 at 12:20:27 PM EST
    I agree that he should stop with the attacks now.  He is whipping up a frenzy here in Oregon and it won't help Hillary in the general.  I also think the rush from his swooning fans has gone to his head and his ego is getting in his way (and I think Jane Sanders has also been affected by the attention).  Amazingly, however, there was a poll that came out yesterday showing Hillary beating Sanders in Oregon.  I find this hard to believe, but we are a closed primary.  http://tinyurl.com/zxcyu33

    Parent
    And you've had lots of early voting (5.00 / 3) (#60)
    by jbindc on Wed May 11, 2016 at 12:32:30 PM EST
    I don't dislike Sanders.  I'm angered and saddened because I think Devine and Weaver are advising he and Jane badly.

    I AM angry that he has created / awakened those who want to wear the label of "progressive" or "liberal" and repeat and believe right wing talking points.  He needs to tamp that down and get those people on board - that is HIS job, not HRC's,  and he's failing miserably at it.

    And since he isn't doing anything to help downticket races. Every day that he attacks HRC and lets his supporters attack her, is a day he loses leverage to get what he wants.  The party is not going to capitulate to him vis a vis the platform, prime convention speaking spots, or in plum assignments in the Senate so he can keep talking aboit his message.

    Parent

    Devine and Weaver aren't advising him badly (5.00 / 3) (#61)
    by CoralGables on Wed May 11, 2016 at 12:53:22 PM EST
    they are advising him well. Devine and Weaver are looking out for their own paycheck and are collecting big.

    Parent
    Is this poll an outlier? (none / 0) (#93)
    by caseyOR on Wed May 11, 2016 at 05:58:34 PM EST
    What has the polling been like from other sources?

    Parent
    I have not been able to find any other polls (none / 0) (#94)
    by Cashmere on Wed May 11, 2016 at 06:54:18 PM EST
    but have not checked today.  I found this because I got a text alert from OPB yesterday.  I will be shocked if this holds up here.  Tonight, my husband and I are going to sit down, discuss the issues, and vote (with that pamphlet that you love :) .  It truly is wonderful voting here in Oregon, as you know.

    Parent
    I do love the Oregon Voters (none / 0) (#95)
    by caseyOR on Wed May 11, 2016 at 07:49:29 PM EST
    Pamphlet. Every state should have one.

    Parent
    Casey, don't forget sj... (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by fishcamp on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:08:11 AM EST
    Yep, sj too. (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by caseyOR on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:54:22 AM EST
    I would disagree (none / 0) (#141)
    by jbindc on Fri May 13, 2016 at 10:35:32 AM EST
    While I miss most of them, II can think of one in particular that, while not mopey or whiny, I would put in the viciously snarky and sometimes even, bitchy, category, who offered little substance but only commented to make a sarcastic remark to try and prove her/himself as more enlightened (even when s/he wasn't, IMO)

    I actually don't really miss that person at all.

    Parent

    You know (none / 0) (#35)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:58:09 AM EST
    though it would help if Bernie would actually start acting like a responsible adult instead of a petulant child who has been denied what he thinks he's owed.

    Parent
    what does anyone gain (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by CST on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:06:51 AM EST
    by calling Bernie a petulant child?  Venting?  Ok fine, but what about the bigger picture?

    Is anyone convinced to vote for Hillary that way?

    The stakes are too high to be pissing off the people that might be inclined to come on board.

    Personally, my number one goal at this stage is to see that Trump loses in such a historic fashion that we never experience another Trump in my lifetime.  Calling Bernie a petulant child doesn't get me any closer to that goal - whether it's true or not.  And god knows I'm guilty of the same thing some times with my more "vocal" friends.  But there's a lot of Bernie supporters who are highly disappointed but not ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater.  Those people are worth holding out the olive branch for, and sometimes that is best accomplished by not saying exactly how you feel.

    Parent

    I'm not (5.00 / 4) (#63)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2016 at 01:01:30 PM EST
    even suggesting he should quit. I just wish he would stop with the nonsense he's been shopping. It's not fair to those people "who aren't ready to throw in the towel".

    I mean Jane goes on Fox News and shops the email BS. C'mon that's not helping anybody but themselves and I have to wonder if he'll even endorse Hillary when it is all over.

    Parent

    Senator Sanders win (none / 0) (#41)
    by KeysDan on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:19:00 AM EST
    in West Virginia widens the fault line of his earlier discounting of Secretary Clinton's decisive primary wins in the South.

     The pooh poohing of those wins was based on the fact that those wins were irrelevant because those states are unlikely to be blue in November, anyway.  And, rather insensitively, minimized those who are consistent and loyal Democratic (and Clinton) constituencies--black voters.  This demeaning attitude overlooks the possibility of the Democrats winning North Carolina, or maybe, Georgia.

    We have not been treated to this Sanders' argument so much since Sanders' wins in states such as Utah,Kansas, Oklahoma, and Idaho).  But, another, and, more cogent argument against Sanders' on this issue, is illustrated by the DOJ law suit against the state of North Carolina, over its discriminatory HB 2.

     Democrats in the south (and others) have a critical interest in nominating a Democrat who will protect and defend their rights. Critical, when their own (red) state tramples on human rights and civil liberties. Their recourse is an active Democratic Administration, and, accordingly, their participation so as to assure an electable Democratic president.

    Even more critical... (none / 0) (#44)
    by kdog on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:33:29 AM EST
    is for sane and kind Southerners to get their statehouses in order...the greatest threats to civil rights for women, minorities, and the LGBT community are coming from the red state governors and state legislatures and state courts, not the feds.  The culture war is all over but for the screaming at the federal level.

    Sure there are some things a Brand D president can do to help, but being a constitutional republic there are limits.  President Clinton can't stop Kasich from making it very difficult for Ohio women to practice bodily sovereignty...but the voters of Ohio can.  Or Mississippi or Georgia or North Carolina or...

    Parent

    the supreme court (5.00 / 2) (#58)
    by CST on Wed May 11, 2016 at 12:08:37 PM EST
    is key though.

    Parent
    Yes, but the (none / 0) (#48)
    by KeysDan on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:41:52 AM EST
    flaw in your argument is the part about "sane and kind" Southerners. Or, at least, enough to make a change.  The hope for the longer term is in the young people of the South. And, voting.  So far, the biggest change in color from red to purple has been the influx of Hispanics and those moving South from the North--transfers and retirees.

    Parent
    I like to think... (none / 0) (#51)
    by kdog on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:51:36 AM EST
    there's more sane and kind than we'd think by looking at the statehouse.

    Just like there are more sane and kind Americans than you'd think by looking at Washington DC.

    Maybe they're like fishcamp at the gym...scared to open their mouths! ;)

    Parent

    Kdog, (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by KeysDan on Wed May 11, 2016 at 12:02:03 PM EST
    I would like to think that, too.

    Parent
    The problem isn' t (none / 0) (#54)
    by CoralGables on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:58:51 AM EST
    those that don't open their mouth. The problem is those that vote for carnival sideshow candidates because they think both major parties are the same.

    Parent
    where do you think he got that line of attack? (none / 0) (#70)
    by pitachips on Wed May 11, 2016 at 01:51:07 PM EST
    Personally I think he should stop attacking Hillary (to the extent that his criticisms are personal as opposed to policy differences), but people really kill me crying over his comments when it was the Clinton campaign who originated that line of attack.

    All of the people here who claim to be so concerned with the attempt to minimize black votes were probably nodding along when it was Bill/Hillary arguing that Obama is less electable because he hasn't shown he could win the votes of "hard-working Americans, white Americans."    

    Parent

    Probably too broad of (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by KeysDan on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:34:16 PM EST
    a brush to state that "all of the people here...were probably nodding along..."  I know of at least one exception.  But, you make a fair but arguable point, especially if interested in re-litigating the Obama/Clinton primary competition.

    The prologue to this history, as I recall it,  is that concerns for the electability of then Senator Obama were broader than you suggest.  Many black voters shared that concern, initially, as much as they may have preferred to be in his corner.

     Hillary and Bill (called by some as the first black president) enjoyed wide support from the black community and banked on their continued electoral support.  However, the results of the Iowa caucus eclipsed concerns by black and many other Americans for Obama being electable. The Obama campaign was then on a track to the White House.

    Parent

    Pretty hard to identify (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by sallywally on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:09:24 PM EST
    who shot the first negative comment into the mix. But not hard to identify where the majority have come from since.

    IMO the Clinton were falsely tagged as racist -- as were their supporters.

    Parent

    CNN (none / 0) (#106)
    by FlJoe on Thu May 12, 2016 at 05:47:05 AM EST
    does a 4 minute piece on Trump's failure to release his tax returns, not one single word about Bernie's, funny that.

    No one cares about Bernie's tax returns anymore (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:40:33 PM EST
    unless the people of Vermont want to see them. The only two that are meaningful are Clinton and Trump as they will be their respective party's nominee.

    Parent
    didnt sanders have to file (none / 0) (#156)
    by athyrio on Sat May 14, 2016 at 02:24:33 AM EST
    tax returns while in the congress?

    Parent
    Everybody has to file (none / 0) (#168)
    by NYShooter on Sun May 15, 2016 at 05:49:14 AM EST
    a tax return, while in Congress, or, in Bible-belt, Louisiana.

    I think you meant to say, " didn't sanders have to file tax returns while in the congress AND make them public?"

    The answer is, "of course, Sanders had to file tax returns while in congress," but, "No, he didn't have to make them public."

    A little side note:......There's very few things Congressmen (or, women), from either party, completely agree on, and even fewer things they agree on 100% of the time. Making their tax returns public would be one of those rare occasions were the unanimity of their "no"-vote is guaranteed, 100% of the time. So, you see, there's an example that when they just put their minds together, they can, "get along." Score one for good old, bi-partisanship.

    Also, isn't it wonderfully refreshing to see that so many of our Congress Critters are such ardent "Believers" in the Almighty. I mean, just think about it. They come to Washington from all those "Podunks," USA, having scratched out an honest journeyman's living, as deli clerks, or some other such noble profession. And, then, in just a few short years, through dedication, and hard work I'm sure, they return home as conquering heroes, and full-blown (no pun intended) multi-millionaire members of the exclusive 1% Club.

    It's A Miracle, I tell ya, a God-Danged Miracle! Praise Jaysus!

    Halle-freaken-lujah!!

    Parent

    Even funnier. (none / 0) (#109)
    by mm on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:02:02 PM EST
    Wolf Blitzer last night suggested that Trump should take a page from Bernie's campaign and demand the transcripts of Hillary's GS speeches as a precondition to releasing his tax returns.
    I guess he is now an unofficial advisor to the Trump campaign.

    This morning I heard Chris Cuomo declare as established fact that "trump is the only remaining candidate that hasn't released all his tax returns".

    It's giving me whiplash.

    Parent

    Are you not aware (none / 0) (#116)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 12, 2016 at 04:42:08 PM EST
    that CNN stands for "The Clinton News Network?" And has for almost 25 years.

    Parent
    Ha (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by mm on Fri May 13, 2016 at 05:45:55 AM EST
    Yeah, I heard that.

    I believe that was started by Rush Limbaugh and Brent Bozell.    I understand.  To these people, reality has a liberal bias.  

    Parent

    Reality (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by sallywally on Fri May 13, 2016 at 08:49:04 AM EST
    Does have a liberal bias!

    Parent
    Stanford had/has a program (none / 0) (#170)
    by sallywally on Sun May 15, 2016 at 09:29:08 AM EST
    that followed the evolution of opinions on various topics, mostly social, and the more the participants learned about the topics, the more liberal their opinions became.

    I don't know whether or not it still exists. But it supported the idea that reality does, in fact, have  a liberal bias.

    Not sure about how the program stands/stood up to scrutiny in terms of validity, reliability , methodology, etc.


    Parent

    The Stanford Prison Expierment (none / 0) (#171)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun May 15, 2016 at 09:41:50 AM EST
    I saw this last night..  It's running on Showtime.

    Damn.   Gut wrenching movie.  Very hard to watch.  But everyone should.  

    As awful and misguided as this "Expierment", which even the academics running it admitted it was not an Expierment but a demonstration, was it definitely showed exactly why prisons become such nightmarish places.

    A real life horror movie.

    Parent

    BTW (none / 0) (#172)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun May 15, 2016 at 09:59:09 AM EST
    This is from one of the reviews at that link


    The well-acted effort tries to sell the notion that Zimbardo's experiment had a lasting value, but by then we've spent more than two hours watching a man gravely compromised by his own cruelty.

    This is a criticism that would be totally expected of this film from someone who missed the point.  I disagree.  The one thing made perfectly clear is the guy running it, in the end, gets this is a mistake.  It takes him way to long to admit it, but he does.

    As far as "lasting value" I believe it has some.  I don't see how you can watch it and not think it does.  As horrifying and misguided as it was.

    Parent

    You think wall to wall coverage of the (5.00 / 2) (#129)
    by ruffian on Fri May 13, 2016 at 07:08:25 AM EST
    Clinton scandals, both the real ones and the imagined ones, was meant to help the Clintons?

    Parent
    It was a long game they were playing (none / 0) (#135)
    by jbindc on Fri May 13, 2016 at 09:31:03 AM EST
    Get the networks to eviscerate them in the 1990s so HRC could become president in 2016.

    Parent
    CNN seems too conservative to (none / 0) (#126)
    by sallywally on Fri May 13, 2016 at 12:06:47 AM EST
    Be a mouthpiece for the Clintons, if that's basically what you're saying.

    Parent
    Anyone not busy being born is busy dying (none / 0) (#112)
    by parse on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:55:43 PM EST
    I'm really starting to dislike Sanders now. Every day he seems older, more stooped and more out of touch to me.

    There are certainly grounds for criticizing Sanders, but blaming him for growing older each day seems a little unfair.

    Some say... (none / 0) (#133)
    by kdog on Fri May 13, 2016 at 09:08:26 AM EST
    they want a big tent party, then when some of those the party left behind or ignored peak back in for another look, they bash them over the head.

    I'm starting to think a political party is synonymous with a religious cult.

    I love the way people (none / 0) (#157)
    by fishcamp on Sat May 14, 2016 at 08:12:30 AM EST
    get braver and snarkier towards the end of most blogs.

    Did any comment in particular (none / 0) (#158)
    by oculus on Sat May 14, 2016 at 01:40:26 PM EST
    prompt this observation?

    Parent
    not yet at this camp (none / 0) (#169)
    by fishcamp on Sun May 15, 2016 at 07:15:33 AM EST
    Wear your seatbelt (none / 0) (#163)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat May 14, 2016 at 08:27:20 PM EST
    Even if you are not going far.

    My nephew had a very serious car accident this afternoon.  This is not the nephew I spend a lot of time with, who lived with me for a while, its his younger brother.  He's 16.  Rolled his truck.  Got tossed out 15-20 feet and sustained neck/spine and head injuries. Pretty serious ones.  They air evaced him to a trauma center in Springfield.  He has not regained consciousness.  But they say he's moving enough that there doesn't seem to be any paralysis.  But he is in pretty bad shape.  Just a couple of miles from home on the way to his girlfriends house.  
    Wear that seatbelt.  
    When I got the call I was driving without mine.  If he had it on the injuries would almost certainly have been much less serious.
    No need to clog the thread.

    But thoughts and prayers welcome.  

    Sorry (none / 0) (#165)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat May 14, 2016 at 09:29:24 PM EST
    That was supposed to go in the open.

    Parent
    Since I messed up (none / 0) (#166)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat May 14, 2016 at 09:43:17 PM EST
    I will just say he's now awake and talking.  

    Everyone can breath a little.

    Parent

    Saw this late...hope he continued to improve (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by ruffian on Sun May 15, 2016 at 06:15:24 PM EST
    today. They are amazingly resilient at that age. Thinking of you and your family.

    Parent
    Just minutes ago (none / 0) (#176)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun May 15, 2016 at 06:18:38 PM EST
    Heard he is getting surgery tomorrow on his back.  4 damaged veterbra.  Strangely that's almost good news.  The big fear was brain damage or some paralysis.  Neither of those it seems.

    Parent
    Prayers (none / 0) (#167)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat May 14, 2016 at 10:33:59 PM EST
    for your nephew Howdy. Sorry to hear that but I'm glad the news seems to be pretty good so far.

    Parent