Wow. So many people angry with the NYT that this wasn't characterized as a "win" for Bernie. Since Hillary actually won more delegates than Bernie did - which is the name of the game, after all - it's hard to see how NYT could reasonably have written a headline declaring this a Sanders win.
The GOP clown car. That's about as old as Hillary Clinton. There is no one in our clown car that took money from foreign governments while they served at State and violated a signed agreement not to do so
There isn't a member of the clown car who approved overseas loans to companies like Dell and GE in return
There is no one in the clown car whose foundation is under investigation for Public Corruption is there? There is no one in the clown car who called the parents of the Benghazi vicitim's liars is there?
There is no one in the clown car who set up a private server to avoid
government scrutiny and to shield her emails is there? Did any have a stooge (Huma Abedin) block repeated attempts to get them to use a State Department email? Did anyone give David Kendall a thumb drive with confidential emails on it that he did have the proper clearance for? Did anyone have their server in a bathroom closet in Denver? Did the clown car erase 30,000 emails? Did the clown car fail to turn over ALL emails to State and the National Archives?
If Hillary is not indicted it will prove that the Obama administration is the most corrupt in history. Did anyne lost their job behind Fast and Furious? NSA? VA? IRS? Benghazi? The Obama administration is where truth dies and where hacks like Hillary Clinton prosper because if character and integrity mattered she'd be peeling potatoes the rest of her pathetic life in Leavenworth She has no business running and for her to think she does is laughable
There isn't a member of the clown car who approved overseas loans to companies like Dell and GE in return
There is no one in the clown car whose foundation is under investigation for Public Corruption is there? There is no one in the clown car who called the parents of the Benghazi vicitim's liars is there?
There is no one in the clown car who set up a private server to avoid
government scrutiny and to shield her emails is there? Did any have a stooge (Huma Abedin) block repeated attempts to get them to use a State Department email? Did anyone give David Kendall a thumb drive with confidential emails on it that he did have the proper clearance for? Did anyone have their server in a bathroom closet in Denver? Did the clown car erase 30,000 emails? Did the clown car fail to turn over ALL emails to State and the National Archives?
If Hillary is not indicted it will prove that the Obama administration is the most corrupt in history. Did anyne lost their job behind Fast and Furious? NSA? VA? IRS? Benghazi? The Obama administration is where truth dies and where hacks like Hillary Clinton prosper because if character and integrity mattered she'd be peeling potatoes the rest of her pathetic life in Leavenworth She has no business running and for her to think she does is laughable
1
An earlier post gave a list of organizations that paid Clinton for speeches. The commenter added headings to his source list, marking a synagogue, a Jewish college and a Jewish social welfare non-profit as "Pro Israel."
This is wrong factually and morally. Jews hold a wide range of opinions on Israel; none of these organizations espouses any specific policy on Israel, nor is Israel central to their mission -- Jewish life in America and tikkun olam --healing the world. We are Americans; not Israelis living in the U.S.
To assume every Jewish organization is a hardline, hawkish AIPAC, and every Jew holds the opinions of Sheldon Adelson is a false stereotype. Would you classify all American Catholic organizations as "Pro-Vatican"? If Bernie speaks, as he no doubt has, to Jewish-affiliated groups, does that make his speech automatically "Pro-Israel"? Please, please, let us just be Jewish and American.
This is wrong factually and morally. Jews hold a wide range of opinions on Israel; none of these organizations espouses any specific policy on Israel, nor is Israel central to their mission -- Jewish life in America and tikkun olam --healing the world. We are Americans; not Israelis living in the U.S.
To assume every Jewish organization is a hardline, hawkish AIPAC, and every Jew holds the opinions of Sheldon Adelson is a false stereotype. Would you classify all American Catholic organizations as "Pro-Vatican"? If Bernie speaks, as he no doubt has, to Jewish-affiliated groups, does that make his speech automatically "Pro-Israel"? Please, please, let us just be Jewish and American.
1
I agree and that's exactly why Netanyahu and those Jewish organisations that
support him are so disastrous for American Jewry
What you are highlighting is a direct result of there activities
Sandra
support him are so disastrous for American Jewry
What you are highlighting is a direct result of there activities
Sandra
1
Bernie is a prop to make Clinton look younger and reasonable. Cruz and Rubio hype, & the talk of a brokered convention is all a media illusion.
Everyone knows it's going to be Clinton v. Trump.
Everyone knows it's going to be Clinton v. Trump.
2
Nothing will please me more than to see Trump's loud arrogance and pompous boor act bring about his political destruction.
3
Watching the Democratic debate tonight I could only think of the difference in this debate and the Republican donnybrooks. While Hillary and Bernie debate substantive issues in a civilized manner, Trump and Rubio engage in sub-mental battles over ear and genital sizes. That makes for some kind of bizarre circus-like entertainment but completely inappropriate for a presidential debate. Beyond those histrionics lurks Cruz, to me the most devious of the lot.
4
It's been an hour and a a half since Bernie Sanders blew out Hillary Clinton in Maine by almost two to one and so far the Times doesn't have a banner story detailing this unexpected landslide for Sanders.
Sunday 21:30 EST
Sunday 21:30 EST
8
Dear Maro:
Oh no, here's the hapless "Feel The Bern" crowd, feeling more burnt out than hopeful. Hanging onto a "landslide", and "unexpected" at that, in Maine, grasping at straws. Bern Feelers also are implying The Times is part of the massive Clinton conspiracy. Well, I guess denial is not just a river but a stage of acceptance in the slow Sanders decline and demise, fingernails clawing till the last moment arrives. Hang in there, kiddo.
DD
Manhattan
Oh no, here's the hapless "Feel The Bern" crowd, feeling more burnt out than hopeful. Hanging onto a "landslide", and "unexpected" at that, in Maine, grasping at straws. Bern Feelers also are implying The Times is part of the massive Clinton conspiracy. Well, I guess denial is not just a river but a stage of acceptance in the slow Sanders decline and demise, fingernails clawing till the last moment arrives. Hang in there, kiddo.
DD
Manhattan
5
So offended by the Democratic Debate in Flint.
I just watched a "Black" segment (I'm a Black attorney in Washington DC so there's that) where an "educated" Black Obama supporter who didn't know Bernie Sanders was part of the Civil Rights Movement asked Bernie Sanders if he'd ever done anything to fight for racial equality. Then Don Lemon, the second dumbest Black person on television (Juan Williams is the dumbest) went into a series of woe is me questions about the Black community.
Dr. King died so that we wouldn't have racially segregated debate questions. Aren't we all Americans? This is why I am voting for Donald Trump. I prefer a President who has the toughness, integrity and leadership to lead this country without dividing it like Obama has, and like the liberals do every time they're in office.
I'm not sure if Ted Cruz can lead, because like most of us, I am not sure if Ted Cruz is sane.
I just watched a "Black" segment (I'm a Black attorney in Washington DC so there's that) where an "educated" Black Obama supporter who didn't know Bernie Sanders was part of the Civil Rights Movement asked Bernie Sanders if he'd ever done anything to fight for racial equality. Then Don Lemon, the second dumbest Black person on television (Juan Williams is the dumbest) went into a series of woe is me questions about the Black community.
Dr. King died so that we wouldn't have racially segregated debate questions. Aren't we all Americans? This is why I am voting for Donald Trump. I prefer a President who has the toughness, integrity and leadership to lead this country without dividing it like Obama has, and like the liberals do every time they're in office.
I'm not sure if Ted Cruz can lead, because like most of us, I am not sure if Ted Cruz is sane.
1
LOL- I guess if you are a muslim or Mexican you get to feel Trump's "division" but not if you are black. Must be nice.
I do agree with you that Cruz is insane.
I do agree with you that Cruz is insane.
7
No offense, but I think we ALL know you are a Black attorney in Washington D.C. (since 2008!), who will vote for Trump by now.
6
Integrity, DCBarrister? Do you read the NYT, by any chance? I wouldn't buy a used car from him. And if I were his supplier, I'd be asking for my cash up front.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/02/nyregion/new-york-attorney-generals-su...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/02/nyregion/new-york-attorney-generals-su...
Ted Cruz really is not eligible to serve as President. I just completed an 8-week study researching the meaning of "natural born citizen" in Articke II and the Constitution restricts the Office of the President to only those born on US soil. Cruz was born in Canada and was a Canadian citizen until 2014 with dual US status from his mother (his father was Cuban). The history shows that this phrase was a) limited to those born in one of the US Stares, and b) designed to block out those born abroad, even if there was "dual citizenship" with half-US cutizenship from having one US parent. The Fiunding Fathers insustrd that the President be abive suspicion about his loyalty and allegiance ONLY to the United States of America. "Duals" don't fit this bill.
Cruz knows this, because this is the "strict construction" or CONSERVATIVE view of the US Constitution according to Justice Antonin Scalia and others. Cruz relies on LIBERAL activist interpretations of our Constitution, and his law professor for Constitutional law openly calls Cruz a hypocrite. We don't need prople like Cruz talking out both sides of his mouth. He's a "dual faced" person.
Cruz knows this, because this is the "strict construction" or CONSERVATIVE view of the US Constitution according to Justice Antonin Scalia and others. Cruz relies on LIBERAL activist interpretations of our Constitution, and his law professor for Constitutional law openly calls Cruz a hypocrite. We don't need prople like Cruz talking out both sides of his mouth. He's a "dual faced" person.
3
Never ever ever vote for ANYBODY from Texas!
8
That's pretty intense coming from someone in Texas...
4
Absolutely agree. Lived there once. Not straight, not friendly, not independent, not nice.
2
Thanks for the heads-up!--wasn't planning on voting for Cruz, anyway.
1
The biggest loser here is Marco Rubio. He opted not to run for re-election in the Senate, and is losing badly in the presidential race. Come January 2017, tax payers will stop wasting money on him. Hopefully Republicans will lose his senate seat.
6
He doesn't want to be a senator because when he loses his potus run, he soon be collecting a $1mm paycheck from some lobbyist shop. It's a win/win for him.
And for the rest of the country too.
honestly I would vote for ted cruz any day over the lair hillary clinton and the racist donald trump.
Din't forget that Cruz is considered a giant hypocrite for using LIBERAL interpretation of the Constitution to assert his Canadian "dual cutizenship" birth does not bar him from the the office of the President. He was trained as a youth in private schools in Texas as a staunch John Bircher and in law school always quarrelled with his Constitutional Law professor. about the evils if activist interpretations. Well, a CONSERVATIVE reading, according to tge precepts of Justice Antonin Scalia, says Cruz is NOT eligible and only persons born in the US meet the Constitution's requirement that only "natural birn cutizens" can hold that singluar office. "Liar liar pants on fire."
2
Dear Bobbobby:
Since you are being honest as you put it, I'll be honest back. The General in November will be Hillary versus The Donald so I guess you will not be voting at all. But it's nice to hear that any day you would vote for Cruz. I'll put this valuable information in the proper place, the circular file.
DD
Manhattan
Since you are being honest as you put it, I'll be honest back. The General in November will be Hillary versus The Donald so I guess you will not be voting at all. But it's nice to hear that any day you would vote for Cruz. I'll put this valuable information in the proper place, the circular file.
DD
Manhattan
2
Watching Cruz gives me the willies. If there is one thing I have learned from watching these elections is:
Things Can Always Get Worse.
Voters who are too pure to vote for Clinton must not know any women who stand to have Planned Parenthood evaporate. Or maybe no one has a daughter whose life would be effected by a right wing loon on the SC who wants her to enjoy religious fundamentalist restrictions on her life. Or know any Mexican Americans or any Muslims -
vote to help people you don't know if you have a vote to throw away on Trump.
People used to blabber that there was no difference between Bush and Gore. Not if you are female, non-white, or any type of minority. What is American's thing about "purity"?? Drives me nuts.
Deciding to not vote for Clinton based on Fox propaganda is insane.
Things Can Always Get Worse.
Voters who are too pure to vote for Clinton must not know any women who stand to have Planned Parenthood evaporate. Or maybe no one has a daughter whose life would be effected by a right wing loon on the SC who wants her to enjoy religious fundamentalist restrictions on her life. Or know any Mexican Americans or any Muslims -
vote to help people you don't know if you have a vote to throw away on Trump.
People used to blabber that there was no difference between Bush and Gore. Not if you are female, non-white, or any type of minority. What is American's thing about "purity"?? Drives me nuts.
Deciding to not vote for Clinton based on Fox propaganda is insane.
13
Deciding not to vote for Clinton based on Fox propaganda is not the reason I will not be voting for Hillary. Hillary doesn't know what she wants. She blows with the wind. When it blows one way that is the way she follows; when it blows the other way she changes her mind. All she really know is that she feels entitled to be the first female president. She will also be the first president to reside at taxpayers expense, not in the White House, but in federal prison.
During her husband's terms in office he strictly enforced incarceration for young black me and strictly hindered single women to receive welfare.
While Bernie was getting arrested in college for supporting Black causes, Hillary was supporting Goldwater. Not much has really changed. Wall Street is still in her back pocket and she still supports wars.
Go Bernie.
Hillary for the sake of the Democratic party should get out before she loses to the Republican whoever that might be. Hillary is losing in all the national pols. Maybe the Democrats, like the Republicans will wake up too late to see what the people really want which is change.
During her husband's terms in office he strictly enforced incarceration for young black me and strictly hindered single women to receive welfare.
While Bernie was getting arrested in college for supporting Black causes, Hillary was supporting Goldwater. Not much has really changed. Wall Street is still in her back pocket and she still supports wars.
Go Bernie.
Hillary for the sake of the Democratic party should get out before she loses to the Republican whoever that might be. Hillary is losing in all the national pols. Maybe the Democrats, like the Republicans will wake up too late to see what the people really want which is change.
2
Deciding ANYTHING based on Fox propaganda is insane.
4
Since the NY Times won't tell you anything about Ted Cruz, the latest NYT invention to defeat Trump (given the abysmal failures of the other handpicked stool pigeons the liberal elite have thrown in our faces), I will give you all an exclusive.
Did you know:
Heidi Cruz, Ted Cruz's sugar mama, financier and wife is a former deputy for the NSA under George W. Bush?
Heidi Cruz is a Goldman Sachs (too big to fail, Obama WH bailout recipient) executive who got sweetheart loans for Ted Cruz's Senate and Presidential campaigns?
Yet Ted Cruz is portrayed as some sort of knight in shining armor, unvarnished and unbought by the corporate elite and political establishment. And NOBODY asks questions.
Did you know:
Heidi Cruz, Ted Cruz's sugar mama, financier and wife is a former deputy for the NSA under George W. Bush?
Heidi Cruz is a Goldman Sachs (too big to fail, Obama WH bailout recipient) executive who got sweetheart loans for Ted Cruz's Senate and Presidential campaigns?
Yet Ted Cruz is portrayed as some sort of knight in shining armor, unvarnished and unbought by the corporate elite and political establishment. And NOBODY asks questions.
6
Trump is completely varnished and entirely propped up by bank loans. His pick for Secretary of the Treasury literally paid millions to bail out Trump
Taj Mahal
Taj Mahal
Since the entire political establishment is out to destroy Donald Trump, and Trump will NOT pick Washington insiders for his cabinet, I'm willing to trust Trump's promise to bring the best and brightest.
And nothing Donald Trump has done or will ever do has anything to do with the fact that Ted Cruz is a phony, whose wife is a former Bush WH insider and a wealthy Goldman Sachs executive.
Cruz runs around preaching (lying) about a humble past as a political outsider that is 100% false.
And nothing Donald Trump has done or will ever do has anything to do with the fact that Ted Cruz is a phony, whose wife is a former Bush WH insider and a wealthy Goldman Sachs executive.
Cruz runs around preaching (lying) about a humble past as a political outsider that is 100% false.
4
Heidi Cruz us also Mormon and git her Goldman Sacs jib because she worked on Bush's campaign. None of her clients, all private individuals, have net worth less than $40 million each. She is a NAFTA specialist advusing fat cats how to ship US jobs across the border and make a killing. She was recently discovered catatonic in her big SUV in Houston, staring blankly into space for several hours, and was then taken to a facility. She seems back to her old self these days.
5
Voters in Michigan, Ohio and other states dependent on the auto industry and subsidiary businesses, better think long and hard before they even contemplating voting for Trump or any other Republican, because if they had their way and stopped President Obama, the last vestiges of the Detroit, Michigan, Ohio auto industry would have been a distant memory.
It was President Obama and the Democratic Party that have always stood up and fought to save American jobs and the American Auto Industry.....don't ever forget it.
The Republican's wanted to let the American Industry bottom out and go bankrupt not ever caring about the American working middle class.....voters need a reality check...Trump is no different.....he's all about the bottom line.
It was President Obama and the Democratic Party that have always stood up and fought to save American jobs and the American Auto Industry.....don't ever forget it.
The Republican's wanted to let the American Industry bottom out and go bankrupt not ever caring about the American working middle class.....voters need a reality check...Trump is no different.....he's all about the bottom line.
5
When you're so desperate to defeat an almost unbeatable front-runner that you ask the other candidates to step down, it's too late and it means you're lost. If Kasich and Rubio step down, those votes might go to Trump anyway, for the most part. The damage has already been done.
4
NY TIMES should open comment section for that article about the "Maryland House Race" in Chevy Chase MD where candidates include a load of super rich and DC connected movers and shakers/elites including the wife of Chris Matthews. One candidate has spent $3 million on tv ads in just 6 weeks.
I'm sure many are eager to comment about that one!
I'm sure many are eager to comment about that one!
1
More than a few of us want to know why the New York Times continues to humiliate itself with tis hoody journalism. Oh. I know, the people at the Times think they are doing and exemplary job as we have been informed repeatedly in the Public Editor column. Will the Times ever emerge from its self imposed exile in the Twilight Zone?
4
Dear A.icon:
Thank you for your insightful specific questioning of the standards set forth by The Times. You've managed to ascertain what Times reporters are thinking. Also Exceptional intuition on your part.
As for its self-imposed exile, that usually means someone wants to be there doesn't it? And let's see, "The Twilight Zone"? Well, it was a great anthology series, but it was just a TV show you know? The Times exists in the real world on Eight Avenue across from the Port Authority Terminal. The Twilight Zone died along with Rod Serling. Cue the theme music.
DD
Manhattan
Thank you for your insightful specific questioning of the standards set forth by The Times. You've managed to ascertain what Times reporters are thinking. Also Exceptional intuition on your part.
As for its self-imposed exile, that usually means someone wants to be there doesn't it? And let's see, "The Twilight Zone"? Well, it was a great anthology series, but it was just a TV show you know? The Times exists in the real world on Eight Avenue across from the Port Authority Terminal. The Twilight Zone died along with Rod Serling. Cue the theme music.
DD
Manhattan
What is it with all these constant complaints about The New York Times???
Look. If you don't like what or how they're reporting, send a letter to the Editor instead of taking up time and space in the comment section. No one here can do ANYTHING about it, see?
Look. If you don't like what or how they're reporting, send a letter to the Editor instead of taking up time and space in the comment section. No one here can do ANYTHING about it, see?
2
I wish The Ne York Times would write and article about how the New York Times ignores Senator Sanders
10
Dear Orange Orchid:
Senator Sanders ignored? How so? I read about Sanders almost every day though I don't support him. He's getting more press than in his entire career.
Are you confusing ignoring with ignorance by the voter? Perhaps so, because Sanders has been around, oh, forever. He was a poor schmuck from Brooklyn in the Sixties who at its nadir abandoned NYC for the bucolic Green Mountains of Vermont. For forty years he has been in the news especially here in neighboring New York. From his days of mayor of Burlington, to his seat in the lower House of Representatives, to the Senate. For his entire career in government he has remained an Independent until last year so he could run for president as a Democrat. If he were true to his beliefs he would have run as an Independent. But like Hillary and the rest of the crowd he's a politician. He knows that he won't beat Hillary in a Democratic contest. But he would not have seen the light of day were he to run as an Independent.
So what don't we know about Sanders? That Sanders is the junior Senator to the senior Democratic Senator from Vermont, elected in 1975, with a record that dwarfs Sanders. Senator Leahy has endorsed Hillary, a colleague he has worked with for years in the Senate and later at State. He's had very little interaction with Sanders.
Sanders is a fine fellow but quite ineffective. But somehow something will change if he were president? Do explain.
DD
Manhattan
Senator Sanders ignored? How so? I read about Sanders almost every day though I don't support him. He's getting more press than in his entire career.
Are you confusing ignoring with ignorance by the voter? Perhaps so, because Sanders has been around, oh, forever. He was a poor schmuck from Brooklyn in the Sixties who at its nadir abandoned NYC for the bucolic Green Mountains of Vermont. For forty years he has been in the news especially here in neighboring New York. From his days of mayor of Burlington, to his seat in the lower House of Representatives, to the Senate. For his entire career in government he has remained an Independent until last year so he could run for president as a Democrat. If he were true to his beliefs he would have run as an Independent. But like Hillary and the rest of the crowd he's a politician. He knows that he won't beat Hillary in a Democratic contest. But he would not have seen the light of day were he to run as an Independent.
So what don't we know about Sanders? That Sanders is the junior Senator to the senior Democratic Senator from Vermont, elected in 1975, with a record that dwarfs Sanders. Senator Leahy has endorsed Hillary, a colleague he has worked with for years in the Senate and later at State. He's had very little interaction with Sanders.
Sanders is a fine fellow but quite ineffective. But somehow something will change if he were president? Do explain.
DD
Manhattan
4
What's with you Sanders people?? Do you really think there's some kind of personal vendetta???
Do yourself a favor and read more than just the comments section of this paper. You'll find plenty of Sanders articles there.
Do yourself a favor and read more than just the comments section of this paper. You'll find plenty of Sanders articles there.
2
Orange: they have been live-blogging his debate with Clinton all evening on the front page.
4
I will not vote for Cruz. I will vote for Trump.
5
Same here.
Same all over the United States.
Despite the best efforts of the NY Times to invent news, the fact remains, NOTHING Ted Cruz can say or the NYT can print will get anyone who supports Donald Trump or worse, people who have voted for Donald Trump already to wake up tomorrow and buy a Cruz or Rubio bumpersticker.
It's March 6, 2016 and nobody in the US Senate has endorsed Ted Cruz. What would you think of yourself if you've worked at a job as long as Ted Cruz has here in Washington and NOBODY you work with every day had your back?
America sees that.
If the people who work with Ted Cruz every day in the US Senate don't like him, what are the chances the entire nation will?
Not very good.
Same all over the United States.
Despite the best efforts of the NY Times to invent news, the fact remains, NOTHING Ted Cruz can say or the NYT can print will get anyone who supports Donald Trump or worse, people who have voted for Donald Trump already to wake up tomorrow and buy a Cruz or Rubio bumpersticker.
It's March 6, 2016 and nobody in the US Senate has endorsed Ted Cruz. What would you think of yourself if you've worked at a job as long as Ted Cruz has here in Washington and NOBODY you work with every day had your back?
America sees that.
If the people who work with Ted Cruz every day in the US Senate don't like him, what are the chances the entire nation will?
Not very good.
4
Ted Cruz is too extreme and can never win a national election. He's a religious wacko and a war-monger. I'll vote for Trump.
4
I don't think it's the "same all over the Unite States", nor have I any reason to think that America "sees" Trump as the optimal President.
At least, THIS American doesn't.
At least, THIS American doesn't.
4
At some point the voters are going to realize that the Donald thinks the Geneva convention is an annual meeting of hotel owners in Switzerland - but it will be too late to un-nominate him...
8
Att. Republican
However much Trump upsets you Cruz will take you to the Ninth Circle of Hell, Treachery. After dragging you through most of the others, so don't say you were not warned.
However much Trump upsets you Cruz will take you to the Ninth Circle of Hell, Treachery. After dragging you through most of the others, so don't say you were not warned.
5
Really now, what's the difference between the two, cruz is evil incarnate, trump I'm not so sure. They, along with the rest of the clown train, from the very beginning, belong nowhere near the white house if this country is to survive.
4
I am so tired of CNN,MSNBC and the NYT, they have Hillary winning already. This race is far from over and Bernie Sanders is still very much in it. Hopefully he will do well in other Midwest and the Western States. I have heard some experts actually write that he could fare better than Hillary against the Republican candidate !!!!
8
Dear m.A.Preston:
That's because Hillary does have the nomination well in hand. To assume otherwise is wishful thinking.
Forget some "experts" you've been reading and check with a master prognosticator, Nate Silver's Five Thirty Eight site. He has Hillary well ahead in the Midwest the West and elsewhere, in Florida, Ohio, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and California. As of today, Silver states that Sanders will have to get over 53% of the vote in every state yet to vote to even equal Hillary's lead.
Hope and optimism is all well and good, but eventually one has to deal with harsh reality. Bummer, huh? But cheer up. Hillary will clean the clock of The Donald. That you can take to the bank. No worries, mate.
DD
Manhattan
That's because Hillary does have the nomination well in hand. To assume otherwise is wishful thinking.
Forget some "experts" you've been reading and check with a master prognosticator, Nate Silver's Five Thirty Eight site. He has Hillary well ahead in the Midwest the West and elsewhere, in Florida, Ohio, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and California. As of today, Silver states that Sanders will have to get over 53% of the vote in every state yet to vote to even equal Hillary's lead.
Hope and optimism is all well and good, but eventually one has to deal with harsh reality. Bummer, huh? But cheer up. Hillary will clean the clock of The Donald. That you can take to the bank. No worries, mate.
DD
Manhattan
2
Cruz won two lousy caucuses. This is nothing. For better or worse Trump is on fire, and if he wins the Rust Belt, forget it.
And by the way, Cruz has little chance of winning against Clinton because, to be honest, Cruz is too creepy. His online nickname is Zodiac Killer.
Maybe Jeb will re-enter the race. Or Marco Rubio will quickly pass puberty and start acting like a president. Otherwise, can you say President Trump without rolling your eyes? Better start practicing.
And by the way, Cruz has little chance of winning against Clinton because, to be honest, Cruz is too creepy. His online nickname is Zodiac Killer.
Maybe Jeb will re-enter the race. Or Marco Rubio will quickly pass puberty and start acting like a president. Otherwise, can you say President Trump without rolling your eyes? Better start practicing.
3
I'd take Mitt over Trump or Cruz. Easy to say now.
4
So the Republican Party is now debating whether to take strychnine or cyanide. This is no doubt an improvement over last week, when it seemed to be leaning more towards cyanide. It's surely better to have the illusion of choice. Let us know what you finally pick; it will save time on the autopsy.
5
You may want to save the victory lap--there could be a major meltdown on the Democratic side if Hillary keeps using the superdelegate scam and the mainstream media to alienate young voters.
6
Mr. Sanders must be winning big today in the Maine Caucuses. How do I come to this conclusion? Not a peep out of The Times or the other media outlets.
So Mr. Sanders is correct that this is a very very good weekend for his campaign, his deficit In pledged delegates will be close to 190 after tonight.
So Mr. Sanders is correct that this is a very very good weekend for his campaign, his deficit In pledged delegates will be close to 190 after tonight.
9
Looks like Maine may go fro Mr. Sanders:
http://patch.com/us/across-america/maine-democratic-caucus-live-results-...
High turn out, long lines and the caucus will be conducted by paper ballot, due to the large turn out.
Let the Clinton supporters attack now.
http://patch.com/us/across-america/maine-democratic-caucus-live-results-...
High turn out, long lines and the caucus will be conducted by paper ballot, due to the large turn out.
Let the Clinton supporters attack now.
8
Bernie wins in states with a small minority population. Unfortunately, those states have a small amount of electoral votes and will be in the Republican column.
2
Huh? Southern states all Hillary, all Republican?
2
Doesn't really speak much for his crossover appeal, does it???
1
Mr Martin
Thank you for posting my comments. It is appreciated
Thank you for posting my comments. It is appreciated
Sock it to'em Donald...I'd never vote for you, but I love to see the Grand Old Party slowly twisting in the wind trying to figure out how to get rid of their very own Creation. If they do figure out a way....You can be sure you really gave them a run for their Money!
5
Would the Democrats who live life in complete denial when it comes to their candidates explain how you can vote for Hillary when
1) she's a progressive right? Why is it then when she sat on the board of Wal Mart from 1987-1992 there is no record of her advancing women's rights. Well?
2) She's fighting for the middle class? That's why when she found that UNLV had raised tuition 4 straight years she refused to lower her speaking fee That's connecting!
3) Why is it that it took 20 FOI lawsuits for Clinton to turn over ER emails and server? I thought she was the most transparent politician alive!
4) Why does the Clinton Slush Fund refuse to undergo an independent audit? I guess the FBI investigation for public corruption will tell us
5) 2 years ago the Clinton's donated $3 million to charity; the Clinton Foundation. They donate to themselves and get the tax write off. How noble of them!
6) Finally the emails. If they gave Pagliano immunity that means they've impaneled a grand jury and they suspect specific information. So for Hillary to she's not the target? Guess again! Please Democrats by all means address immunity and the grand jury. Cruz will be whatever you want but inething he is not; facing federal indictment. It's coming!
1) she's a progressive right? Why is it then when she sat on the board of Wal Mart from 1987-1992 there is no record of her advancing women's rights. Well?
2) She's fighting for the middle class? That's why when she found that UNLV had raised tuition 4 straight years she refused to lower her speaking fee That's connecting!
3) Why is it that it took 20 FOI lawsuits for Clinton to turn over ER emails and server? I thought she was the most transparent politician alive!
4) Why does the Clinton Slush Fund refuse to undergo an independent audit? I guess the FBI investigation for public corruption will tell us
5) 2 years ago the Clinton's donated $3 million to charity; the Clinton Foundation. They donate to themselves and get the tax write off. How noble of them!
6) Finally the emails. If they gave Pagliano immunity that means they've impaneled a grand jury and they suspect specific information. So for Hillary to she's not the target? Guess again! Please Democrats by all means address immunity and the grand jury. Cruz will be whatever you want but inething he is not; facing federal indictment. It's coming!
9
You're a conservative voter, Healed. Why would I take advice from you? And I have a question for you -- conservatives keep telling us Clinton is a terrible candidate who will lose, but if she's that bad, why do you need to keep telling us? Wouldn't it become obvious soon without you?
If your opposition really is losing, the best approach is to stand aside and let it happen. The GOP isn't doing that. Shouldn't you be attacking Bernie instead, if he's the threat? In any case, your list is a bunch of threadbare lies. I stopped listening to GOP tin-hat hyperbole many years ago. Wolf! Wolf!
If your opposition really is losing, the best approach is to stand aside and let it happen. The GOP isn't doing that. Shouldn't you be attacking Bernie instead, if he's the threat? In any case, your list is a bunch of threadbare lies. I stopped listening to GOP tin-hat hyperbole many years ago. Wolf! Wolf!
4
Naomi. You liberals use the same approach when discussing Cruz. If he's such a terrible candidate why keep telling us repeatedly.
You're media-filled insular thinking is exactly what's wrong with the DNC and why they'll likely lose the presidency. Your two 'best' candidates are composed of a socialist and someone about to be indicted by the JOP over an idiotic email server in her bathroom.
Just accept it, your party has fallen a long way..
You're media-filled insular thinking is exactly what's wrong with the DNC and why they'll likely lose the presidency. Your two 'best' candidates are composed of a socialist and someone about to be indicted by the JOP over an idiotic email server in her bathroom.
Just accept it, your party has fallen a long way..
1
That's rich. And the Republican Party hasn't fallen a long way??? Well, then again. Maybe not.
1
Ronald Reagan had it right....Socialism can only exist in 2 places - in Heaven where it is not needed and in Hell where it already exists
1
Socialism does not exist in Hell otherwise known as Texas.
9
This year portends to be problematic for the Democratic SSR. The turnout indicates that there is not so much enthusiasm for socialism here in the US.
Bernie may see a path but the lights went out about a week ago
5
Bernie is an old kooky prop. Cruz, Rubio, the talk of a delegation is all media orchestrated drama, too. I can't believe how many people waste their life buying into this soap opera. Media is laughing all the way to the bank.
Everyone has known it's going to be Clinton v. Trump for several months.
Everyone has known it's going to be Clinton v. Trump for several months.
3
Cruz is a thousand times worse for progressives than Trump, despite all the "Nazi rally" talk. Trump's just a clever deal-maker trying to Barnum the clods into a White House victory. He's a typical rich New Yorker who's fine with abortions, gays, and minorities--unless he has to use them to con the rubes for a while. And with Trump, you get the destruction of the Republican Party and the Israel Lobby, of which the party has been a wholly owned subsidiary since the neocons threw in with Reagan in 1980, and no war for Israel with Iran, since Trump doesn't need a right-wing Jewish dime and is totally uninterested in making himself as unpopular as W for Bibi's sake. Cruz is infinitely more dangerous. He's a fake Savonarola who would end abortion rights and create a truly Neanderthal Supreme Court, maybe even fighting a war for Israel in Iran into the bargain. If it's a Republican year, pray for Trump, if you'll pardon the expression.
10
I'm pro-choice, pro-gay rights/gay marriage (an atheist) and I know Ted Cruz is a horror, very dangerous. I'll vote for Trump.
1
Oh sure. Because trump is so much more of a Liberal, right???
Cruz winning is good news. Trump has lots of charisma, which is all you need these days, and could beat Clinton. Cruz is so very far to the right that he's already in a third party. Any reasonable person (who is not trying to turn the USA into a gigantic multi-ethnic Denmark) should beat Cruz easily.
Watch Cruz get less prayerful and (seemingly) more reasonable once he gets out of the south. Watch Cruz.
Watch Cruz get less prayerful and (seemingly) more reasonable once he gets out of the south. Watch Cruz.
Wait. You didn't get the memo?? -- America is ALREADY a giant multi-ethnic Denmark....and it's beautiful!
1
As for the popularity of Trump, to quote a popular book "you reap what you sow:" deplorable investment in education means that the less educated amongst us are in favour of candidates who aren't politically correct, and who don't care about the qualifications of those whom they vote for.
6
My heart says Bernie but my head says Hillary. With the Republicans my heart and head says NO(!!) to both Trump and Cruz.
6
I am going to vote for whoever the Democraric nominee is. I am getting a little tired of Democrats bashing Clinton. She has fought off 20 years of right wing propaganda, Bernie has not delt with any right wing propaganda and is untested in this realm. The Republicans are ignoring Bernie, because they want him to win. If he is nominated he will be attacked as a socialist and his shine will quickly fade. I think the Republicans prefer to face Bernie in the general election because they can paint him as an extreme liberal.
11
You are from Tennessee which did not vote for Gore, hence Iraq War and now ISIS.
1
I voted for Gore, and was against the Iraq war.
6
Cruz is a Bush boy. Hemet his wife when she and he worked for Bush Jr. He is establishment all the way parading as anti establishment. Anyone who will do a ounce of research on him will find he is funded by special interests and Wall street all the way. He went down to Florida in 2000 to Help Bush Jr. steal the 2000 election. The guy is not even eligible to run for potus. He is not a natural born citizen.
6
So, Cruz wins 2 states and he's a threat to Trump. Sanders wins 2 states and the only mention is of Clinton's "commanding victory" despite the fact that Clinton only won 6 more pledged delegate's than Sanders? That does not seem like an even and biased response to both sides of the race.
10
Start sucking it up, Matt. If Bernie gets the nomination and the Republicans unleash their hounds to hunt him, you'll wish for the level of misery you're now complaining about. They've been trying to maul Clinton since forever. It will get much uglier.
For people commenting earlier today on the significance of caucus vs. primary results and saying that only the "party faithful" attend caucuses:
I am just home from the Democratic caucus in Portland, Maine. The doors opened at 11:30 - at 4:30 the line to enter was at least a quarter-mile long -- still. Earlier in the day it had stretched out around an entire city block, three and four abreast.
Our state permits people to register for the first time at caucus; that line stretched around the perimeter of the high school gym and as far outside as one could see (overwhelmingly made up of people wearing Bernie Sanders buttons and t-shirts).
Let me assure you - these are not the "party regulars"! In fact, the "regulars" seem to be overwhelmed and shocked by the turnout and not quite able to deal with the crowds. They have been huddling and discussing, trying to quell a lot of anger from people who waited hours (at least it wasn't snowing). Finally they committed to letting everyone who was on the line as of 2 o'clock make a caucus choice - but it will be many, many hours before the final (paper) selection sheets are tallied.
I am just home from the Democratic caucus in Portland, Maine. The doors opened at 11:30 - at 4:30 the line to enter was at least a quarter-mile long -- still. Earlier in the day it had stretched out around an entire city block, three and four abreast.
Our state permits people to register for the first time at caucus; that line stretched around the perimeter of the high school gym and as far outside as one could see (overwhelmingly made up of people wearing Bernie Sanders buttons and t-shirts).
Let me assure you - these are not the "party regulars"! In fact, the "regulars" seem to be overwhelmed and shocked by the turnout and not quite able to deal with the crowds. They have been huddling and discussing, trying to quell a lot of anger from people who waited hours (at least it wasn't snowing). Finally they committed to letting everyone who was on the line as of 2 o'clock make a caucus choice - but it will be many, many hours before the final (paper) selection sheets are tallied.
16
As an Independent voter I have a few questions for those Republicans who support either Cruz or Rubio. I understand the support for Trump on some entertainment value level, but the support of Cruz in particular, is odd to me.
How is it that Cruz and Rubio, running for the highest office in the nation, can gain any traction or support when they emerge from a US Congress that has an approval rating of less than 18%?
How can Cruz, disliked by his own party, win the backing of a nation?
Why is the lack of any state executive experience not an item of concern for the GOP with either Cruz or Rubio, but it was a problem with Obama's qualifications for President?
Does the GOP believe that Cruz or Rubio could contend/debate with HRC on any level better than Kasich? If so why?
Are you comfortable with the campaign tactics employed by Cruz and Rubio over the Kasich campaign? Again, if so, why?
It appears to me the only path forward for the Republicans is through Kasich. The only two problems for the Governor of Ohio is that he does not fit the current GOP requirements for support.
1 - He is not Hispanic.
2 - He is too moderate.
How is it that Cruz and Rubio, running for the highest office in the nation, can gain any traction or support when they emerge from a US Congress that has an approval rating of less than 18%?
How can Cruz, disliked by his own party, win the backing of a nation?
Why is the lack of any state executive experience not an item of concern for the GOP with either Cruz or Rubio, but it was a problem with Obama's qualifications for President?
Does the GOP believe that Cruz or Rubio could contend/debate with HRC on any level better than Kasich? If so why?
Are you comfortable with the campaign tactics employed by Cruz and Rubio over the Kasich campaign? Again, if so, why?
It appears to me the only path forward for the Republicans is through Kasich. The only two problems for the Governor of Ohio is that he does not fit the current GOP requirements for support.
1 - He is not Hispanic.
2 - He is too moderate.
5
Don't you love how all the NYT comment picks are either in favour of Hilary or focused on the republican side of things. Also how much would you bet her campaign emailed a 'suggestion' for the word "commanding" to be used when writing about her wins. What a farce.
14
Look again. Several are Bernie people.
2
OOPS!
NY Times forgot to headline that Trump won 2 States also.
NY Times forgot to headline that Trump won 2 States also.
8
The NYT downplaying Trump's wins in both primaries?
Lying. It's what's for dinner.
Lying. It's what's for dinner.
3
Cruz actually declares that he will use the FBI to target his 'enemies.' He's stated that on day one as President, he will ask the FBI to investigate Planned Parenthood. Talk about abuse of power!
22
How is that any different than the IRS targeting conservative groups under Obama? Talk about abuse of power!!
1
I think that if you checked the record, first of all the IRS checked groups that were liberal and conservative. Second of all, there is absolutely no indication that Obama even knew about it.
5
Cruz is not eligible for the office. He was born in Canada. Read the constitution.
12
Sorry but you are factually incorrect. If that were the case then why wasn't that issue raised in 2008 with McCain? His father was in the Navy and he was not born in the US but he ran. Did the Constitution not apply then?
1
Trump had it checked out with every attorney and in every which way and found out that Ted is fine to run for President.
Are you calling Trump a liar ?
Trump is also going to release the findings of his 5 year Hawaii investigation into Obama's eligibility. It could be a bombshell. Or perhaps he's just a fraud like the majority of the Republican party knows to be true.
I personally don't know if he is a con artist and a fraud, but Republicans see to be an honest bunch, so if they call him a con artist and a fraud ...
Are you calling Trump a liar ?
Trump is also going to release the findings of his 5 year Hawaii investigation into Obama's eligibility. It could be a bombshell. Or perhaps he's just a fraud like the majority of the Republican party knows to be true.
I personally don't know if he is a con artist and a fraud, but Republicans see to be an honest bunch, so if they call him a con artist and a fraud ...
Doesn't anyone realize that Cruz is the really scarey one???
33
Cruz won Kansas and Maine and the headline says "Ted Cruz Keeps up Pressure.." With all due respect this is an inappropriate headline at best. Ted Cruz hasn't won a major state other than his own home state. And now the press is going to try to make him into a challenger? Rubio failed that's for sure but Cruz is only a step or two ahead of him. This is either bad reporting or bad headline writing. Take your pick.
5
The key test for Bernie/Hillary will come when the swing states vote. Wins in solidly red or blue states don't tell us much. So far, Bernie has won 2 swing states (CO, NH), and HIllary 2 (VA, NV). If Bernie can win a significant fraction of Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Missouri, he makes a stronger case for the general election.
15
The victory in Maine could be a sign that Cruz has the potential to grow outside the southern states. In addition, Cruz is the last best chance at stopping Trump. If, however, Trump does get the nomination I will vote easily for him over Hillary Clinton. She flaunts the pretense at political correctness while leaving Americans to die, then blames it on YouTube for political expediency…
Now, I'm no fan of Trump; I find him repulsive. However, as 'radical' as the mainstream media will caste it with their shilling, liberal remarks, Trump is a SAINT compared to Hillary.
- Through her failed foreign policy, we'll likely get caught up in military conflict with Syria, possibly Russia (which we're not prepared for).
- She'd also continue this Iran deal, which will funnel millions of dollars into a terrorist-sponsoring government, who will use it to further their nuclear program against the agreement.
- In addition, we'll see even more taxes raised, which always just mainly affects the working middle-class, not the elites.
- Her administration will be infused with failed security measures and scandalous cover-ups just like her ridiculous private email server found in a bathroom.
If given the unfortunate choice between a big-mouthed billionaire and a corrupt baby killer, then the big-mouth is the only viable option. So basically, our only hopes for a decent candidacy option depends on whether or not Rubio will opt out of the race and let Cruz face off with Trump one-on-one.
Now, I'm no fan of Trump; I find him repulsive. However, as 'radical' as the mainstream media will caste it with their shilling, liberal remarks, Trump is a SAINT compared to Hillary.
- Through her failed foreign policy, we'll likely get caught up in military conflict with Syria, possibly Russia (which we're not prepared for).
- She'd also continue this Iran deal, which will funnel millions of dollars into a terrorist-sponsoring government, who will use it to further their nuclear program against the agreement.
- In addition, we'll see even more taxes raised, which always just mainly affects the working middle-class, not the elites.
- Her administration will be infused with failed security measures and scandalous cover-ups just like her ridiculous private email server found in a bathroom.
If given the unfortunate choice between a big-mouthed billionaire and a corrupt baby killer, then the big-mouth is the only viable option. So basically, our only hopes for a decent candidacy option depends on whether or not Rubio will opt out of the race and let Cruz face off with Trump one-on-one.
6
-Military preparedness: US Military budget was $598.5 Billion in 2015, 2xs greater than Russia and China combined. Our economy DWARFS Russia's.
Conservative MSM knows not of what it speaks
-More Iran nonsense, what is the alternative, attack them? With whose sons and daughters? Further, and apparently you haven't heard, the recent election in Iran was a distinct win for moderate politician's
-Taxes targeted on hedge fund tax schemes will not fall on the middle class middle class
-Whether the email is a scandal or not has yet to be determined. Unless you listen to the Conservative MSM.
-Those who support choice do not share your belief that abortions are murder. This is just not up to you.
Conservative MSM knows not of what it speaks
-More Iran nonsense, what is the alternative, attack them? With whose sons and daughters? Further, and apparently you haven't heard, the recent election in Iran was a distinct win for moderate politician's
-Taxes targeted on hedge fund tax schemes will not fall on the middle class middle class
-Whether the email is a scandal or not has yet to be determined. Unless you listen to the Conservative MSM.
-Those who support choice do not share your belief that abortions are murder. This is just not up to you.
11
-Military Non-Preparedness: The money invested does not reflect our military strength. The Air Force is smallest since it’s been in 1917. The Army is the smallest it’s been since 1940, and our Navy is the smallest its’ been since 1915. So yeah, we’re not prepared.
-More Iran Denial: Iran announced construction of two nuclear facilities only two days after this ‘deal’ was finalized. Attack them? We might need to once they fire a nuclear weapon (ironic how you failed to mention those sons and daughters for Syria...) You fail to see the larger picture.
-Taxes: Raising taxes always falls on the middle class. Not the poverty class, they get government benefits. Not the elites you hate so much (Hint: They pay for the resources to get through the IRS loopholes). It’s the middle class like me, who gets clobbered.
-Email Scandal: Bryan Pagliano was granted immunity by the JOP for his cooperation, and they never would have agreed to that unless they already had a case built. There's been rumors that the FBI director may even step down should they refuse to indict. We will only see more corruption like this from Hillary should she be elected.
-ProLife: Advancing medical technology only strengthens the fact that children are alive at conception. The earliest baby born that survived (James Gill) was 21 weeks. Keep denying the facts, but science will soon catch up with reality and you’ll realize that we’ve been killing children while pretending they’re not alive.
-More Iran Denial: Iran announced construction of two nuclear facilities only two days after this ‘deal’ was finalized. Attack them? We might need to once they fire a nuclear weapon (ironic how you failed to mention those sons and daughters for Syria...) You fail to see the larger picture.
-Taxes: Raising taxes always falls on the middle class. Not the poverty class, they get government benefits. Not the elites you hate so much (Hint: They pay for the resources to get through the IRS loopholes). It’s the middle class like me, who gets clobbered.
-Email Scandal: Bryan Pagliano was granted immunity by the JOP for his cooperation, and they never would have agreed to that unless they already had a case built. There's been rumors that the FBI director may even step down should they refuse to indict. We will only see more corruption like this from Hillary should she be elected.
-ProLife: Advancing medical technology only strengthens the fact that children are alive at conception. The earliest baby born that survived (James Gill) was 21 weeks. Keep denying the facts, but science will soon catch up with reality and you’ll realize that we’ve been killing children while pretending they’re not alive.
1
--Sorry, a) then, how is the Pentagon and the House managing the $600billion in expenditures if we are "behind" and, really, b) it is quite silly to compare military capabilities using numbers from a century ago. Are you comparing a Sopwith Camel biplane to an F-35? These are Conservative MSM memes.
-Larger picture is what, we go to war? That has worked beautifully since 2001. Step one, implement the draft so we are all invested, including Congressional families. Then, when we are all stakeholders, decide how to handle the Iran situation.
- More email innuendo. You use the word "rumors", apropos.
- Your scruples, morals are not the yardstick by which others have to live their lives. Remind me, who did that Texas Grand jury recommend to indict?
-Larger picture is what, we go to war? That has worked beautifully since 2001. Step one, implement the draft so we are all invested, including Congressional families. Then, when we are all stakeholders, decide how to handle the Iran situation.
- More email innuendo. You use the word "rumors", apropos.
- Your scruples, morals are not the yardstick by which others have to live their lives. Remind me, who did that Texas Grand jury recommend to indict?
Cruz is a more divisive candidate than Trump, every time he speaks he offends anyone who doesn't share his far right views with his blistering attacks on "liberal/ progressive policies" whether it be Planned Parenthood, ACA or a more nuanced foreign policy . While I don't believe Cruz would win against Clinton or Sanders, take it from a Texas, Cruz slash and burn campaign tactics that demonizes his opponents, will result in even more divided nation.
Frankly, I don't find Rubio's positions and rhetoric all that different from Cruz and that is probably why Rubio is not gathering stem, why would a hard right voter want conservative light when they can get Cruz.
Kasich, is the most electable GOP candidate in the general election. His success in turning around Ohio's economy would likely put Ohio, the ultimate battleground state, in the Republican win column and his likable, moderate tone would appeal to independent voters through out the county.
Frankly, I don't find Rubio's positions and rhetoric all that different from Cruz and that is probably why Rubio is not gathering stem, why would a hard right voter want conservative light when they can get Cruz.
Kasich, is the most electable GOP candidate in the general election. His success in turning around Ohio's economy would likely put Ohio, the ultimate battleground state, in the Republican win column and his likable, moderate tone would appeal to independent voters through out the county.
9
He's also essentially a RHINO on many positions, which is why he's losing.
2
RHINO! The Tea Party rally label for those not far enough to the right.
Hence the current state of disarray called the GOP/RNC.
Hence the current state of disarray called the GOP/RNC.
2
Kasich a RINO? Oh, no, he's hard right -- his positions are miles to the right of any Republican ever elected President. You need to recalibrate your political compass.
Kasich only seems moderate because it's now so unusual in your party for politicians to argue politely instead of yelling insults, or for politicians to listen to constituents with respect, interest and even empathy. His humanity prevailed over the party's Obama-hatred when he expanded Medicare in his state. His definition of "pro-life" seems to include protecting them after birth and not only before it.
I disagree with him on nearly everything, but of all the Republicans, I think he is the only one who might see the Flint disaster as a human tragedy, not a political one. I like to think he'd be horrified at the suffering and want to send help quickly. I can't be sure, since I've never heard him asked. But imagining he has the kind of genuine humanity that outweighs party dogma or expedience -- it gives me a whiff of hope.
Kasich only seems moderate because it's now so unusual in your party for politicians to argue politely instead of yelling insults, or for politicians to listen to constituents with respect, interest and even empathy. His humanity prevailed over the party's Obama-hatred when he expanded Medicare in his state. His definition of "pro-life" seems to include protecting them after birth and not only before it.
I disagree with him on nearly everything, but of all the Republicans, I think he is the only one who might see the Flint disaster as a human tragedy, not a political one. I like to think he'd be horrified at the suffering and want to send help quickly. I can't be sure, since I've never heard him asked. But imagining he has the kind of genuine humanity that outweighs party dogma or expedience -- it gives me a whiff of hope.
3
This is a race that will go down in history for all the wrong reasons.
12
Among the Republicans the best choice is clearly Kasich.
He is not a demagogue like Trump, an extremist like Cruz or
a rookie like Rubio but rather a level headed moderate who
as Governor of Ohio knows how to run a government.
He's not as flashy or attention getting as the rest but
knows his stuff, does his job and does it well and in the end
that's what really counts---not all the bluster.
Besides if he came on strong in the next few weeks being Governor of Ohio he could win Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana whcih
like Ohio are all Great Lakes States and with a lot of farmers.
If Kasich won all those States that could give him as many as 357 delegates which is not enough to win but certainly enough to gain late momentum
and look forward to California and some kine of a deal at the convention.
Hopefully Trump is beginning to slowly fade out and lose momentum. Just proves intelligent people don't like crude, loud mouthed schoolyard bullies with a chip on their shoulder and no clue and no plan other than bluster.
I like Kasich for President. How about you?
He is not a demagogue like Trump, an extremist like Cruz or
a rookie like Rubio but rather a level headed moderate who
as Governor of Ohio knows how to run a government.
He's not as flashy or attention getting as the rest but
knows his stuff, does his job and does it well and in the end
that's what really counts---not all the bluster.
Besides if he came on strong in the next few weeks being Governor of Ohio he could win Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana whcih
like Ohio are all Great Lakes States and with a lot of farmers.
If Kasich won all those States that could give him as many as 357 delegates which is not enough to win but certainly enough to gain late momentum
and look forward to California and some kine of a deal at the convention.
Hopefully Trump is beginning to slowly fade out and lose momentum. Just proves intelligent people don't like crude, loud mouthed schoolyard bullies with a chip on their shoulder and no clue and no plan other than bluster.
I like Kasich for President. How about you?
6
I like Kasich as well but 2016 is not the year
1
Why not?
It actually takes longer to twist Saturday's GOP primary results into a narrative making Ted Cruz look like he's leading than it would have taken to just report the facts. Cruz won two smaller caucuses and his losing streak in primaries, like Rubio's continues.
Burying the lede. The NY Times way.
Burying the lede. The NY Times way.
12
Cruz or Trump...sorta like diphtheria or typhoid.
28
Many posters have commented here as to just how similar Bernie is to George McGovern (me being one of them)
Those posts have attracted responses from the Bern'ites that McGovern in 72 is completely different than feeling the Bern...
Well McGovern in '72 was constantly fending off "charges" that since he wasn't getting or winning the so called "urban vote" aka the African American vote in the primaries that he couldn't win the General Election. Not to worry said the McGovern supporters "once we tell the urban voters 'what is good' for them they'll support George in large numbers"
hmmm
as Yogi would say Bernie in 2016 is "deja vu all over again"
There is one aspect that is different between the McGovern campaign and Bernie's
In 1972, in the Democratic primary in Massachusetts, which is probably one of the most liberal States in the Nation,
George McGovern WON!
He then went on to carry MA in the fall! Unfortunately that was the only State he won...
As opposed to Bernie, who LOST the Massachusetts primary in 2016!
hmmm
Those posts have attracted responses from the Bern'ites that McGovern in 72 is completely different than feeling the Bern...
Well McGovern in '72 was constantly fending off "charges" that since he wasn't getting or winning the so called "urban vote" aka the African American vote in the primaries that he couldn't win the General Election. Not to worry said the McGovern supporters "once we tell the urban voters 'what is good' for them they'll support George in large numbers"
hmmm
as Yogi would say Bernie in 2016 is "deja vu all over again"
There is one aspect that is different between the McGovern campaign and Bernie's
In 1972, in the Democratic primary in Massachusetts, which is probably one of the most liberal States in the Nation,
George McGovern WON!
He then went on to carry MA in the fall! Unfortunately that was the only State he won...
As opposed to Bernie, who LOST the Massachusetts primary in 2016!
hmmm
8
In 1972 Nixon was an incumbent president. There was a Soviet Union. The earnings of the U.S. working class were just about to peak. 2016 is a lot different.
4
Sanders has officially been a Democrat less than a year. It's fine that he has had Democratic tendencies, but in almost all the primaries so far, the registered Democrats have gone overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton. Some of the Southern states that the Sanders supporters claim are worthless actually will probably turn purple in the next few years. Massachusetts will not be the only liberal state to go for Clinton. For sanity, I keep watching the fivethirtyeight.com forecasts.
7
In the General Election, McGovern won 32% of the white vote and 87% of the non-white vote.
At this juncture I'm curious as to why Clinton's supporters are so accepting of her lack of transparency? I'm not of that Benghazi crowd or email brouhaha, nor am I sexist. Initially I was for Clinton, but as she led us through her policies they all added up to empty rhetoric. For me the issue is about transparency. In my view, President Obama has been very transparent.
However, with Clinton she's giving us the Heisman on her transcripts of the paid speeches to Wall Street. Why isn't that issue with you Clinton supporters? I find it indefensible. Clinton's response? The GOP people won't release their speeches. That's not an answer that is a dodge on the fact that what she said in those speeches would reveal her for who she really is: a Republican warmonger.
As Democrats we want to win. The simple fact is Sanders soundly defeats all of the leading GOP candidates in head to head polling. Clinton? She loses to all of the GOP and essentially ties with Trump. That being said, why are Clinton's supporters willing to accept her lack of transparency---just wait until she's president, it will only get worse.
I don't want to have metrics where we are losing three soldiers per day for another war we were lied into. Feel the Bern. Voting for Bernie is not only a vote for a more transparent government, but it's actually a vote for a candidate who can actually win the general election. Hillary won't win it.
However, with Clinton she's giving us the Heisman on her transcripts of the paid speeches to Wall Street. Why isn't that issue with you Clinton supporters? I find it indefensible. Clinton's response? The GOP people won't release their speeches. That's not an answer that is a dodge on the fact that what she said in those speeches would reveal her for who she really is: a Republican warmonger.
As Democrats we want to win. The simple fact is Sanders soundly defeats all of the leading GOP candidates in head to head polling. Clinton? She loses to all of the GOP and essentially ties with Trump. That being said, why are Clinton's supporters willing to accept her lack of transparency---just wait until she's president, it will only get worse.
I don't want to have metrics where we are losing three soldiers per day for another war we were lied into. Feel the Bern. Voting for Bernie is not only a vote for a more transparent government, but it's actually a vote for a candidate who can actually win the general election. Hillary won't win it.
18
What are people imagining she said at those speeches? Famous people, many of them with no political background, get paid ridiculous amounts of money by companies to come in and speak to employees. It's basically a perk that is supposed to be inspirational or something.
People act like these were official closed door meetings to cook up some sort of nefarious plans to deceive the public.
People act like these were official closed door meetings to cook up some sort of nefarious plans to deceive the public.
4
Excellent so you were there? Obviously it is so harmless that it makes sense that she would not release the transcripts? Interesting logic.
3
Why are you so fixated on some speeches? This has the flavor of the demands to see Pres. Obama's birth certificate and Harvard transcript. There will always be something else that is demanded from Hillary Clinton. More than 30,000 emails were released (unlike emails from any other candidate), and none were classified at the time, and none were hacked. She has been investigated in numerous witch hunts now with nothing found to substantiate wrongdoing.
The Kochs pledged almost $1 billion to smear Hillary Clinton and most of this is just swiftboating.
The Kochs pledged almost $1 billion to smear Hillary Clinton and most of this is just swiftboating.
7
Any dirty tricks that are played on Donald Trump, by either Democrats or GOP Cartel will cause a major civil out cry and millions in the silent majority will drop out and Hilary Clinton, criminal will arrive in the White House.
2
Did Mr. Trump say in His quasi-victory speech Saturday that He would fundraise for the republican party? Is it reasonable to accept that the people responding to His requests would write large checks without wanting anything from Him in return?
1
I watched the Trump press conference last night.
Trump said the same thing FOUR times--that he would raise money for the GOP but would not take any for himself. Four times. As in almost five.
Let me guess, you're an Obama supporter?
Trump said the same thing FOUR times--that he would raise money for the GOP but would not take any for himself. Four times. As in almost five.
Let me guess, you're an Obama supporter?
3
Trump has lent his own campaign money. He is expecting to get it all back.
1
You can guess all you like, but it is irrelevant as Obama is not running for president. One of Trump's claims is that is not susceptible to being bought, but it sounded like he was back-pedalling on this issue too. Or do you not see this as being bought?
I would choose Trump over Cruz or Rubio, it that improves my credentials.
I would choose Trump over Cruz or Rubio, it that improves my credentials.
Maine news sources reporting "insane turnout" at Democratic caucuses in Maine today. Caucus part has been canceled at some polling places and voters allowed to turn in paper ballots.
7
Insane turnout in Louisiana also,
More Democrats voted last night than Republicans in a state that Romney won by 17%
Hillary almost topped the vote total of Trump and Cruz combined. She beat Trump by nearly 100,000 votes - nearly a 2 to 1 margin.
More Democrats voted last night than Republicans in a state that Romney won by 17%
Hillary almost topped the vote total of Trump and Cruz combined. She beat Trump by nearly 100,000 votes - nearly a 2 to 1 margin.
Bernie Sanders has momentum in white dominating States, that is not the true picture of America, Hillary is the one who could pull through this election and beat Trump .
Ted Curz is a cool headed manipulator is worse than Donald Trump.
Ted Curz is a cool headed manipulator is worse than Donald Trump.
10
I didn't believe this trope about the media currying favor with the candidates, but I'm beginning to realize that this is indeed a factor in the election.
In Trump's case, his general bro logic went unchallenged, and the fewer policy details apparently the better. I guess the media didn't want to be attacked like Megan Kelly was? Of course don't even get me started on Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski's fawning over Trump before they went on the air, as it was all captured on audio. Pathetic. Trump basically bullies the media into submission. At least Reagan was a governor---what's next, a Kardashian as a Secretary of State?
With Clinton it's this "Super Delegate" fantasy that the media tacks onto Clinton's totals to carry this illusion that Clinton has essentially won. Nothing could be further from the truth. Super Delegates will need to vote, but they aren't going to vote against their respective public's interests. The media doesn't query Clinton on her Wall St. transcripts, who cares what the GOP will or won't release, Sanders has. Oh wait! Sanders never curried favor with Wall St.
The biggest analysis missing is the DNC's end game. Sanders trounces all GOP candidates in head to head polling, and Clinton is defeated by all and essentially ties with Trump. Having a special place in hell for those Democrats who will not vote for Clinton is something we cannot afford. This election is bigger than satisfying Clinton's ego, go with the Bern!
In Trump's case, his general bro logic went unchallenged, and the fewer policy details apparently the better. I guess the media didn't want to be attacked like Megan Kelly was? Of course don't even get me started on Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski's fawning over Trump before they went on the air, as it was all captured on audio. Pathetic. Trump basically bullies the media into submission. At least Reagan was a governor---what's next, a Kardashian as a Secretary of State?
With Clinton it's this "Super Delegate" fantasy that the media tacks onto Clinton's totals to carry this illusion that Clinton has essentially won. Nothing could be further from the truth. Super Delegates will need to vote, but they aren't going to vote against their respective public's interests. The media doesn't query Clinton on her Wall St. transcripts, who cares what the GOP will or won't release, Sanders has. Oh wait! Sanders never curried favor with Wall St.
The biggest analysis missing is the DNC's end game. Sanders trounces all GOP candidates in head to head polling, and Clinton is defeated by all and essentially ties with Trump. Having a special place in hell for those Democrats who will not vote for Clinton is something we cannot afford. This election is bigger than satisfying Clinton's ego, go with the Bern!
11
Can Sanders supporters please stop on the one hand dismissing actual votes (when Hillary wins) and polls about things happening SOON (where Hillary leads), while trumpeting the general election polls (eight months away)? But even if we believe they're at all equivalent, "Clinton is defeated by all and essentially ties with Trump" isn't even accurate. First, it hardly matters that Kasich trumps Clinton because Kasich isn't getting anywhere near the nomination, even in a brokered convention. Ditto Rubio. So let's focus on Clinton versus Trump (she wins) and Clinton versus Cruz (she ties). And let's reflect the fact that none of their totals include undecided voters (over 10%). So she starts with a miniscule deficit versus Cruz which is unsurprising given the 20 plus years of Republican mudslinging. Does anyone really doubt she'll trounce either of these two candidates who even many in the Republican Party loathe?
4
You mean actual coin tosses vice votes? Let's be accurate, first, I'm not dismissing Hillary's wins. Just because Hillary is winning doesn't mean she will win the general election. That's the point you are missing.
Hillary's margin ( +3.4) against Trump readily falls within a poll's margin of error, so she is essentially tied with Trump. Rubio trounces Hillary (+5.0). In fact Cruz is ahead of Hillary (+1.4), but for the same logic he too is tied with Hillary. On the other hand, Sanders readily annihilates both Trump (+8.0) and Cruz (+9.7), and essentially ties with Rubio (+3.3).
Hillary will not win the general election. Just because she has the DNC running her campaign doesn't mean it is in the best interests of the voters. Think about it this way, what is there to be afraid of by having more debates? Exactly. Bernie frightens them and they should be; this election is also about smashing the corrupted oligarchs who chiefly serve their class not the public's interests.
If Hillary has nothing to hide then by all means release those transcripts about her Wall Street speeches. If transparency aided Hillary's case then she would release them. Pretty simple.
Hillary's margin ( +3.4) against Trump readily falls within a poll's margin of error, so she is essentially tied with Trump. Rubio trounces Hillary (+5.0). In fact Cruz is ahead of Hillary (+1.4), but for the same logic he too is tied with Hillary. On the other hand, Sanders readily annihilates both Trump (+8.0) and Cruz (+9.7), and essentially ties with Rubio (+3.3).
Hillary will not win the general election. Just because she has the DNC running her campaign doesn't mean it is in the best interests of the voters. Think about it this way, what is there to be afraid of by having more debates? Exactly. Bernie frightens them and they should be; this election is also about smashing the corrupted oligarchs who chiefly serve their class not the public's interests.
If Hillary has nothing to hide then by all means release those transcripts about her Wall Street speeches. If transparency aided Hillary's case then she would release them. Pretty simple.
3
im a big fan of profanity, so thats not th issue
th repubs fancy themselves th family value guys and heres trump swearing like a sailor on leave
his cursing would get him chucked off many tv/radio shows or fined by th fcc
he gets away w it bc hes being filmed by a legit news network making a political speech, which th fcc is reluctant to get involved with
when networks air trump speeches do they put a warning to get th kids out of th room
th repubs fancy themselves th family value guys and heres trump swearing like a sailor on leave
his cursing would get him chucked off many tv/radio shows or fined by th fcc
he gets away w it bc hes being filmed by a legit news network making a political speech, which th fcc is reluctant to get involved with
when networks air trump speeches do they put a warning to get th kids out of th room
5
thx1138 = hoisted by your own petard
Obama liberals are "big fans" of profanity, yet the same Obama liberals have virgin ears when it comes to Donald Trump who spoke no profanity at the last debate, or any debate.
As a Black lawyer in Washington DC, I view life as a classroom, so this is my chance to learn something new. Can you explain to me what legal basis the FCC would have to fine Donald Trump? Before you answer, between 3 years of law school and being in practice for nearly 9 years in Washington DC, there are no words written in English that form a word of the United States Code, not a single sentence found in the CFR supports what you're saying.
Is there some sort of new law censoring Trump from saying common words that do not incite violence, pose any sort of threat or are obscene or profane?
If so let me know, because that law is unconstitutional on its face.
Obama liberals are "big fans" of profanity, yet the same Obama liberals have virgin ears when it comes to Donald Trump who spoke no profanity at the last debate, or any debate.
As a Black lawyer in Washington DC, I view life as a classroom, so this is my chance to learn something new. Can you explain to me what legal basis the FCC would have to fine Donald Trump? Before you answer, between 3 years of law school and being in practice for nearly 9 years in Washington DC, there are no words written in English that form a word of the United States Code, not a single sentence found in the CFR supports what you're saying.
Is there some sort of new law censoring Trump from saying common words that do not incite violence, pose any sort of threat or are obscene or profane?
If so let me know, because that law is unconstitutional on its face.
5
I'm not going to vote for Donald Trump, but I haven't heard any profanity from him at all. The whole hand thing - a joke, which, like Howard Dean's scream - is being spun like mad in the wrong direction. Can we please start talking about something that matters? How about Ted Cruz's proposal to eliminate the IRS? I'd like to hear him asked how he's going to further bloat the military and fund those torture units of the CIA, if no federal taxes are collected.
2
i dont think i even have a petard
As a Black lawyer in Washington DC, I view life as a classroom
can only black lawyers in wash dc view life as a classroom ?
As a Black lawyer in Washington DC, I view life as a classroom
can only black lawyers in wash dc view life as a classroom ?
Trump or Cruz? It's like giving you a choice between Godzilla and Frankenstein's monster. I will be more than satisfied with either Democrat winning the White House. I really don't care anymore as long as either Hillary or Bernie is elected President. I am that far gone.
7
Anybody else remember 2008, when a barely known black novice senator with a muslim name won out over Hillary Clinton? When she was "likable enough".
Here in 2016 we are presented with a Hillary Clinton that has even more baggage than 2008. She has not held the positions that she came into the race with, but has morphed to sound like what Senator Sanders has supported all along. And that is just talk, as any used car salesman would do to sell you.
She has played dirty politics...having her daughter shill for her and say that Sanders wants to take away Obamacare, which isn't true...he just want something better for all of us...which we may have had if Ted Kennedy didn't die. Health care was the reason Kennedy supported Obama over Clinton. She also claims that Sanders doesn't stand behind Obama..also untrue.
She says she wants money out of politics, yet has her hand in many corporate pockets. She expects us to believe that these corporations will not be looking for favorable treatment down the road, as if we were stupid. She took huge amounts of money for short speeches to bankers that have been paying record fines for wrongdoing. Her family's current mega-wealth is all from personal appearances..not tangible goods or services. No strings attached ??
She's under investigation not by the GOP, but by the FBI.
She for the TPP, until she's against it.
A woman president would be great, but you can't cure America's problem just because of gender.
Bernie 2016
Here in 2016 we are presented with a Hillary Clinton that has even more baggage than 2008. She has not held the positions that she came into the race with, but has morphed to sound like what Senator Sanders has supported all along. And that is just talk, as any used car salesman would do to sell you.
She has played dirty politics...having her daughter shill for her and say that Sanders wants to take away Obamacare, which isn't true...he just want something better for all of us...which we may have had if Ted Kennedy didn't die. Health care was the reason Kennedy supported Obama over Clinton. She also claims that Sanders doesn't stand behind Obama..also untrue.
She says she wants money out of politics, yet has her hand in many corporate pockets. She expects us to believe that these corporations will not be looking for favorable treatment down the road, as if we were stupid. She took huge amounts of money for short speeches to bankers that have been paying record fines for wrongdoing. Her family's current mega-wealth is all from personal appearances..not tangible goods or services. No strings attached ??
She's under investigation not by the GOP, but by the FBI.
She for the TPP, until she's against it.
A woman president would be great, but you can't cure America's problem just because of gender.
Bernie 2016
22
I have no idea what possesses the media to be so shallow in its reporting?
"Ted Cruz Keeps Up Pressure on Donald Trump on 'Super Saturday'" Why not "Louisiana & Kentucky Republicans vote for a concrete 'WALL' while Maine, Nebraska and Kansas Republicans vote for a steel 'WALL'" in the body of the article, the NY Times could explain that these two groups are at each others throats preferring their wall over the other wall.
On NPR, the news said that "about 100 protesters in the west were protesting 'unconstitutional' activities by the Federal government". Since when have these protesters proven unconstitutional activity by the government? Let's be accurate in reporting with "about 100 protesters in the west 'claim that the Federal government is engaged in unconstitutional activity" "This same group for months unlawfully occupied public property, disrupting the local economy, costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars for law enforcement, court costs and clean up of the occupied property and surrounding area."
Our media constantly gives credit to disreputable people and activity. No wonder the Republican Party and our national politics are in shambles.
"Ted Cruz Keeps Up Pressure on Donald Trump on 'Super Saturday'" Why not "Louisiana & Kentucky Republicans vote for a concrete 'WALL' while Maine, Nebraska and Kansas Republicans vote for a steel 'WALL'" in the body of the article, the NY Times could explain that these two groups are at each others throats preferring their wall over the other wall.
On NPR, the news said that "about 100 protesters in the west were protesting 'unconstitutional' activities by the Federal government". Since when have these protesters proven unconstitutional activity by the government? Let's be accurate in reporting with "about 100 protesters in the west 'claim that the Federal government is engaged in unconstitutional activity" "This same group for months unlawfully occupied public property, disrupting the local economy, costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars for law enforcement, court costs and clean up of the occupied property and surrounding area."
Our media constantly gives credit to disreputable people and activity. No wonder the Republican Party and our national politics are in shambles.
4
The "Stop Trump" Movement = Elect Hillary Movement.
The Republican Party, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory since 2008.
The Republican Party, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory since 2008.
6
My fellow Americans................please save us from the disgrace of both Donald Trump and Ted Cruz.
9
Caucuses mean nothing if that's all you're winning. They are attended by highly-motivated citizens, as opposed to plain-old primaries where I can vote in advance, by mail or show up anytime during the 12 hours that polls are open.
8
Most of the positions Trump supporters cheer him on were brought to us by the GOP. Examples: free trade, money-is-speech billionaire control of politics, big money shipping jobs overseas, etc. Why were these sad people voting GOP for all those years? What did they think 'free trade' was about? What did they think tax cuts for the upper brackets would bring? Every time I hear Trump speak, I just scratch my head and marvel at the so-called GOP voter rebellion against the establishment. It is all too strange.
7
Good afternoon from Capitol Hill!
Are Obama liberals still pushing the idiotic narrative that the GOP somehow built Donald Trump, given the fact that Trump was a liberal Democrat as late as 2000, and the GOP establishment will spend $548 million dollars by the end of May to destroy the Trump campaign?
Have any Obama supporters answered the question of why someone would pour sugar in the gas tank of the brand new Ferrarri and bulldoze the $500 million dollar mansion they "built?"
Are Obama liberals still pushing the idiotic narrative that the GOP somehow built Donald Trump, given the fact that Trump was a liberal Democrat as late as 2000, and the GOP establishment will spend $548 million dollars by the end of May to destroy the Trump campaign?
Have any Obama supporters answered the question of why someone would pour sugar in the gas tank of the brand new Ferrarri and bulldoze the $500 million dollar mansion they "built?"
2
DCBarrister, if I ignore my refrigerator, mold grows in it. If I keep ignoring it, it finally it gets so bad that I realize how short-sighted and lazy I was, and I spend a bunch of money and effort trying to get rid of it. My regret does not erase the fact that I was responsible for its growth, through my failure to act in time. I can't blame the cabbage on which the mold arrived. My own short-term expedience was the culprit, no matter how ashamed that makes me.
3
2000 was 16 years ago. Ronald Reagan was a Democrat before switching to Republican. Same with Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms.
Mittens was happy to accept Trumplestiltskn's endorsement in 2012, and Faux News and every other outlet were happy to give Trumplestiltskin voice for his birther nonsense for eight long years.
Yep, he's a full blooded Republicant, and they can all own it.
Mittens was happy to accept Trumplestiltskn's endorsement in 2012, and Faux News and every other outlet were happy to give Trumplestiltskin voice for his birther nonsense for eight long years.
Yep, he's a full blooded Republicant, and they can all own it.
2
Trump or Cruz? Talk about Hobson's choice.
6
Hillary.
3
When I graduated from (grad) college, I though I was all out fiscal conservative and obviously republican. 16 yrs later I am not so sure. Can someone explain why economy has done better under democratic rule than republican? are democrats better at fiscal discipline or better at executing economy than republicans. I have studied the stats--the economy has consistently done better under democratic presidents than republican (including Reagan days). What gives?
8
Republican dogma favors supply side economics. Democrat dogma favors demand side economics. Unfortunately whether supply side or demand side is more appropriate depends on the economic situation at hand not on what party you belong to. Inflation is defined as too many dollars chasing too few goods - the solution is to help the supplier (cut corporate taxes, reduce regulations, provide tax incentives like accelerated depreciation of new equipment). When the supplier's profit margin increases the incentive is to expand the business; increase the supply. Low inflation is too few dollars chasing too many goods - the solution is to help the demand side (increase jobs by the repair and improvement of infrastructure, improve public education, invest in basic research at universities and research centers, increase the minimum wage). When the public has more money they will buy more goods and services; increase the demand. It may be a bit oversimplified, but if you care about economics you should be able to figure out what the government should be doing now, and therefore how to vote.
6
When is it ever a bad idea to fix infrastructure? Well-maintained infrastructure greases the wheels of the economy and makes things hum efficiently.
5
Democrats just steal a little less. LOL
At this point in the ferocious era of rapidly cycling news about the presidential race, the New York Times has long ago endorsed Hillary Clinton as their choice for the Democratic Presidential nominee. Given that endorsement, it's no surprise that the paper should be gleeful at news of her victories or pleased to report polling data or punditry that predict Mrs. Clinton's advantage. What is terribly disturbing, however, is that the paper has given strong evidence that it has crossed the line of reporting the news with integrity as our nation's esteemed 'newspaper of record' and has shamelessly and clumsily reduced itself, scurrilously, to making the news, by way of utilizing the paper to aggressively campaign for Mrs. Clinton in a manner that would seek to persuade Senator Sanders' supporters of the futility of their continuing to exercise support for him. This cannot end well.
24
Donald Drumpf? Rafael Cruz? Marco Rubio? The Big Don, Lying Ted, and Little Marco. The new Moe, Larry, and Curly cast for a Three Stooges remake?
It's got possibilities. The only thing missing from their repertoire so far is that Stooges trademark brand of slapstick. Get out the hammer, the saw, the pliers and a stack of creme pies for the next debate. The ratings will go through the roof. To the moon, Alice.
The Donald's new slogan: I guarantee, there's no problem there.
It works. For the economy, the Mideast, Putin, you name it.
Anxiously awaiting The Stooges rumble in Cleveland this July.
DD
Manhattan
It's got possibilities. The only thing missing from their repertoire so far is that Stooges trademark brand of slapstick. Get out the hammer, the saw, the pliers and a stack of creme pies for the next debate. The ratings will go through the roof. To the moon, Alice.
The Donald's new slogan: I guarantee, there's no problem there.
It works. For the economy, the Mideast, Putin, you name it.
Anxiously awaiting The Stooges rumble in Cleveland this July.
DD
Manhattan
7
I have read numerous defamatory comments about Cruz and I have a question for the Democrats who are so crass and offensive. AT what point do you take the time to look at the issues, or is it just easier to mime talking points from Hillary or Bernie?
I see no substantive comments but attack posts which tells me you don't know the issue but are content to be intellectually lazy and let other people tell you what to think
At this point Rubio and Kasich need to step aside and give their delegates to Cruz. Trump realizes that Cruz is a viable threat and cannot be dismissed with insults and defamatory comments. Cruz was an accomplished debater at Harvard. He's argued 9 cases before the Supreme Court including Bush v Gore, the Heller case and the Michael Newdow case He's submitted over 80 briefs to the Court. He clerked for Rehnquist. Does that necessarily mean he's smart? Yeah it does. Cruz is abrasive. So what. Each candidate has their flaws. Hillary's is she a habitual liar. Bernie couldn't get one bill passed during his time in the Senate
I would like the Democrats who think their candidates walk on water to respond to the fact that Bryan Pagliano was given a grant of immunity. He's the guy who helped set up the server. And doesn't a grant of immunity mean that a grand jury has been seated? Why yes it does! And a grant of immunity means that they feel he has enough pertinent information that is it worth it. So mock Cruz all you want. He's not under investigation is he?
I see no substantive comments but attack posts which tells me you don't know the issue but are content to be intellectually lazy and let other people tell you what to think
At this point Rubio and Kasich need to step aside and give their delegates to Cruz. Trump realizes that Cruz is a viable threat and cannot be dismissed with insults and defamatory comments. Cruz was an accomplished debater at Harvard. He's argued 9 cases before the Supreme Court including Bush v Gore, the Heller case and the Michael Newdow case He's submitted over 80 briefs to the Court. He clerked for Rehnquist. Does that necessarily mean he's smart? Yeah it does. Cruz is abrasive. So what. Each candidate has their flaws. Hillary's is she a habitual liar. Bernie couldn't get one bill passed during his time in the Senate
I would like the Democrats who think their candidates walk on water to respond to the fact that Bryan Pagliano was given a grant of immunity. He's the guy who helped set up the server. And doesn't a grant of immunity mean that a grand jury has been seated? Why yes it does! And a grant of immunity means that they feel he has enough pertinent information that is it worth it. So mock Cruz all you want. He's not under investigation is he?
1
I think it was Lindsey Graham, when referring to the choice between Trump and Cruz - you can die by the bullet or you can die by poison. Bottom line, both Trump and Cruz should be way down the list if you care about the country.
12
There's the campaign slogan to take to the White House: Vote for Ted, he's not under indictment. But he is a greasy, manipulative, lying obstructionist who would rather burn the house down than concede a single point. Those are all qualities of a "smart" litigator, but not presidential, not by a long shot.
7
Actually Cruz is under investigation for his ties to Goldman Sachs. And just for the record, Democrats do not have a lock on being crass and making defamatory comments....I suggest you read them ALL.
1
Clinton: 4,187,169... Sanders: 2,664,932. Not including Iowa and American Samoa, as of Sunday morning, March 6.
3
For all those criticizing The Times for using the word "Take" when describing Hillary's victories, take a read:
The Merriam Webster Dictionary says "take" means:
-to secure by winning during a competition
-to get into one's hands or possession
-to seize or capture
-to get possession of
I think you get the point. We all to need to step outside our 'snow globe' now and again, so please do and quit this unfounded nitpicking. You're showing your age and lack of experience as adults.
The Merriam Webster Dictionary says "take" means:
-to secure by winning during a competition
-to get into one's hands or possession
-to seize or capture
-to get possession of
I think you get the point. We all to need to step outside our 'snow globe' now and again, so please do and quit this unfounded nitpicking. You're showing your age and lack of experience as adults.
6
Here are two good election slogans
"You Cruz, You lose"
"Better Dead than Ted"
Cruz is dangerous because he is a a shrewd manipulator of words and a cynical exploiter of religion. The Kochs must be heaving a sigh of relief knowing that one of their eight invited to LA to pitch for their millions seems to be gaining traction. Hope the general public doesn't fall for this man.
"You Cruz, You lose"
"Better Dead than Ted"
Cruz is dangerous because he is a a shrewd manipulator of words and a cynical exploiter of religion. The Kochs must be heaving a sigh of relief knowing that one of their eight invited to LA to pitch for their millions seems to be gaining traction. Hope the general public doesn't fall for this man.
13
No matter who people choose to vote for from this group of candidates, there is not a REAL leader amongst them.
2
Who could be worse that rude and vulgar Donald Trump ?
It is Ted Cruz.
It is Ted Cruz.
8
I may not agree with Republicans on policy, but I admire and envy their courage in sticking it to the establishment, while the expectations and imagination of Democrats remain lethargic, thanks to Hillary. It's just a good thing we didn't have a Clinton running against JFK for the nomination, or we would have never have made it to the moon.
4
"The results suggested that a substantial number of Republicans were still uneasy about Mr. Trump: He finished above 40 percent in just one state."
But the GOP voters seem to be uneasy about all the candidates, as none has one a majority of the outright vote count.
But the GOP voters seem to be uneasy about all the candidates, as none has one a majority of the outright vote count.
4
Cruz is actually worse than Trump, in terms of being outside any acceptable box. He is certifiably, scary.
25
reminds me of a jellyfish in a tide-pool
4
Ted Cruz is smart and calculating besides being all that makes him even more scary.
5
And Paul Ryan is pretty scary too.
1
Sanders won Kansas by the overwhelming margin of 66%-32%. This is his biggest margin of victory by far outside of his home state of Vermont. The Democratic race is not static. Sanders has momentum.
24
Yesterday Clinton: 248442 Sanders: 117639
6
Votes shmotes
3
Hillary won Louisiana by 71-23.
She leads overall in VOTES by 61-38
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016
She leads overall in VOTES by 61-38
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016
5
Kasich is still the best to stop Trump, but it's a very slim hope, see my analysis here https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/forget-rubio-kasich-last-extremely-slim-h...
Trump pretty much has it locked up, as I argue here https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/near-certain-nominee-trump-domination-sup...
Trump pretty much has it locked up, as I argue here https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/near-certain-nominee-trump-domination-sup...
2
the published delegate counts should not include Superdelegates as they will move to the candidate nominated at the convention. it's a tactic used by the party establishment, including the DNC chair, and the mainstream media who want to project HRC as the presumed candidate and the overwhelming winner of the primary. it's a battle for Bernie Sanders between here and the convention, but I haven't written him off.
16
Dear southmpls:
As a member of the DNC, your lack of knowledge about super delegates is staggering. Super delegates will in Philadelphia in July to nominate Hillary. They are published in The Times because they count as much as the delegates the voters picked. You do know that voters are themselves picking delegates to attend the convention. These delegates are pledged to the candidate the voters picked just like the super delegates.
Pledged delegates are not binding by Law, but a pledge is a promise. It is the same if you pledge to a charity. You can renege on that pledge if you wish without any legal ramifications. But it would make you a lout, a scoundrel, a liar.
Total delegates do count in the DNC unlike the RNC. Please, in the future find out the facts before distorting them here.
DD
Manhattan
As a member of the DNC, your lack of knowledge about super delegates is staggering. Super delegates will in Philadelphia in July to nominate Hillary. They are published in The Times because they count as much as the delegates the voters picked. You do know that voters are themselves picking delegates to attend the convention. These delegates are pledged to the candidate the voters picked just like the super delegates.
Pledged delegates are not binding by Law, but a pledge is a promise. It is the same if you pledge to a charity. You can renege on that pledge if you wish without any legal ramifications. But it would make you a lout, a scoundrel, a liar.
Total delegates do count in the DNC unlike the RNC. Please, in the future find out the facts before distorting them here.
DD
Manhattan
5
What is missing this cycle are the definitive comedians.
Tina Fey singlehandedly took Sarah Palin out of the running.
We need Will Ferrell to eleminate Trump. He could do it so well.
Where are you when we need you, Will?
4
Will was caucusing with Hillary, last I saw.
2
As I said earlier, he is locked up in Trump Dungeon with Jon Stewart.
George McGovern also attracted adoring crowds. He, too, was was going to change things. He, too, was very popular around the younger demographics. He won one state in the general election. Barry Sanders is McGovern redux.
17
He polls better head-to-head against Trump than Hillary Clinton does. So what does that say about her?
10
Different times! Different candidates!!!
5
Maggie's Dad
Your dreaming if you think a national beauty contest poll done in Late February will have any relevance to the final out come of a State by State election held 9 months later!
Bernie is not attracting minorities and as such he is just like McGovern in 72 aka "all show NO GO!
Your dreaming if you think a national beauty contest poll done in Late February will have any relevance to the final out come of a State by State election held 9 months later!
Bernie is not attracting minorities and as such he is just like McGovern in 72 aka "all show NO GO!
4
With all the differences supposedly being portrayed between the candidates of either party, what intrigues me the most so far is the striking similarities; namely, the underlying messages of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump with regard to where the Party elites can put their money. To me they're both coming from essentially the same place, but each only wearing different colored ties.
And now with today's news of Nancy Reagan's passing and the memorials that will run, I can't but wonder how the many televised reminders of those Reagan years, especially their persona, will impact Republicans clamoring for those good old and glamorous days in Washington. In strictly physical terms, I'm reminded a lot more of Reagan by Donald Trump than I am by Ted Cruz. Of course, though, people will say Trump can never be like Ronald Reagan, just look at the language he uses. To which I say to them - just turn on HBO or any other cable channel that's uncensored for ten minutes and tell me that today is anything like it was back in those days; language-wise, manners-wise, civility-wise, or anything else . . .wise. Trump is totally a manifestation of the time and the place we live in today . . . not way back then. So we ought to get used to it. Change happens, for better or worse, but change nonetheless.
And now with today's news of Nancy Reagan's passing and the memorials that will run, I can't but wonder how the many televised reminders of those Reagan years, especially their persona, will impact Republicans clamoring for those good old and glamorous days in Washington. In strictly physical terms, I'm reminded a lot more of Reagan by Donald Trump than I am by Ted Cruz. Of course, though, people will say Trump can never be like Ronald Reagan, just look at the language he uses. To which I say to them - just turn on HBO or any other cable channel that's uncensored for ten minutes and tell me that today is anything like it was back in those days; language-wise, manners-wise, civility-wise, or anything else . . .wise. Trump is totally a manifestation of the time and the place we live in today . . . not way back then. So we ought to get used to it. Change happens, for better or worse, but change nonetheless.
5
"Mr. Trump’s losses underlined his continued vulnerability in states that hold time-intensive caucuses: He has lost five of seven such contests. He has performed far better in states holding primaries, which require less organization, and some of which also allow Democrats and independents to vote in Republican races."
In other words, when the people get a chance to speak directly as to who they want, Trump has a better chance than when the party bosses meet to decide. It is another example of how the GOP leadership is out of touch with the base, and the people are seeing that. That's why the leadership wants to kill the Trump campaign, they are afraid of the people no longer blindly following them.
In other words, when the people get a chance to speak directly as to who they want, Trump has a better chance than when the party bosses meet to decide. It is another example of how the GOP leadership is out of touch with the base, and the people are seeing that. That's why the leadership wants to kill the Trump campaign, they are afraid of the people no longer blindly following them.
5
All I want is a Democrat who WILL win. No one can really figure that out now.
8
I want a Dem in the White House, but if I had to choose between Cruz and trump I'd pick trump.
24
Lb nyc, No question. Cruz would have us in a war 5 minutes after he was sworn in.
5
Some grousing among BS supporters that he "didn't grab the headline"? Well, his delegate count was lower than HRC's. And he won big in two states with white populations in the mid 80% range, hardly indicative of his ability to carry urban areas. Are his wins headline worthy? Probably not? Game changing? Definitely not. HRC's problem remains, getting out the vote, especially the BS vote. The danger is that his supporters will pout and sit the election out or write it off by writing in their favorite's name.
9
More importantly, his VOTE count was lower. A lot lower.
4
In the most recent polls taken on the subject, Cruz beats Clinton in the general election, but Sanders beats Cruz. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential...
15
And Clinton beats Sanders ...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democrati...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democrati...
4
I refuse to get caught up in this ridiculous circus that the GOP is putting on. I think Donald is the best man for the job hands down. Reason? He's not a politician. And his opponents are the biggest bunch of crooks I've ever seen. That's what politics seem to breed. Now I can sit here and type about each individual opponent and why I don't like them, but I won't. When that shmuck of a Mormon came out of the wood work and started ripping on Mr. Trump because he felt Donald would ruin the GOP, I decided to stay away and let the chips fall the way they may. I will vote in the general election case closed.
11
Hillary lost two states yet she is still the winner with more delegates.
Sanders followers are just prolonging their agony. Hillary is the winner! How difficult is to get that in your head?
Sanders followers are just prolonging their agony. Hillary is the winner! How difficult is to get that in your head?
11
If you (and others) are so confident that Hillary will win, why even bother trying to discourage Bernie's supporters? If you're really so certain, then why the passive-aggressive insults and general lashing out?
Methinks the lady doth protest too much...
Methinks the lady doth protest too much...
10
It is the Message. The longer Senator Sanders is in the campaign the more Hillary sounds like HIM.
3
Ari, triangulation is all the Clintons know. God knows they don't have any core values, other than getting elected...by any means necessary.
Marriage equality, sh was against it before she was for it.
The Patriot Act, she was for it, and might still be.
The Iraq invasion, she was for it before she was against it. She was for Keystone XL and the TPP before she was against them, and as Secretary of State, her office promoted both. That puts her in a position of advocating against her own work product. Lovely.
Marriage equality, sh was against it before she was for it.
The Patriot Act, she was for it, and might still be.
The Iraq invasion, she was for it before she was against it. She was for Keystone XL and the TPP before she was against them, and as Secretary of State, her office promoted both. That puts her in a position of advocating against her own work product. Lovely.
4
Just because I like being yelled at on Sundays, here's why I'm not supporting Bernie Sanders.
1. His foreign policy statements--what there are of them--concern me. For one thing, he's evasive of direct questions, and constantly bends everything back toward Clinton's vote on Iraq. And while i'd suspect he wouldn't get us into another Iraq, he sounds a lot like an isolationist. i don't think we can afford that. Oh, and the constant simple-minded sneering at TPP is a concern: there're never any specifics.
2. Similarly, the economic and health care plans are, well, moonshine. For openers, he's not gonna get those levels of spending through any conceivable Congress. And as for sustaining 5-6% GNP growth for years? Then there's the blithe assumption that everybody who gets their insurance bennies from employers is cheerfully gonna give them up, in exchange for raised taxes and less-rich plans. And they will be cheaper, because he'll wave a wand and insurance companies, hospitals, docs and pharmaceutical companies will evaporate somehow.
3. I don't see how he gets elected. His supporters and those millions of converts he'd need just aren't showing up to get him throigh the primaries: if they were, he'd have won everything. And please, spare the wailing about the media conspiracy, and how if black people just knew what was good for them...
As for the various Republicans or whatever those are, dear Gods.
1. His foreign policy statements--what there are of them--concern me. For one thing, he's evasive of direct questions, and constantly bends everything back toward Clinton's vote on Iraq. And while i'd suspect he wouldn't get us into another Iraq, he sounds a lot like an isolationist. i don't think we can afford that. Oh, and the constant simple-minded sneering at TPP is a concern: there're never any specifics.
2. Similarly, the economic and health care plans are, well, moonshine. For openers, he's not gonna get those levels of spending through any conceivable Congress. And as for sustaining 5-6% GNP growth for years? Then there's the blithe assumption that everybody who gets their insurance bennies from employers is cheerfully gonna give them up, in exchange for raised taxes and less-rich plans. And they will be cheaper, because he'll wave a wand and insurance companies, hospitals, docs and pharmaceutical companies will evaporate somehow.
3. I don't see how he gets elected. His supporters and those millions of converts he'd need just aren't showing up to get him throigh the primaries: if they were, he'd have won everything. And please, spare the wailing about the media conspiracy, and how if black people just knew what was good for them...
As for the various Republicans or whatever those are, dear Gods.
29
There's many good things about Senator Cruz. But the dirty tricks he played on Dr. Carson in iowa, and the fake voters-registration form he sent out, were disappointing. And for a strict constitutionalist and Harvard-trained lawyer to intentionally fabricate a voter-registration document is reflective of his true-nature. While I admire Senator Cruz for his staunch positions, ultimately, it would appear those positions are more for his own political-gain, rather than unbridled commitment and service to America and it's people. And, Senator Cruz won CAUCUSES. Hardly a ground-swell -- on the other hand Mr. Trump won Primaries -- and the Primaries are where the PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN.
It's crystal-clear Mr. Trump is the ONE AND ONLY person who can legitimately save America on behalf of the the middle 90% of white middle-class Americans. (And to a lesser, though still very important groups of non-whites.) Any other candidate, from EITHER party, and it will just be 'business-as-usual' -- which is EXACTLY what the Establishment wants, and is exactly why the Establishment is fighting so hard against Mr. Trump. The Establishment has there chance. Now it's time for the rest of America to participate in economic-gains and return to a collective feeling of respect and dominance in the world.
Mr. Trump, self-funding, the only 100% Patriotic American Billionaire. Tell's it like it is, GETS THINGS DONE. Republicans and America should RALLY AROUND MR. TRUMP. American success story and icon.
It's crystal-clear Mr. Trump is the ONE AND ONLY person who can legitimately save America on behalf of the the middle 90% of white middle-class Americans. (And to a lesser, though still very important groups of non-whites.) Any other candidate, from EITHER party, and it will just be 'business-as-usual' -- which is EXACTLY what the Establishment wants, and is exactly why the Establishment is fighting so hard against Mr. Trump. The Establishment has there chance. Now it's time for the rest of America to participate in economic-gains and return to a collective feeling of respect and dominance in the world.
Mr. Trump, self-funding, the only 100% Patriotic American Billionaire. Tell's it like it is, GETS THINGS DONE. Republicans and America should RALLY AROUND MR. TRUMP. American success story and icon.
5
A lot of silly name calling (GOP style) of Bernie supporters, to shut down their voices. No doubt, because of the internal conflict, which results from supporting the status quo.
Akin to watching a rescue, instead of participating.
Makes one appreciate the courage and efforts Bernie has made and the hill he's been up against, for decades. It's antithetical to support the status quo and be on the front lines of the civil rights movement or to create profound change. History backs this up. I hope to tell my grandchildren, we fought for their future, regardless of the naysayers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU3NKvvxcSs&feature=youtu.be
Akin to watching a rescue, instead of participating.
Makes one appreciate the courage and efforts Bernie has made and the hill he's been up against, for decades. It's antithetical to support the status quo and be on the front lines of the civil rights movement or to create profound change. History backs this up. I hope to tell my grandchildren, we fought for their future, regardless of the naysayers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU3NKvvxcSs&feature=youtu.be
23
I am very grateful Sen. Sanders--elected as an Independent who chooses to caucus with Democrats-- is raising interest in discussing serious issues and the considerable challenges of our times during his primary campaign for the 2016 nomination. I think he is an honorable man who has worked hard to find his place in politics.
I don't think his supporters should exaggerate his history (front lines of the civil rights movement?} or his success as a representative and senator in proposing or passing legislation that created "profound change". Who he is and what he has done in his nearly 75 years is worthy of honor without exaggerations. He lacks experience in foreign relations and the network of allies Hillary Clinton has developed for years.
Hilliary Clinton is not a perfect person, a perfect politician or a perfect cabinet member. When she wins the nomination of the Democratic party--a party she has spent decades supporting--she will not be a perfect candidate. She is serious, articulate and assertive which as a woman will be seen as not worthy of sharing a beer, lacking a sense of humor and shrill. Her long record of accomplishment gives her opposition plenty of ammunition. Many of us do not agree with votes she cast, policies she supported and her place firmly in the center of Democratic politics. But Hillary Clinton has proven herself qualified, experienced and tough enough to deal with an obstructive Republican opposition that deals in lies and dirty tricks.
I don't think his supporters should exaggerate his history (front lines of the civil rights movement?} or his success as a representative and senator in proposing or passing legislation that created "profound change". Who he is and what he has done in his nearly 75 years is worthy of honor without exaggerations. He lacks experience in foreign relations and the network of allies Hillary Clinton has developed for years.
Hilliary Clinton is not a perfect person, a perfect politician or a perfect cabinet member. When she wins the nomination of the Democratic party--a party she has spent decades supporting--she will not be a perfect candidate. She is serious, articulate and assertive which as a woman will be seen as not worthy of sharing a beer, lacking a sense of humor and shrill. Her long record of accomplishment gives her opposition plenty of ammunition. Many of us do not agree with votes she cast, policies she supported and her place firmly in the center of Democratic politics. But Hillary Clinton has proven herself qualified, experienced and tough enough to deal with an obstructive Republican opposition that deals in lies and dirty tricks.
10
Bernie is keeping pace.
Hilary still has the opportunity to on the wrong end of a legal noose.
Nice to see delegate counts showing actual set numbers and not including the switch when we want to super delegates.
Too bad we cannot vote out those finagling paid-off party leaders
Hilary still has the opportunity to on the wrong end of a legal noose.
Nice to see delegate counts showing actual set numbers and not including the switch when we want to super delegates.
Too bad we cannot vote out those finagling paid-off party leaders
18
Falling further behind is the new keeping pace. I can't take Bernie seriously with comments like this.
16
There is little difference between Cruz voters and Trump voters. The ties that bind: A contempt for fellow Americans that borders on treasonous.
15
I'm starting to view MSNBC as TRUMP TV, and can't help but notice the minuscule attention paid to Bernie Sanders and his steady and uniquely ethical and honorable campaign.
28
MSNBC made a business decision
Bernie Kills their ratings as he puts the audience to sleep (i.e. the American TV viewing public will not tune in to watch a socialist.)
Trump on the other hand increases their ratings.
So they looked at the business aspect of who to cover
Bernie and ratings go in the tank
or
Trump and everyone is making bonus this year...
and they thought about it long and hard (in actuality it took about a NY second)
Good Bye Bernie
Welcome to Bloviation TV!
Don't you just love liberals in business!
Bernie Kills their ratings as he puts the audience to sleep (i.e. the American TV viewing public will not tune in to watch a socialist.)
Trump on the other hand increases their ratings.
So they looked at the business aspect of who to cover
Bernie and ratings go in the tank
or
Trump and everyone is making bonus this year...
and they thought about it long and hard (in actuality it took about a NY second)
Good Bye Bernie
Welcome to Bloviation TV!
Don't you just love liberals in business!
3
Ted Cruz is Gaining momentum against Donald Trump. The thought of Cruz winning the Republican nomination and the Presidency is a scary one. America will be set back 20 years. Donald Trump is the trump card to a Democratic victory. The Republican party will be in shambles, maybe Trump is right, he will make America great again.
14
The Republican Party is already in shambles.
Obama was ahead of Clinton in '08 at this point in the race by less than she is ahead of Sanders now. If we hadn't had the precedent of a candidate (Hillary) going on to win one big state after another yet still being written off, not just by the establishment mainstream media but by the supporters of the winning candidate (Obama), I would perhaps feel differently about the predicament Mr. Sanders and his supporters are in now, and whose fault it is.
A recent article in Politico referred to the concept of a "revolution" as a political get-rich-quick scheme. Fewer Democrats than Republicans appear to be falling for it this cycle.
If Bernie Sanders and his supporters want a real sea change in the American political and financial systems they have A LOT more work to do than run a presidential campaign. (And please don't bring up FDR - who was an immensely wealthy man in the midst of 25% unemployment and much of what he did he did to save capitalism and stave off socialism.) They need decades of effective groundwork that does more than demonize the opposition. They need to show us how it works, how it would look. Could they do it in Vermont first, so we could see how it gets done and what it looks like?
A recent article in Politico referred to the concept of a "revolution" as a political get-rich-quick scheme. Fewer Democrats than Republicans appear to be falling for it this cycle.
If Bernie Sanders and his supporters want a real sea change in the American political and financial systems they have A LOT more work to do than run a presidential campaign. (And please don't bring up FDR - who was an immensely wealthy man in the midst of 25% unemployment and much of what he did he did to save capitalism and stave off socialism.) They need decades of effective groundwork that does more than demonize the opposition. They need to show us how it works, how it would look. Could they do it in Vermont first, so we could see how it gets done and what it looks like?
18
Bernie ought to take his revolution to Senate races. That's how the Koch's did it. We need someone like Bernie to take America back from them.
If he is able to flip the Senate, I'm positive there would be a very nice Committee Chairmanship waiting for him.
If he is able to flip the Senate, I'm positive there would be a very nice Committee Chairmanship waiting for him.
4
When is a choice no choice at all? This.
9
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Democratic Party Chair and loyal Hillary attack dog (what did THAT cost?) does Hillary no favors when Debbie attacks Democratic heroes leveling the financial playing field like Senator Elizabeth Warren. Recently, out of the blue, W-S demanded that Senator Warren be removed from her Senate committee to police banks and financial institutions. Senator Warren is the sole Democratic woman senator who has not endorsed Secretary Clinton. Senator Warren is neutral in the primary race. Wasserman-Schultz should be reminded that voters must elect a Democrat in November and honor her role as the Democratic Chairman by at least not attacking Senator Sanders in public. W-S was one of Hillary's campaign managers in 2008. Debbie messed up then and she's messing up again which shows that she, like Hillary, has a hard time learning new tricks because her core values (like Hillary's) are so skewed by relentless bribes from Big Donors. I hope there is some great young person in W-S's Florida congressional district who appreciates the new reality of extreme wealth disparity in America. The bottom line is that some folks can't stay in the new economy because of education, age, health, or whatever - and globalization. The government must provide a safety net for those who cannot compete to protect those who can compete in the new economy safe. Forget your tired old political categories - it's common sense. Bernie has it. Debbie and Hillary do not.
38
The name you're looking for re Florida is Tim Canova.
2
Thanks. I just donated to Tim Canova. He is a promising young progressive willing to take on economic justice for all. And as a plus, he could knock Debbie Wasserman-Schultz off the national Democratic stage where she seems to be devoted to traditionally right wing voters.
4
The Clinton Machine (including Clinton News Network -- CNN) is giddily reporting that Bernie Sanders' campaign hasn't resulted in big gains in primary voting. (1) There are two people running. Perhaps one of those failing to generate real excitement is the Clinton Machine. (2) Check the caucus turnouts. While the 25-year-old Machine overwhelms Bernie in the passive "absentee ballot" and gets by in vote-in-the-booth actions, Bernie has mobilized hundreds of thousands of caucus goers, volunteers, and rally-goers, plus, the entire younger generation. (3) Bernie hasn't been running for President for ten years, doesn't have relatives who have been President, and doesn't have the media shills like Chris Matthews, Andrea Mitchell, and Wolf Blitzer giving him countless media endorsements. Bernie's been running for -- let's see -- nine months. and was off-the-radar to 95% of US people when he announced last June. Simply stated, his mobilization of millions has been building remarkable strength while the Machine is satisfied with picking the low hanging fruit. (4) The Machine is smugly harvesting "the fix" of "super" delegates (super undemocratic). The Machine is also plowing the molasses of Rep. Wasserman-Shultz slippery campaign road.
Given all this, who truly is failing to mobilize the millions?
Rage against the Machine!
Given all this, who truly is failing to mobilize the millions?
Rage against the Machine!
35
Closer to 20 years. The Clintons have been planning Hillary's presidential run right after Bill's second term inauguration.
10
Another example of the Times' glass half empty reporting of the Democratic race. Cruz scored "decisive victories" in Kansas and Maine while Trump "contained" him in Louisiana and Kentucky. On the other hand, Clinton "scored a commanding victory" in Louisiana while Sanders merely "won the Nebraska [by 57%] and Kansas [by 67%] caucuses." Why are Cruz's victories in two states "decisive" while Sanders' similar large margin of victories in two states scarcely worthy of mention?
30
Because with every primary and caucus, including the ones yesterday, he is falling father and farther behind Clinton.
6
The article overplays the significance of Louisiana primary. While helpful for the nomination, it is meaningless for the general election. In 2012 Obama received 40% of the vote in Louisiana and lost it and the rest of the South except Florida. To prevail in the general election, the Democrats must nominate a candidate who can carry the crucial swing states (none of which are in the South except Florida). AS of right now all the polls indicate Sanders has a much better chance to prevail in the general election.
Sanders is significantly outperforming Clinton in the three most recent national general election match ups and in the few swing state matchups. Clinton is already losing to Cruz by 1% (essentially tied) in the latest (3/1/16) CNN nationwide matchup. Sanders is crushing Cruz by 17%. (Clinton is ahead of Trump by 8% while Sanders is ahead of Trump by 12% in the same poll). See polls collected at RealClearPolitics site.
The Quinnipiac and Fox news polls on 2/18/16 show the same results- Sanders beating Cruz by 10% while Clinton losing to Cruz by 3%. (Quin. Poll) and Sanders beating Trump by 15% and Clinton beating Trump by 5%. (Fox News Poll). The average of all the polls has Clinton losing to Cruz by 1.5% (essentially tied) and Sanders beating Cruz by 9.7%.
The few state wide polls for crucial swing states show Sanders beating Cruz in Ohio by 2% and in North Carolina by 4% with Clinton losing both states to Cruz.
Sanders is significantly outperforming Clinton in the three most recent national general election match ups and in the few swing state matchups. Clinton is already losing to Cruz by 1% (essentially tied) in the latest (3/1/16) CNN nationwide matchup. Sanders is crushing Cruz by 17%. (Clinton is ahead of Trump by 8% while Sanders is ahead of Trump by 12% in the same poll). See polls collected at RealClearPolitics site.
The Quinnipiac and Fox news polls on 2/18/16 show the same results- Sanders beating Cruz by 10% while Clinton losing to Cruz by 3%. (Quin. Poll) and Sanders beating Trump by 15% and Clinton beating Trump by 5%. (Fox News Poll). The average of all the polls has Clinton losing to Cruz by 1.5% (essentially tied) and Sanders beating Cruz by 9.7%.
The few state wide polls for crucial swing states show Sanders beating Cruz in Ohio by 2% and in North Carolina by 4% with Clinton losing both states to Cruz.
24
Peter, and any of the other Bernie Bots who keep touting polls that all the experts agree don't have much meaning until after the conventions:
Please explain what voters exactly would vote for Cruz against Hillary but vote for Bernie against Cruz?
I don't know if there are any Judge Judy fans out there, but I always remember her line "if it doesn't make sense, it isn't true".
So, you think there are all these women voters who will pick Cruz over Hillary but Bernie over Cruz?
How about African-Americans and (actual) Hispanics?
The only ones I can think of that make sense are White Males with Small Hands.
Seriously, kids, it's one thing to be enthusiastic and a little biased, but if you are going to be that irrational, you should probably switch your party affiliation to Republican.
Please explain what voters exactly would vote for Cruz against Hillary but vote for Bernie against Cruz?
I don't know if there are any Judge Judy fans out there, but I always remember her line "if it doesn't make sense, it isn't true".
So, you think there are all these women voters who will pick Cruz over Hillary but Bernie over Cruz?
How about African-Americans and (actual) Hispanics?
The only ones I can think of that make sense are White Males with Small Hands.
Seriously, kids, it's one thing to be enthusiastic and a little biased, but if you are going to be that irrational, you should probably switch your party affiliation to Republican.
7
To arty in ma : the reason that Bernie would trounce Cruz but Hillary wouldn't is very simply that many enthusiastic young Bernie supporters would rather stay home than vote for a candidate who stands for not much more than "business as usual". You may decry their attitude and point to the dire consequences for the nation (SCOTUS picks for example) if they sit on their hands on November 8th, but that's exactly what many will do. Moreover, African-Americans currently voting for Hillary would vote for Bernie if he were the candidate because they will vote for ANY Democrat over a Republican. This is the tragic irony, that the Democratic Party will probably nominate the weaker of its two candidates and quite possibly lose the White House. This amounts to re-electing Herbert Hoover over the vitally important change represented by FDR.
10
The issue, arty, is turnout. I am an older woman who supports Bernie but would vote for Hillary over any of the Republicans. But am I typical? I wonder.
Bernie is energizing significant segments of the Democratic base, particularly young voters, whose voting behavior tends to be less reliable.
I agree that polls at this point are only minimally meaningful insofar as predicting what happens in November. But I think they do suggest that Bernie is indeed electable, and the media need to stop treating his candidacy as background noise.
Bernie is energizing significant segments of the Democratic base, particularly young voters, whose voting behavior tends to be less reliable.
I agree that polls at this point are only minimally meaningful insofar as predicting what happens in November. But I think they do suggest that Bernie is indeed electable, and the media need to stop treating his candidacy as background noise.
7
Do Republicans really think that Ted Cruz is any better than Donald Trump? My God that is a choice between REALLY BAD and EVEN WORSE. Take your pick about who wears which label.
14
President Bernie Sanders can save the Republican Party from itself. The GOP needs to rid itself of its anti-government radical right if it is to survive as a majority party. Sanders, by taking his firm position to the left of Hillary Clinton, would open a space for the reasonable "governing class" in the GOP to move into without compromising too much. Because the GOP has invested so much propaganda in discrediting Mrs. Clinton before she even announced her run, no Republican could be seen as "making a deal with the devil" and will thus be bound to their radicals for four more years. Also, without a president who stakes out a leftward agenda, the "center" will continue to move farther and farther to the right.
10
". The GOP needs to rid itself of its anti-government radical right if it is to survive as a majority party."
NO, the democrats need to rid themselves of the government worshiping "progressives" if they are to survive.
NO, the democrats need to rid themselves of the government worshiping "progressives" if they are to survive.
1
"President Bernie Sanders can save the Republican Party from itself"????
Are you serious???-- The Republican Party will self-implode before the General Elections.
Are you serious???-- The Republican Party will self-implode before the General Elections.
5
Annie, I was thinking the same thing last night. With the rightward move of the Democratic party, courtesy Bill Clinton and then Barack Obama, the GOP has had to move rightward as well, to maintain position distinction. A leftward Dem correction, long overdue, courtesy President Sanders, would indeed "open a space" for a move away from the toxic far-right positions the GOP seems dominated by. If they found their center again, they might be able to stand up to the Tea Party, just as we have to stand up to our right-wing branch of the Democratic Party to reclaim it.
1
Just an observation. Cruz has yet to win an actual election. What he has won are caucuses, where the party establishment can easily control who participates. Trump wins the actual open elections, where the establishment cannot control the outcome.
5
Texas had a caucus ?
1
What could be worse than Donald Trump gaining the GOP nomination?
The dangerous and throughly-odious Ted Cruz in the November election.
The dangerous and throughly-odious Ted Cruz in the November election.
21
The corrupt and "entitled" clinton winning the November election.
10
I look forward to the day that Bernie wins the nomination and the NYTimes headline reads "Hillary's 2016 nomination derailed in a shocking upset but campaign still boasts an overwhelming lead for 2020" accompanied by a photo of Hillary and a graphic of the 2020 election results with no delegates for Bernie and 50 superdelegates already pledged to Mrs. Clinton.
36
I'm a stalwart Democratic and will vote for whoever wins the nomination, and also read the NYT religiously. I am VERY TIRED of the pro-Hillary slant in the vast majority of the coverage. Can you at least try to be objective?
29
The democrats like to belittle the GOP wreck caused by Trump. Yet, structurally, the Democrat's own wreck caused by Sanders is no less damaging and radical. Trump is a semi-fascist to be sure. Yet Sanders is a more then semi- socialist. In my book (and in the book of many historians) they are not far apart. The Sanders supporters like to bring up Europe (where most of them have marveled on the Eurorail passes), but the European reality is far from the nirvana and Sanders is a follower of much more old school version of socialism. Closer to former East Germany and Cuba (which he much admires). Cruz is a thoroughly unpleasant and false man. But Clintot matches him every bit. And she adds one more - potential target of a felony lawsuit. So while the GOP issues are as brash and obvious as a leisure suit. Democrats problems, while less obvious, are just as profound. All of this doesn't bode well for the general election. Unless a real third party candidate emerges.
3
Jim Web pairs with Trump as the Independent Party pair.
Interesting points. I don't call myself Sanders supporter, but he isn't the kind of "socialist" I think you're describing: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/03/bernie-sanders-...
2
jacob - I am familiar with the whitewash narrative presented in the Atlantic (also a very left publication). Like the writer, I also lived under socialism and I suspect earlier than the writer. I also have cumulatively spent years doing business in Europe. I don't agree with the article. Ideologically, Bernie's roots are very much in Soviet styled socialism. he doesn't call for nationalization, but not because he doesn't believe in it, but because he knows it's a non-starter with the voters. The writer does a lot of strenuousness "interpretations", but there is no need. Simply go back and listen to his past interviews and writings. They are not a secret. .He plainly and apologetically supported USSR, Cuba, Venezuelan, Sandinistas, etc. Why won't the writer or his supporters simply take him at his word?
If you want the 1% to have greater control over your daily lives, be sure to vote for Donald Trump and the rich man's agenda.
3
This is something all the Sanders' supporters who would vote for Trump over Clinton should think about.
4
no need for that; just vote for Hillary!
4
Trump has lost 5 of 7 states which hold caucuses. To do well in a caucus state require good organizational skills, something that Trump apparently doesn't have. That is yet another reason not to support this fellow as if we really needed it. He is a disgrace, ignorant on the issues, and is debasing the office he seeks just by running.
6
Ted Cruz by far, by FAR, is easier to beat then Trump for democrats. Jermiah Wright? What about the minister who endorsed Cruz who thinks all homosexuals should be put to death? You think a republican female in the Philly subs is going to vote for a guy who is against a woman's right to choose even in the case of rape and incest? Nice try with that.
As a democrat, who will vote democrat in the fall no matter what, please elect Cruz.
As a democrat, who will vote democrat in the fall no matter what, please elect Cruz.
5
With the apparent continued demise of Rubio, and the lack luster performance to date of Kasich (my choice), the former GOP is faced with a classic Hobsen's Choice.
Trump or Cruz.
Yuck!
Trump or Cruz.
Yuck!
9
Donald Trump may not unite the Republican Party, but he may unite Republicans, Libertarians, Independents and some Democrats —the citizens of the United States who are frustrated with the parties.
6
I agree, Ken. I suggest Trump start talking with Jim Webb and the 2 run together on the Independent ticket if T is choked out of the Repub nomination by the Party establishment.
5
It's a myth that Sanders doesn't appeal do African-Americans. In states where he won, he won he majority of African-Americans.
Sanders lost the African-American votes in the Deep South to Clinton because they are ideologically conservative. A lot of conservatives have already stated publicly that Clinton is a better choice even than Trump. So it's only logical that conservative African-Americans will choose Clinton over Sanders - as will every conservative.
Sanders lost the African-American votes in the Deep South to Clinton because they are ideologically conservative. A lot of conservatives have already stated publicly that Clinton is a better choice even than Trump. So it's only logical that conservative African-Americans will choose Clinton over Sanders - as will every conservative.
18
I don't know where or how you get your news down there in Brazil, but you might want to reevaluate your sources.
Sanders is by no means winning the "majority of African-Americans. Not in Louisiana. And not anywhere else.
Sanders is by no means winning the "majority of African-Americans. Not in Louisiana. And not anywhere else.
The most important score in this horse race to many Democrats is who will be the best choice to deliver a win in November. Bernie's win in Kansas and Nebraska and Hilary's sweep of the South are wins in States that almost always end up giving their electoral votes to the Republicans. The win that is significant is the Sanders win in Colorado, as it is a State that has a 3/3 record in the last 6 Presidential elections.
The best horse race results to indicate who is the strongest candidate are the results in the swing States.
The best horse race results to indicate who is the strongest candidate are the results in the swing States.
11
The Democratic Party has to pull some Republican voters over the line to win.
The word "Socialist" is not going to pull those Republicans into the Democratic fold.
The word "Socialist" is not going to pull those Republicans into the Democratic fold.
4
After yesterday's primaries, Bernie has 456 real delegates to Hillary's 651. 2,944 real delegates remain unwon. The major news media does not report on the real numbers, always conflating Hillary's superdelegate cronies with the actual votes she has received from the people, because they want to fool voters into thinking that Hillary's lead is insurmountable -- but it is only 195 points ahead of Bernie's count, or 4.8% of the total real delegates. Hardly a "significant" lead in my opinion.
19
How is Louisiana the big prize?
Louisianan has 8 electoral votes, Kansas and Oklahoma have 13 total.
Louisianan has 8 electoral votes, Kansas and Oklahoma have 13 total.
9
Kansas "and" Oklahoma.
Nice try.
Nice try.
2
Someone should tell the "Constitutionalists" who support Cruz that, while the Constitution is silent about who can run for the President, it is quite specific about who can attain the Presidency. And Rafael Cruz, born in Canada, does not meet the criteria.
12
I am curious when the NYT will register that literally 99.5% of the comments here are pro-Bernie, and no I don't believe that they are written by hordes of love-struck millenials. What is happening this year is so totally fascinating and terrifying as the establishment control of our entire system circles the wagons against the steady awakening of Democracy. This year's populism may be ugly and fearful on the right, but it is filled with positive, visionary, big ideas on the left (all of which work great in the rest of the modern world). This is really is the American People speaking up for the themselves and they won't be silenced. I am astonished that the NYT has been revealed as just a Party mouthpiece. I would have thought that the talk of the tinfoil hat brigade before this year... I look forward the the Democratic convention in Philly in July when the American people show up en masse and demand their Democracy back.
29
Those big grand ideas on the Left are also built on some very iffy clams about politics and numbers, I am sorry to have to say.
For one thing, where's the revolutionary groundswell? Democrats simply aren't turning out to vote in anything like the numbers Bernie Sanders needs to win the primary, let alone the general election.
For one thing, where's the revolutionary groundswell? Democrats simply aren't turning out to vote in anything like the numbers Bernie Sanders needs to win the primary, let alone the general election.
7
record turnouts today... and yesterday. For Bernie that is. It's lackluster in the states that Hillary is winning. That's what should have everyone on the Dem side worried. If you're reading the mainstream news, however, you will not know that because they are not reporting the Sanders' yuuuge turnouts.
1
Another NYT hit piece - headline blares Clinton landslide in Louisiana...no mention that Bernie won 2 out of 3 with impressive margins.
Funny how the NYT keeps trying to dismiss Sanders' candidacy while the voters don't always fall in line.
Funny how the NYT keeps trying to dismiss Sanders' candidacy while the voters don't always fall in line.
20
You think Bernie Sanders is gonna take NEBRASKA in a general election? KANSAS?
Really?
Really?
7
DO you think southern states will go for democrats in general election?
8
It seems that Bernie wins primaries and caucuses (cauci?) in states that he could win in November. Hillary wins primaries in states that she would probably lose in November.
12
I am a Dem, and the news that Hillary's server employee has been granted immunity re testifying about the e-mails is worrying to me.
Yes, I know that she likely did no more than Rice and Powell did and that this is likely to end up where all the other "investigations" of her have ended up, but I'm also worried that Repubs can make it a big enough thing for just long enough to disrupt the election.
They have already saddled her with the "untrustworthy" label, even though none of their investigations has turned up anything.
Yes, I know that she likely did no more than Rice and Powell did and that this is likely to end up where all the other "investigations" of her have ended up, but I'm also worried that Repubs can make it a big enough thing for just long enough to disrupt the election.
They have already saddled her with the "untrustworthy" label, even though none of their investigations has turned up anything.
4
I confess, Hillary: I voted for Bernie, yesterday.
I believe the Clinton machine will likely pull this one out of the hat for you, and, of course, I'll vote Democrat in November. But my vote for Bernie was a vote for my conscience, a kind of protest vote against your too cozy relationship with Wall Street and refusal to acknowledge the absolute necessity to get to a single payer heathcare system. ASAP.
I think the country desperately needs a revolution, and I hope my one vote for Bernie - multiplied by a few million like-minded older Americans - will work as a wake-up call. We're here for you, we just prefer you move much further to the left, and know our support comes with that expectation.
Think of what you could accomplish, Hillary: first woman CIC + revolution. Wow.
Evolve Hillary. Evolve.
I believe the Clinton machine will likely pull this one out of the hat for you, and, of course, I'll vote Democrat in November. But my vote for Bernie was a vote for my conscience, a kind of protest vote against your too cozy relationship with Wall Street and refusal to acknowledge the absolute necessity to get to a single payer heathcare system. ASAP.
I think the country desperately needs a revolution, and I hope my one vote for Bernie - multiplied by a few million like-minded older Americans - will work as a wake-up call. We're here for you, we just prefer you move much further to the left, and know our support comes with that expectation.
Think of what you could accomplish, Hillary: first woman CIC + revolution. Wow.
Evolve Hillary. Evolve.
15
Actually, she is. But maybe you've missed that...
Every time your headlines are blatantly biased towards Clinton I send Bernie more money. It's not hoping against hope. He pulls off real wins from it.
It's not like the Jeb Bush black-hole of campaign finance either. Bernie has won very well from the small donations we give him. Bush didn't have anything to show for hundreds of millions of dollars.
And to me, Clinton doesn't have a whole lot to show for her hundreds of millions of Big Player dollars raised. Oh yeah, she's secured support from the Black folks of the Red States. I'm glad they're voting but it's ironic that Hillary hardly reflects their interests in the long run.
People believe Bernie . . . and guess what, NYT, they're starting to not believe that you are an objective news reporting agency. It's kinda sad actually but you stick the evidence supporting these feelings on your front page everyday.
Go Bernie, Go! Good luck in Maine today!
It's not like the Jeb Bush black-hole of campaign finance either. Bernie has won very well from the small donations we give him. Bush didn't have anything to show for hundreds of millions of dollars.
And to me, Clinton doesn't have a whole lot to show for her hundreds of millions of Big Player dollars raised. Oh yeah, she's secured support from the Black folks of the Red States. I'm glad they're voting but it's ironic that Hillary hardly reflects their interests in the long run.
People believe Bernie . . . and guess what, NYT, they're starting to not believe that you are an objective news reporting agency. It's kinda sad actually but you stick the evidence supporting these feelings on your front page everyday.
Go Bernie, Go! Good luck in Maine today!
26
How anybody expects to build a left-wong revolution worth having on this kind of sneering at black folks, I couldn't say.
9
Pointing out that people sometimes vote against their own interests is hardly a "sneer", sir.
10
Read what I say correctly, Robert. I was not putting down Black folks. I was pointing out the situation of her support among black folks in overwhelmingly Red States and her support of trade agreements and wars that affect the under privileged of this country is like Karen (above) says regarding people voting against their own interests.
7
The fact that anyone would vote for Hillary with her pending criminal charges illustrates the problem. Her political party is more important than honesty, integrity and breaking the law.
This is the reason for Trump's popularity.
This is the reason for Trump's popularity.
11
And yet his former Trump University is currently under investigation.
10
It should be noted that in arguably the most liberal state in the country, Massachusetts, Hillary won in arguably in the most liberal municipality, Cambridge, often referred to in the press by the appellation " The People's Republic of..." Hillary also won in ultra liberal towns like Brookline and Lexington. I think a lot of people there are doing some strategic thinking.
11
On Feb 22, a Boston Globe editorial urged unenrolled (a.k.a. independents) voters to cast Republican votes against Trump in the open primary. Many of those independent voters are liberals who must be terrified of a Trump presidency. While no one can say for sure what happened in MA, the strong voter turnout on the Republican side is perfectly consistent with a loss of liberal support for Sanders among independent voters. (Note: 53% of the state’s electorate are registered as unenrolled, Democrats account for 36% of all registered voters, and Republicans account for roughly 11%.) Strategic voting and the politics of fear tend to have unintended consequences.
There are so many amazingly hopeful things about Bernie's candidacy: the funding of his campaign by millions of small donations; the fact that he does not back off calling himself a socialist; the energy and enthusiasm that young people have for a person of integrity... But one of the most amazing hopeful things is that his campaign has pulled away the veil that has covered media. The biases and spin and omissions and collusion are being exposed.
There was a time when I thought the NYT was above it all. Not any more.
There was a time when I thought the NYT was above it all. Not any more.
27
I remember seeing a piece on "60 Minutes" a number of years ago in which Andy Rooney railed against programs designed to register new voters. Essentially what he said was that any 40 year old citizen who had still not registered to vote had shown that they were simply not interested enough to register nor willing to invest the effort required to make an enlightened vote. Such new voters would only serve to nullify his vote. Never during an election cycle have I felt this observation to be more true. Any vote - ANY VOTE - for any of the Republican candidates this year serves only to render any thought out voting position meaningless. With so much at stake for the future for our country and the world at large, this truly a sad state of affairs.
4
Bernie wins decisive victory in Kansas and Nebraska! Hill and Debs purchase 51,843 square miles of swampland!
7
Real story = Sanders lost more ground yesterday.
7
The contested convention in Cleveland will bring a Cruz and Kasich ticket. Mrs. Clinton had better beg Elizabeth Warren to join her for the Democrats. If her ego gets ahead of her, she will lose. Clinton may thin k she can pick either Senator Brown or Manchin and get the blue collar vote, but without Ms. Warren the youth vote will stay home. Wall Street is the best enemy anyone could ever want.
3
Please everyone leave Elizabeth Warren out of this. She has an important role as a Senator from MA.
4
The nation surely needs her more!!
Senator Ted Cruz decisive wins in Kansas and Maine has shown his enduring appeal
Among conservatives as he tried to reel in Donald Trump in Presidential race observers feel
Mr Trump contained Mr Cruz advances by winning in Louisiana and to Kentucky states two
But Texas Senator win were sure to energize anti Trump forces to hold nomination to who,s Who
Hillary Clinton scored a commanding victory in Louisiana the State with more delegates in play
Senator Bernie Sanders won the Nebraska and Kansas according to AP but did not alter play
Mr Cruz said it would be disaster for us if Donald Trump is our nominee in the Presidential race
Boasting of his breadth of support Mr Cruz suggested that Mr Trump and others drop off race
We will continue to amass delegates but what needs to happen that field needs to be narrow
As long as field remains divided it gives advantage to Mr Trump who is our party mate somehow
Such voters who can be receptive to anti establishment message have augmented his support
But if he does not perform better in caucuses Mr Cruz may not allow him to capture 1237 vote
Mrs Clinton continued to demonstrate her strength by capturing Louisiana where voters are black
That single victory was enough to demonstrate that Mrs Clinton had got more delegates on day not black
Among conservatives as he tried to reel in Donald Trump in Presidential race observers feel
Mr Trump contained Mr Cruz advances by winning in Louisiana and to Kentucky states two
But Texas Senator win were sure to energize anti Trump forces to hold nomination to who,s Who
Hillary Clinton scored a commanding victory in Louisiana the State with more delegates in play
Senator Bernie Sanders won the Nebraska and Kansas according to AP but did not alter play
Mr Cruz said it would be disaster for us if Donald Trump is our nominee in the Presidential race
Boasting of his breadth of support Mr Cruz suggested that Mr Trump and others drop off race
We will continue to amass delegates but what needs to happen that field needs to be narrow
As long as field remains divided it gives advantage to Mr Trump who is our party mate somehow
Such voters who can be receptive to anti establishment message have augmented his support
But if he does not perform better in caucuses Mr Cruz may not allow him to capture 1237 vote
Mrs Clinton continued to demonstrate her strength by capturing Louisiana where voters are black
That single victory was enough to demonstrate that Mrs Clinton had got more delegates on day not black
1
Great to read more biased coverage of the Democratic primary, NYTimes. I used to have more respect for your political coverage, but when I've seen you repeatedly undercutting Sanders (primarily by giving him little to no coverage), I begin to become convinced that you indeed have an underlying pro-Clinton bias. The front page of the paper right now speaks for itself: You have a headline about how Cruz is keeping the pressure up on Trump, a sub-headline about how Clinton's win in Louisiana was "decisive" (how? it was another instance of her winning big in the South) and zero indication of the fact that Sanders won 2 states last night and only 6 fewer delegates than Clinton. One has to click through to the Clinton article to see a headline featuring anything but a statement from Sanders saying "don't write us off."
I expect better from you, NYTimes. Sanders is gaining traction that most would not have expected from a Socialist. Will he win the nomination? Probably not. Does he deserve more respect in your coverage of his campaign? Absolutely.
I expect better from you, NYTimes. Sanders is gaining traction that most would not have expected from a Socialist. Will he win the nomination? Probably not. Does he deserve more respect in your coverage of his campaign? Absolutely.
22
Oh please. BERNIE keeps up the PRESSURE on Clinton!
15
Hillary Clinton's lock on the most loyal and long suffering liberal progressive Democratic political base-black African Americans in the South- means everything in the primary and caucus season and will mean nothing in the general election season.
9
So what happens when Rubio drops out? Who gets his votes? Trump or Cruz?
1
All of the Presidential candidates have pulsating jugulars waiting for Citizens United-supported PAC ads to gash them open. Focusing on Hillary, her well-described lapses in judgement and sense of entitlement expose her carotid. But Bernie's neck is even more dangerously exposed. The Republicans will be quick to not discriminate between "socialist' and "communist." They will point out that his plans would make us the United States of Greece. The plan for free college, while laudable, is fraught with corpuscular ooze. There will be news film clips documenting rioting French students, whose ride to education is supported by government largess, demanding more years of professional student status with higher stipends and reduced emphasis on academics. Most of all, I cannot recall the election of a single Presidential candidate who promised a tax increase for all. The last who comes to mind is Walter Mondale. So, despite her fragile exposed jugular, I think Hillary has the better chance to prevent a Trump or Cruz putsch. It's a tough call.
2
For those joining, may I summarize Sanders' camp comments,which reflect much ignorance of reality.
1) NYT is biased. (classic retort when losing - blame media)
2) HEADLINE "Sanders takes two "from Clinton"-- not fair, as if she owns all states. EXCEPT headline does not say "from Clinton." At least 40 posts with this red herring or delusion.
3) Headline says "takes," should have said WINS. They never read sports pages (Cubs take two from Rangers) nor thesaurus -- takes is common synonym for wins.
4) WE WON TWO STATES, she only won one. Ignores fact that smaller states have fewer delegates,and that the nominee is not chosen by "who won more overall states"as if CA is equal in population to RI.
5) Waaa -- why don't we make all states caucus, caucus votes are "pure democracy" (as if voting booth primaries are bogus??)
6) Waaa -- why are there superdelegates?(Clinton is ahead by 35% in pledged delegates too, margin grew last night.)
7) My fave -- WHY DO WE EVEN HAVE PRIMARIES or delegates? Let everyone vote. Delegates are 100+year tradition, guess you never paid attention before.
7) LA is a red state. Well, so are NE and KS.
8) She only wins blacks, women,older people. (SO dismissive of blacks, and Hispanics.) And there are far more of these citizens, in aggregate,are than millenials.
9) So Bernie now has more delegates,right?
NO. She is way ahead in pledged and total delegates.
TRUE headline - Sanders loses ground!
Love their energy, their ignorance is appalling.
1) NYT is biased. (classic retort when losing - blame media)
2) HEADLINE "Sanders takes two "from Clinton"-- not fair, as if she owns all states. EXCEPT headline does not say "from Clinton." At least 40 posts with this red herring or delusion.
3) Headline says "takes," should have said WINS. They never read sports pages (Cubs take two from Rangers) nor thesaurus -- takes is common synonym for wins.
4) WE WON TWO STATES, she only won one. Ignores fact that smaller states have fewer delegates,and that the nominee is not chosen by "who won more overall states"as if CA is equal in population to RI.
5) Waaa -- why don't we make all states caucus, caucus votes are "pure democracy" (as if voting booth primaries are bogus??)
6) Waaa -- why are there superdelegates?(Clinton is ahead by 35% in pledged delegates too, margin grew last night.)
7) My fave -- WHY DO WE EVEN HAVE PRIMARIES or delegates? Let everyone vote. Delegates are 100+year tradition, guess you never paid attention before.
7) LA is a red state. Well, so are NE and KS.
8) She only wins blacks, women,older people. (SO dismissive of blacks, and Hispanics.) And there are far more of these citizens, in aggregate,are than millenials.
9) So Bernie now has more delegates,right?
NO. She is way ahead in pledged and total delegates.
TRUE headline - Sanders loses ground!
Love their energy, their ignorance is appalling.
12
And I thought Rove and his likeminded spinmeisters were bad. Some of these Sanders supporters would fit right in with that crowd.
4
As for number 6, you can ask Tad Devine, who happens to now be Sanders' campaign chief, how that happened. Love the irony.
2
That debate Theurssday should have been rated R. No child shoould have been allowed to watch it and no adult of normal intelligence and decent instincts wished he or she had. We witnessed the meltdown of the "modern" Republican Party,, the one from which all moderates have been ruthlessly purged. And it was not a pretty sight; the vulgarity of the participants was as extreme as their politics.
But while the results of this last round of caucuses and primaries were interesting and may, as the article suggests, show that both Trump and Clinton may have lost some momenta, they both still seem headed for nommination. Trump probably, Clinton certainly. Sanders' victories in Kansas and Nebraska was interesting (Hillary still has that "empathy" gap, scoring only 46% in a recent poll) but how many Democrats do those Bible Belt states have?
So isn't it time for some Clinton vs. Trump (or Cruz) polls? Why do we have to wait till after the conventions to get an idea of how the "real" election might go?.
But while the results of this last round of caucuses and primaries were interesting and may, as the article suggests, show that both Trump and Clinton may have lost some momenta, they both still seem headed for nommination. Trump probably, Clinton certainly. Sanders' victories in Kansas and Nebraska was interesting (Hillary still has that "empathy" gap, scoring only 46% in a recent poll) but how many Democrats do those Bible Belt states have?
So isn't it time for some Clinton vs. Trump (or Cruz) polls? Why do we have to wait till after the conventions to get an idea of how the "real" election might go?.
The Huffpost polls show them both beating Trump, Sanders by a slightly larger margin:http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump...
2
Bernie better stay in. Hillary is not electable. She faces serious legal problems despite her campaign's spin. And her ridiculous spin that nothing was marked classified when she sent or received it. It's the content of the messages not whether they are label classified after the fact. If I send you a email that is written in Spanish. It's still in Spanish whether it has a label saying this is a Spanish language email. Secondly she claims the server was not hacked. Even if the case it does not matter. That is like someone who drove without car insurance for years claiming they had no accidents. It's illegal and stupid beyond belief to drive without car insurance. Using an unsecured server is illegal. FBI has granted Hillary's IT guy Brian Pagliano immunity. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/in-clinton-email-...
11
Regardless, the choice to not use a .gov account as the rest of government shows Ms. Clinton is not suitable to be President.
7
Like Powell and Rice?
3
There is a reason the super delegates are being counted for Hillary: they support Hillary. There is a reason she earned a zillion dollars in speaking fees: business groups, universities, trade groups, etc., were willing to pay for her to speak. If she is going to be beholden to everyone who has given her money to speak, then she is going to be beholden to quite a disparate sample of the economic forces that make up our economy. And is she going in front of these groups and promising them the moon? Is she going in front of these groups and demeaning 47% of the electorate? No, she's not. The truth of the matter is that there are manifold reasons to support Hillary, just as there are many reasons to support the sanctimonious scold Bernie Sanders. And the essential truth is that we must all get behind the Democratic candidate in the fall to defeat Donald Trump or the lesser nazi, Ted Cruz.
15
How does this article not mention the right had raised pledge of allegiance to Trump in FL yesterday? He has been moving closer to the 1930s by increments, and it's entirely plausible that he will continue to ask for this pledge at rallies that are increasingly visited by violence. I can see the pledge easily morphing into an accompanying chant of the candidate's name. Maybe and hopefully not; but the demand of a candidate that a crowd of his supporters raise their hands in a pledge of support as he looks down upon them should have been reported here.
3
The superdelegates "controversy" is nothing but a red herring. HIllary is winning among pledged delegates, and she is leading them by more than 200. Period. And she can win the nomination purely on the number of pledged delegates, even if not a single superdelegate voted.
So tired of the bellyaching of Bernie supporters. Their man is losing among pledged delegates even if no superdelegate existed.
So tired of the bellyaching of Bernie supporters. Their man is losing among pledged delegates even if no superdelegate existed.
10
It looks like Trump will be the nominee and Hillary may be his rival. It is now up to the media to either expose Trump for who he is or clear Hillary of witchcraft. To leave things as they are will mean the end of the American Republic as we know it, and for sure the demise of that image of a shiny city on the hill.
3
Why is he so proud of the scraps he is winning against Trump. If he didnt have these few holdouts he should have left with Chris and Jeb.
Cruz, your better than Hilary by far but you arent going to clean out the trash like Trump. Sorry, just a fact. We desperately need all these worthless seat warmers gone not to meantion the people causing real damage to us and allies running their own private agenda and giving a free pass to those protecting those causing real damage. Even though I dont put you in the horrible category, You're just to much a product of the system to do that, which makes you part of the problem
Cruz, your better than Hilary by far but you arent going to clean out the trash like Trump. Sorry, just a fact. We desperately need all these worthless seat warmers gone not to meantion the people causing real damage to us and allies running their own private agenda and giving a free pass to those protecting those causing real damage. Even though I dont put you in the horrible category, You're just to much a product of the system to do that, which makes you part of the problem
I'd vote for Bernie in a heart beat if I thought he could win a national race. But I don't. So then the only question to my mind is: Can Hillary stop the national nightmare that is Trump? Not so sure. She just doesn't seem all that popular among white voters. And in this article what really gave me pause was the observation that Trump does best in primaries where Democrats and Independents are allowed to vote. Uh oh.
3
Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Clinton are still fighting among themselves over who is most capable of causing the most harm to the most people. Clinton is a bit better than the others. She doesn't want to drive women into back alleys. Though even that she would be willing to do,I bet, if public sentiment swung in that direction. And probably unlike the others wants workers to at least make slightly above subsistence wages. They all are ready and eager to kill large numbers of people in horrible wars of "choice". And won't hesitate a second to jump when their corporate masters say jump. Sanders is a but more restrained on foreign policies. And considerably better on domestic policy. It is remarkable that he is doing as well as has.
3
Tina Fey, with an assist from Katie Couric, took Sarah Palin out of the race, mocking her with such accuracy that the absurdity of her candidacy was made evident to all.
We now need Will Ferrell to step up, and do the country an enormous favor by taking out Mr. Trump.
Current SNL attempts are inadequate, we need Will.
3
Good luck.
He's locked in Trump Dungeon along with Jon Stewart.
He's locked in Trump Dungeon along with Jon Stewart.
1
I think you're mistaken, Will caucused for Hill.
The Times really needs to look into it's objectivity if it want to retain the mantle of The Paper of Record! Take this gem, from the piece "After Dominating Super Tuesday, can Trump and Clinton Be Stopped?"
"If Hillary Clinton keeps winning with similar margins, securing the nomination would be unlikely for Bernie Sanders."
Wow! That's some reporting! Think about it for a second-- a masterpiece of the obvious. But it completely fails to address the question "can she be stopped?" Clearly, if she doesn't "keep winning with similar margins" she will indeed be stopped. So what's the point?
"If Hillary Clinton keeps winning with similar margins, securing the nomination would be unlikely for Bernie Sanders."
Wow! That's some reporting! Think about it for a second-- a masterpiece of the obvious. But it completely fails to address the question "can she be stopped?" Clearly, if she doesn't "keep winning with similar margins" she will indeed be stopped. So what's the point?
9
It's interesting that Clinton had a "decisive" victory in Louisiana with 71% of the vote, but Sanders merely won Kansas with 68% of the vote. Your bias continues to show.
12
I am very upset that the NY Times continues to add the "superdelegate" count to Clinton's totals. These delegates are not pledged to her, and are free to change their minds at any time. Reporting the numbers this way exaggerates the disparity: Sanders is only behind by about 200 pledged delegates at this point, and it is well within the realm of possibility that he could make up this deficit in primaries still to come.
I call upon the Times to be fair and report only pledged delegate totals for both candidates in the Democratic primary!
I call upon the Times to be fair and report only pledged delegate totals for both candidates in the Democratic primary!
13
Okay, New York Times. Your support for Hillary has overrun your standards of journalism. Every step Bernie takes is reported in relationship to Hillary. Give the man his due. Write him a headline when he makes news. Quit your attempts to skew this race. Report the facts; quit campaigning for Hillary in your reporting. Enough.
20
Oh please. This is pathetic. Blaming the NYT for its reporting of the facts.
The numbers don't lie. Sometimes Clinton is leading Sometimes Sanders.
Stop the whining! Enough.
The numbers don't lie. Sometimes Clinton is leading Sometimes Sanders.
Stop the whining! Enough.
1
God help us if Cruz is the GOP's "best hope to stop Trump". Cruz is smarter and even more reptilian, making him more dangerous. My worst nightmare would be a Trump/Cruz ticket.
4
So, if Ms. Clinton wins, and the Sander's supporters, in a snit, decide to take their ball and go home, which of the Republican candidates will they bless the country with, Trump or Cruz? The Sanders or nothing crowd is setting the Democratic Party and the country up for a great fall.
7
You worry too much. Sanders supporters are not fools.
1
Highly debatable they aren't fools, when they pledge to vote for Trump if Bernie isn't the nominee.
1
CNN just showed a new poll with Sanders continuing to outperform Clinton in a match with Trump. No analysis, no headlines. Why is this being ignored? (The cliche that he hasn't been vetted is getting tiresome. There are plenty of ways to respond when he gets attacked as a socialist.) People don't want to keep voting based on fear.
13
The headline says "Decisive Win for Clinton in Louisiana", yet the Bern decisively won Kansas and Nebraska. Why the spin NYT? It seems to me decisively winning two states would be more news worthy especially since in reduced Clinton's lead in delegates and made the race more competitive.
5
Clinton has twice, almost three times more delegates than Sanders. Even the odds that it would be a close race are almost nil. That is why she continues to be the headline.
5
Um, Clinton has 663, Sanders 459. Hardly "twice or three times" as many (Clinton would need to have 918 to be even twice.)
2
Superdelegates can change their votes at any time, as they did in the Obama/Clinton race. Most superdelegates are politicians who follow the desires of their constituents. Please familiarize yourself with the rules before you write again.
7
She also has 60% of the vote.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016
Bernie has been relying on insider run caucuses to keep his campaign alive. Ironic, considering how much he rails against the establishment that he would be counting on them to stay relevant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016
Bernie has been relying on insider run caucuses to keep his campaign alive. Ironic, considering how much he rails against the establishment that he would be counting on them to stay relevant.
3
A message to diehard Berners:
If, by your logic, you discount victories in states that will vote Republican in the GE as already-lost, then you should treat any states that are reliably Blue as already-won. It follows that the only potential swing states provide a good metric of electability in November. Of the 5 that have voted so far, Clinton's 3 (and their 25 electoral votes) are beating Sanders' 2 (with 13 toal electoral votes). Additionally, Clinton's 70-30 win in Virginia (13 of 25 potential swing votes) was pretty crushing, AND increased confidence in her ability to secure African American votes. Some big swing states are coming up, though, and it will be interesting to see them play out.
It's also worth pointing out that a candidates first goal in primary contests is to win a majority of delegates. By sweeping states like LA - where Sanders barely even campaigned - Clinton racked up a hefty pile of delegates; at the same time, she stayed fairly even with him in states with less delegate value. Her campaign strategy has not wavered: pick up large delegate shares in states Sanders will not contest, stay relatively even everywhere else. So far it has worked.
If, by your logic, you discount victories in states that will vote Republican in the GE as already-lost, then you should treat any states that are reliably Blue as already-won. It follows that the only potential swing states provide a good metric of electability in November. Of the 5 that have voted so far, Clinton's 3 (and their 25 electoral votes) are beating Sanders' 2 (with 13 toal electoral votes). Additionally, Clinton's 70-30 win in Virginia (13 of 25 potential swing votes) was pretty crushing, AND increased confidence in her ability to secure African American votes. Some big swing states are coming up, though, and it will be interesting to see them play out.
It's also worth pointing out that a candidates first goal in primary contests is to win a majority of delegates. By sweeping states like LA - where Sanders barely even campaigned - Clinton racked up a hefty pile of delegates; at the same time, she stayed fairly even with him in states with less delegate value. Her campaign strategy has not wavered: pick up large delegate shares in states Sanders will not contest, stay relatively even everywhere else. So far it has worked.
9
Sanders wins 2 out of three, and Kansas with 68%. Yet the headline title is "Decisive win for Clinton in Louisiana." Are you serious? Please explain to me, without spin, how that is the story of the day - or how a 68% victory for Sanders is not equally decisive. This is getting sicking.
13
It's the number of delegates in LA and the decisive win in an ethnically diverse state that reflects the diversity of all the big states that will be crucial to win in November. I remember that I was upset too when the Times didn't make an effort to favor McGovern as robustly as I wanted in '72, and who at the time I knew was going to win the Presidency in a landslide.
3
Democrats have a painful choice: Make history with the first woman nominee, and hopefully president, or save democracy and the American Dream for the next generation. All praying Democrats need to pray hard on this one.
5
I respect the verve of the Sanders supporters on this feed, but you cannot ignore facts. Hillary Clinton did better last night than Sanders who actually had a pretty bad overall result since he didn't increase his delegate count pretty much at all. Delegate math is the only thing that matters in these primaries and Clinton's lead of about 200 pledged delegates (without including the super delegates) is quite formidable since every state awards Democratic delegates proportionally.
There is nothing undemocratic about this. In the states where Clinton is winning she is doing so very dramatically. Sanders' wins are by smaller margins. She is overwhelmingly likely to win the nomination in the end because more people are voting for her. The system is designed so that it is not the # of state wins that pick the winner ... it is the number of people overall.
There is nothing undemocratic about this. In the states where Clinton is winning she is doing so very dramatically. Sanders' wins are by smaller margins. She is overwhelmingly likely to win the nomination in the end because more people are voting for her. The system is designed so that it is not the # of state wins that pick the winner ... it is the number of people overall.
7
Yale Law alum Clinton v. Harvard Law alum Cruz. Two Ivy League career politicians working for the little people — HA! We're all suckers, under one party rule. Bow down to your globalist kings.
15
I said it before and I'll say it again, I LOVE what Bernie is bringing to the race and the general conversation, but I am supporting Hillary. I cannot abide by the impact his financial policies would likely have on small businesses. I am a small business owner employing 50 people. I'm hardly rich - live very modestly. And, i I suspect that where is policies enacted (which I can't imagine), it would drive many of my jobs overseas just so i could stay solvent. That being said, Hillary really does need to listen. We want Wall Street and the multi-nationals reigned in. We want Citizen's United overturned.
8
Then with universal coverage you would no longer be paying matching premiums for 50 employees, or workers compensation insurance for each. Do these savings not outweigh a slight tax increase overall?
5
Cruz as the firewall against Trump is the ultimate bad news for the Republicans. Trump is a right wing New Dealer - you know, FDR's programs that were denounced as "fascist" by his conservative Republican opponents in the 1930's, and that generally excluded African-Americans for their benefits at the time.
Cruz and his followers are hardcore Capitalist-Christian fundamentalists. They'd raze all of the New Deal and force-draft everyone into the barbarism of their holy market. Cruz would have much less appeal than Trump in the general election. Cruz as the last man standing is good news for Clinton.
Cruz and his followers are hardcore Capitalist-Christian fundamentalists. They'd raze all of the New Deal and force-draft everyone into the barbarism of their holy market. Cruz would have much less appeal than Trump in the general election. Cruz as the last man standing is good news for Clinton.
2
Trump takes outrageous positions thoughtlessly, Cruz takes outrageous positions thoughtfully. Which is worse?
21
Cruz, because he wants to do very precise, well thought out (ALEC, Koch) harm to the electorate. Trump, could care less about helping or harming the electorate - that's flexibility, right there!
4
GOP is getting what it deserves by revving up the Tea Party and every kook and krank possible for decades. They have made this country worse at every turn imaginable. The Democrats, especially the DNC, aren't great or good either but they are much much better than anything associated with America's conservative brand of politics.
8
I'm a long-time reader of the NY Times, but I'm increasingly frustrated by the way this newspaper reports on the Democratic primary. Bernie Sanders wins two states and Hillary Clinton wins one, but the article describes it this way: "Hillary Clinton scored a commanding victory in Louisiana... while Senator Bernie Sanders won the Nebraska and Kansas caucuses." That's beyond biased, amounting to a between-the-lines attempt to color the primaries (the powerful word "commanding" for Hillary against the limp word "won" for Sanders).
This paper's analysis continually fails to note that most of the states Clinton has won are unlikely to mean anything for Democrats in November, while most of Sanders' wins are in states that are likely to matter to Democrats.
Finally, it borders on irresponsible that the NY Times perpetually counts the questionable "super delegates" for Clinton, then uses that number to prove the unlikelihood of a Sanders nomination. By that logic, we might as well have not bothered with the primaries at all, since Clinton had the super delegate edge before a single primary ballot was cast.
This paper's analysis continually fails to note that most of the states Clinton has won are unlikely to mean anything for Democrats in November, while most of Sanders' wins are in states that are likely to matter to Democrats.
Finally, it borders on irresponsible that the NY Times perpetually counts the questionable "super delegates" for Clinton, then uses that number to prove the unlikelihood of a Sanders nomination. By that logic, we might as well have not bothered with the primaries at all, since Clinton had the super delegate edge before a single primary ballot was cast.
21
In arguing inevitability, and the unfounded hope that she has somehow embraced the emerging progressive force that have propelled Bernie, HRC supporters tade in what C. Wright Mills called "crackpot realism."
Time for some clear-headed honesty: if elected, Clinton will sign "free" trade pacts, oversee environmental degradation, thwart $15/hour efforts, and continue to court Big Banks. She is widely hated by the GOP Congress and will achieve little legislative success. Her foreign-policy approach is of the flat-footed establishment kind. She will not lead, or inspire, any movements for change inside or outside the Democratic Party.
Given her high unfavorable ratings, her election is not foreordained. And for those of you who cling to her moderate stands as evidence of electability, please remember the fate of Michael Dukakis.
Time for some clear-headed honesty: if elected, Clinton will sign "free" trade pacts, oversee environmental degradation, thwart $15/hour efforts, and continue to court Big Banks. She is widely hated by the GOP Congress and will achieve little legislative success. Her foreign-policy approach is of the flat-footed establishment kind. She will not lead, or inspire, any movements for change inside or outside the Democratic Party.
Given her high unfavorable ratings, her election is not foreordained. And for those of you who cling to her moderate stands as evidence of electability, please remember the fate of Michael Dukakis.
17
What a terrifying election this is shaping up to be. On the Republican side we have two crude, narcissistic front-runners of demonstrable duplicitousness, and on the Democratic side we have two candidates who seem sober and competent enough, but neither of whom can seem to get traction in two of the main voting blocs they will need in November. Once again, Hillary has won big in a state she hasn't a prayer of winning in the fall, thanks to black votes, but it is obvious that white middle class voters are distinctly cool toward her. Bernie seems to be able to get the white middle class and blue collar voters, but can't fire up black voters. If either bloc stays home in November, we may be looking at President Trump or President Cruz.
7
I wouldn't say she has no chance in Louisiana.
She racked up 225K votes last night. Trump and Cruz combined only got 240K.
She racked up 225K votes last night. Trump and Cruz combined only got 240K.
2
It's a myth that Sanders doesn't appeal to African-Americans. In the states where he won, he also won the African-American vote. The only demography that is truly anti-Sanders (bar the conservative voters that are going Republican regardless) are the plus 65 year old that has an annual income greater than US$ 200,000.00.
Sanders lost the African-American voters in the Deep South to Clinton because they are ideologically conservative. A lot of conservatives have already stated publicly that Clinton is a better choice even than Trump. So it's only logical that conservative African-Americans are going to vote for Clinton over Sanders - after all, it's better for conservatives to have two conservatives competing in the national elections than one conservative and one socialist.
Sanders lost the African-American voters in the Deep South to Clinton because they are ideologically conservative. A lot of conservatives have already stated publicly that Clinton is a better choice even than Trump. So it's only logical that conservative African-Americans are going to vote for Clinton over Sanders - after all, it's better for conservatives to have two conservatives competing in the national elections than one conservative and one socialist.
13
Cruz wins in Kansas - home of the Westboro Baptist Church fanatics. So what?
7
Maine has a voting age population of ~ 1.0 million people. Less than 18,700 people showed up to the Republican Caucus, and Cruz got 8,550 to Trump's 6,070. That's statistical noise compared to the population, hardly an upset win for Cruz.
6
"Decisive Win for Clinton in Louisiana"
How about "Bernie wins two out of three states" instead?
Naw the truth wouldn't make it look like the anointed one is doing so well...
How about "Bernie wins two out of three states" instead?
Naw the truth wouldn't make it look like the anointed one is doing so well...
12
Sour Grapes. This has nothing with being "anointed" --- it was a "Decisive Win"!!
When I see the constant CNN coverage of the ridiculous, pundits trying to intellectualize the reasons for Trumps rise to power, the incessant discussion about the numerous options on how he could be stopped, and the jocular way they discuss serious issues about things Trump has said, it makes my blood boil. Not only has the Republican Party been hijacked, but the soft underbelly of the American psyche has been exposed and that is racism. It is clear that politically correct means hiding racist feelings, however, now we have a candidate for the highest office in the land saying, you don't have to worry cause I hear you and support your concerns. As for the CNN pundits, only Van Jones tells it like it is, the rest nervously laugh it off like it doesn't exist.
7
In every poll, Sanders beats all the Republicans. Clinton loses to 3 out of 4 Republican candidates.
Still want to support Clinton, NYT? Not even a pause to consider the murder of Berta Cáceres, brought to you by Hillary Clinton, Kissinger protégé, and her role in the US-backed coup in Honduras? You are on the wrong side of history.
Still want to support Clinton, NYT? Not even a pause to consider the murder of Berta Cáceres, brought to you by Hillary Clinton, Kissinger protégé, and her role in the US-backed coup in Honduras? You are on the wrong side of history.
13
Hopefully this country won't go from being drunk on Trump to a nightmare hangover with Cruz.
6
The other day Hillary was talking about "jobs" and a "living wage." I wonder where the idea for those talking points came from? HRC is a charlatan- she is more concerned with fixing her failed foreign policy legacy than transforming our country. As State Department head she watched the construction cost of the U.S. embassy in Baghdad soar over $750 million- and knit picks at who should pay to fix the Flint, Michigan water system. This lady is dangerous and calculating and will keep us in a perpetual state of war around the world.
12
Uhh ... perhaps it came from her 2000 Senate campaign manager. His name is Bill deBlasio.
4
As the number of Republican candidates diminishes, Trump’s share of votes stays about the same; if he as popular as he claims, his share should increase instead.
This must be good news to GOP elite.
This must be good news to GOP elite.
The headlines say a lot about The Times' position on the candidates: anti-Trump with the "pressure on" and pro-Clinton with a "decisive win." In truth Trump won two states that are important while Bernie won two that are also important. At this point, both the anti-establishment candidates--Sanders and Trump--seem to be faring quite well. Cruz and Clinton both may have peaked as the primaries move to states less favorable to them. Clinton's big delegate edge is largely the results of non-binding establishment "super delegates" who should vote according to the percent the candidates received in their states. The last thing Democrats need is the appearance of a rigged nomination for a candidate who already has major "trust" issues along with concerns about her judgment (highlighted in these very pages) in her area of supposed expertise, foreign policy. Similarly, Republicans are also flirting with the possibility of a brokered convention and a third-party split. So, please keep the bias from the headlines and let the readers and the voters decide.
8
I realize most people and certainly most pundits have not experienced a Democratic party "caucus" or the derisive tone when speaking of Rubio's win of the Minnesota caucus would not be repeated.
As young voters my husband and I attended several and were often elected to state conventions. The caucus system is not just standing in line and voting like primaries, it requires working within rigorous party rules to determine support for candidates or which platform positions or even to be an "unaffiliated" delegate to the state party convention--often a two day event. The work of democracy is supposed to be done in caucus where platform planks are submitted and voted on. (Thus a anti-abortion or an anti-food stamp plank can make it to the state level convention to be considered although generally not adopted.) If a candidate for any elected office can organize well enough to turn out a majority of caucus voters, then that candidate will control who is an elected delegate and even what platform positions can be considered at the state level. Sometimes a caucus can last for hours just counting votes for candidates and platform planks.
After the first ballot in state conventions (in most cases) delegates are released to vote for other candidates which is why the Republican delegates from the MN caucus will most likely not vote for Rubio.
Similar to the "town hall" a caucus is grassroot representation, but messy, time-consuming and obsolete as a way to vote.
As young voters my husband and I attended several and were often elected to state conventions. The caucus system is not just standing in line and voting like primaries, it requires working within rigorous party rules to determine support for candidates or which platform positions or even to be an "unaffiliated" delegate to the state party convention--often a two day event. The work of democracy is supposed to be done in caucus where platform planks are submitted and voted on. (Thus a anti-abortion or an anti-food stamp plank can make it to the state level convention to be considered although generally not adopted.) If a candidate for any elected office can organize well enough to turn out a majority of caucus voters, then that candidate will control who is an elected delegate and even what platform positions can be considered at the state level. Sometimes a caucus can last for hours just counting votes for candidates and platform planks.
After the first ballot in state conventions (in most cases) delegates are released to vote for other candidates which is why the Republican delegates from the MN caucus will most likely not vote for Rubio.
Similar to the "town hall" a caucus is grassroot representation, but messy, time-consuming and obsolete as a way to vote.
2
I hate to break it to the Sanders supporters, but it's worth acknowledging reality. Hillary never recouped a 100 delegate lead Obama had in 2008. She's got an even bigger advantage than that this year and will win the nomination. Tiny Kansas is just about the reddest state in America. Winning it and Nebraska is hardly consequential if you're hundreds of delegates behind.
5
GOP not working on behalf of its constituents is rather amazing, what else can they throw under the rug?
1
Its interesting that Cruz is seen a savior of the Republican establishment. Its been pointed repeatedly that the Republican establishment is the home of anti immigrant, anti gov't i.e. infrastructure improvement, narrowing voting rights and celebrating Citizens United. Cruz is an obstructionist of the worst sort. Even the members of his own party hate him. The Freedom Caucus in the House adore him. Shutting down the gov't is one of his favorite talking points. The excitement factor for Hillary Clinton is very low. She will not bring lots of voters to the polls. She is the establishment candidate though and seems likely to win the Democratic nomination.
1
When it comes to the general election, some states will vote Republican whoever is the nominee. For the Democrats the biggest issue is turnout. My biggest fear in this election is that Cruz will end up with the nomination and Sanders supporters will be too hostile toward Clinton to support her, behaving just like low-income uneducated whites in the South who repeatedly vote against their own best interests.
6
So the candidate who won one state gets the big story and the candidate who won two states gets the smaller piece 'don't count us out.' Hilarious!
To the New York Times: Given Hillary's continuing refusal to disclose transcripts or video of her Wall Street speeches as called for by the New York Times, are you reconsidering your endorsement?
To the New York Times: Given Hillary's continuing refusal to disclose transcripts or video of her Wall Street speeches as called for by the New York Times, are you reconsidering your endorsement?
10
When will the Barney Fife supporters, sorry, Barney Sanders, the supporters of a senator from a state of 600,000 versus Hillary Clinton, former Senator of New York State, population 20 Million, quit crying about how poorly Sanders gets treated by The New York Times. I haven't read once in The Times where Barney's voting record on gun control includes his voting against the Brady Bill five times, which by the way simply wants to enforce tighter waiting periods, -and why?-so he could ensure getting elected over and over again. Oh, and his getting a C on his report card by the Gun Lobby?-Hillary got an F.
And all that nonsense about Hillary getting such outrageous speaking fees from the Banking Industry? They are an industry that operates in the billions as they go about their business of financing the operations of THE WORLD, and don't layout speaking fees of 10 thousand dollars. They pay through the nose the big bucks because that's what they expect to pay. And they don't drive Chevrolet Malibu's either. BMW's, Lexus, Jaguars, Porches, et al. Are you going to boycott those automakers? What don't you get?
And the computer servers? Oh, Please.
Benghazi? When Hell-Fire Missiles were requested for Syrian embassy defense, Congress refused the request, refused all embassies getting defense funding, with Rep. from Utah, Jason Chaffetz bragging about how he denied more monies being cut for embassy defense.
So, Barney supporters, lets stop living outside the spin cycle.
And all that nonsense about Hillary getting such outrageous speaking fees from the Banking Industry? They are an industry that operates in the billions as they go about their business of financing the operations of THE WORLD, and don't layout speaking fees of 10 thousand dollars. They pay through the nose the big bucks because that's what they expect to pay. And they don't drive Chevrolet Malibu's either. BMW's, Lexus, Jaguars, Porches, et al. Are you going to boycott those automakers? What don't you get?
And the computer servers? Oh, Please.
Benghazi? When Hell-Fire Missiles were requested for Syrian embassy defense, Congress refused the request, refused all embassies getting defense funding, with Rep. from Utah, Jason Chaffetz bragging about how he denied more monies being cut for embassy defense.
So, Barney supporters, lets stop living outside the spin cycle.
11
Thanks, I couldn't have said it better about his supporters. I agree that Hillary is the more qualified candidate to lead this nation but I would never use the same brush to smear Sanders as some of his supporters use on Clinton. He is an inspiring individual and I'm grateful for what he has done.
4
Why do Bernie's supporters stomp thier feet and whine about how unfairly their candidate is treated?
You might think that this is the first time they voted! Oh wait...
You might think that this is the first time they voted! Oh wait...
11
Your article is totally misleading when you add the super delegates to the Hillary camp. The fact that Hillary is mostly winning in the deep South is hardly encouraging for what concerns the November election. In the end all these states will be counted as red states. If Bernie finish first in the blue states , he is the candidate that will do better against the Republican opponent.
10
Cruz = lesser of two evils;
Rubio = empty suit; not substantial enough to be taken seriously by anyone.
Hillary can & will beat any of them.
End of story.
Naf 86 NavyVet
Rubio = empty suit; not substantial enough to be taken seriously by anyone.
Hillary can & will beat any of them.
End of story.
Naf 86 NavyVet
3
Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Clinton are still fighting among themselves over who is most capable of causing the most harm to the most people. Clinton is a bit better than the others. She doesn't want to drive women into back alleys. Though even that she would be willing to do,I bet, if public sentiment swung in that direction. And probably unlike the others wants workers to at least make slightly above subsistence wages. They all are ready and eager to kill large numbers of people in horrible wars of "choice". And won't hesitate a second to jump when their corporate masters say jump. Sanders is a bit more restrained on foreign policies. And considerably better on domestic policy. It is remarkable that he is doing as well as has.
3
I read the Times online and the headline on the Democratic part of this article was "Clinton wins decisively in LA". WHY WAS IT NOT SANDERS WINS 2 of 3???? Why does the Times always make it sound like Clinton is far and away the more popular candidate. The Times along the with the Democratic Party are behaving in a very biased and undemocratic fashion. And what happens to the half of the Democratic Party that supports Bernie? The party is supposed to be letting the people decide who should be the Democratic candidate. I'm not even sure I feel like a part of the Democratic Party anymore.
8
I've got to wonder about where all the birthers have gone. They carry on for 8 years about President Obama on the flimsiest of "evidence", but hardly a word about the Cruz candidacy (alluded to in this article by Mr. Trump), where even the candidate openly acknowledges birth in a foreign country.
Tell be a again about how it wasn't about race.
Tell be a again about how it wasn't about race.
8
You just wait.
Trump's investigators are wrapping up their work in Hawaii, and the results are going to be shocking. You will find out a lot of things about Obama - a lot of questions.
Trump's investigators are wrapping up their work in Hawaii, and the results are going to be shocking. You will find out a lot of things about Obama - a lot of questions.
Cue scary music. Guess what???-- With Trump possibly winning the election, a lot of us are already shocked.
When I see the CNN pundits discussions, hour after hour, trying to intellectualize Trumps rise to power, the numerous options on how he could be stopped, and the jocular way the discussion of serious issues unfold, it scare the crap out of me. Not only has the Republican Party been hijacked, but the soft underbelly of the American psyche has been exposed and that is racism. Politically correct means hiding racist feelings and now there is a powerful personality that says, you don't have to cause I support your concerns. Concerning the CNN pundits, only Van Jones tells it like it is, the rest nervously laugh it off.
2
The naked and biased support of NYT for Clinton's candidacy is not even funny. There has to be a strong reason for not wanting to give proper credit to Sanders. You can try and steer all you want but winners and losers are separated not so much at the starting line but the finish line
Like someone said, last shall be first.
Like someone said, last shall be first.
5
So is the Times going to endorse Cruz now? Watch what you wish for you may get it. Cruz is in many ways a worse option than Trump.
9
The NYTimes coverage is despicable. Clinton winning red states is useless. Bragging about it and not giving Bernie due credit for winning two states of the three and handily beating Hillary by a margin of more than 2-1 in Kansas and by close to that in Nebraska? I mean really. Thankfully they don't adopt the same tactics regarding climate change.
Every day I become more and more disgusted with the NYTimes. It's eminently clear that big media is part of the 1%, indeed they own the major news outlets. So glad to see time and time again that the Reader's Picks are all handedly in Bernie's corner!
Every day I become more and more disgusted with the NYTimes. It's eminently clear that big media is part of the 1%, indeed they own the major news outlets. So glad to see time and time again that the Reader's Picks are all handedly in Bernie's corner!
7
The Times didn't downplay Obama's wins in red states in 2008. I provided a link to the map to refresh your memory ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2008
Why would they do it now when Hillary wins red states ?
PS - Virginia is purple and she crushed him there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2008
Why would they do it now when Hillary wins red states ?
PS - Virginia is purple and she crushed him there.
3
And Cruz and Trump will be one on one. And then there will be one - Trump! And then the G.O.P. will coalesce behind Trump because - 1) They will have no choice. 2) They do not want a popular third party candidate splitting more than half of their votes. 3) The other Candidates has conceded they will support the nomination. 4) Hillary is unbeatable.
1
The big message coming out of this 2016 election is a growing rejection of both the Republican and Democratic establishment parties by voters.
For example, Trump supporters were angry at Romney's speech and told a NYT reporter they wanted the Republican party to stop telling us who to vote for and stop telling us what to do. Union leaders tell a NYT reporter, they endorse Hillary, but a lot of their members seem to be going for either Trump or Sanders.
A lot of media emphasis is on the Republican party's impending collapse, and this election may be the end of it. But the establishment DNC also misjudged and mishandled Bernie Sanders' candidacy and did all it could to shut it down. Problem for Hillary: To hear Bernie and his message is to appreciate Bernie, who has earned his campaign donations from the little people the hard way and by himself.
Another message is voters are also sick and tired of all the media spin favoring the candidates chosen by the big donors, special interests, and party insiders.
For example, consider the headline on the opening page for this article: "Decisive Win for Clinton in Louisiana." "Ted Cruz Keeps Up Pressure on Donald Trump" is on the opening page also, but not until readers click into the article do we see the by-the-way subheadline: "Bernie Sanders Takes 2 on 'Super Saturday.'"
The voters are telling the establishment parties and media something important. Can you hear us NOW?
For example, Trump supporters were angry at Romney's speech and told a NYT reporter they wanted the Republican party to stop telling us who to vote for and stop telling us what to do. Union leaders tell a NYT reporter, they endorse Hillary, but a lot of their members seem to be going for either Trump or Sanders.
A lot of media emphasis is on the Republican party's impending collapse, and this election may be the end of it. But the establishment DNC also misjudged and mishandled Bernie Sanders' candidacy and did all it could to shut it down. Problem for Hillary: To hear Bernie and his message is to appreciate Bernie, who has earned his campaign donations from the little people the hard way and by himself.
Another message is voters are also sick and tired of all the media spin favoring the candidates chosen by the big donors, special interests, and party insiders.
For example, consider the headline on the opening page for this article: "Decisive Win for Clinton in Louisiana." "Ted Cruz Keeps Up Pressure on Donald Trump" is on the opening page also, but not until readers click into the article do we see the by-the-way subheadline: "Bernie Sanders Takes 2 on 'Super Saturday.'"
The voters are telling the establishment parties and media something important. Can you hear us NOW?
8
And that echo you're hearing, is the sound of your own voice. Can you hear this now?
"Don't write us off", said Bernie. "Too late", replied the New York Times.
7
Moments ago I donated another $100.00 to the Sanders campaign, something I, and millions are doing on a regular basis.
Compared to Clinton, the Republican wolf in Democratic clothing, and the crazy Republican candidates, headed by Trump, Bernie is a saint, a man beyond reproach, exemplary in every way, the embodiment of FDR, something I never though could occur again, in this Plutocratic Oligarchy.
It's so embarrassing to know the world is watching our nation turn our most important Presidential election into a farce, a very bad reality show, and its made worse by the mainstream media, including the NY Times, which unabashedly each and every day, shows itself to be the campaign tool for Hillary.
Absolutely awful.
Compared to Clinton, the Republican wolf in Democratic clothing, and the crazy Republican candidates, headed by Trump, Bernie is a saint, a man beyond reproach, exemplary in every way, the embodiment of FDR, something I never though could occur again, in this Plutocratic Oligarchy.
It's so embarrassing to know the world is watching our nation turn our most important Presidential election into a farce, a very bad reality show, and its made worse by the mainstream media, including the NY Times, which unabashedly each and every day, shows itself to be the campaign tool for Hillary.
Absolutely awful.
5
This article has different headlines on the home page compared to this page.
On the home page, it touts a "decisive win" for Clinton under a headline that declares Cruz is keeping the pressure on Trump. This appears to indicate that the Times is rooting for Trump to lose and Clinton to win based on the fact that Sanders won two races to Clinton's one yet was not declared to be putting pressure on Clinton the way Cruz was even though Cruz and Trump had the same number of victories, nor in fact was Sanders in fact even mentioned on the home page headlines.
While it is true that Clinton's margin over Sanders is a bit bigger than Trump's over Cruz, that is no basis at all for screaming headlines suggesting Trump is in more danger. In fact, it is totally shocking how potent Sanders is against Clinton, whereas a billionaire being able to compete well in an expensive election is hardly surprising.
On the home page, it touts a "decisive win" for Clinton under a headline that declares Cruz is keeping the pressure on Trump. This appears to indicate that the Times is rooting for Trump to lose and Clinton to win based on the fact that Sanders won two races to Clinton's one yet was not declared to be putting pressure on Clinton the way Cruz was even though Cruz and Trump had the same number of victories, nor in fact was Sanders in fact even mentioned on the home page headlines.
While it is true that Clinton's margin over Sanders is a bit bigger than Trump's over Cruz, that is no basis at all for screaming headlines suggesting Trump is in more danger. In fact, it is totally shocking how potent Sanders is against Clinton, whereas a billionaire being able to compete well in an expensive election is hardly surprising.
10
This year, oscar's Best movie award went to Spotlight. The movie is about investigative journalism at its best. But what it also revealed is that the investigation by The Globe was almost 20 years too late. Sexual abuse was rampant in the "system" and it was hushed by the superiors in the system. It took an outsider to come in and bring the whole faulty system to the spotlight. It's the same way this election year. We have someone like Bernie who is opening our eyes as to the role of big money, big oil, big pharma in our democratic system that has become corrupted and polluted, the Clintons being symbolic of how entrenched they are in this corrupt system. Where looking away is encouraged and the establishment folks threaten, blackmail and hold you at gunpoint should you try to tell the truth. Our media has failed us.
15
Why has not anyone called out Trump for his use of sexual innuendo? Yes it has been talked about in the public media and alternatively both laughed at and frowned upon. In any other setting this language would be considered a human resource department's nightmare. Clearly those on stage were uncomfortable with the direction of his harassing language, and I imagine many more in the audience and public at large as well.
It just goes to show that even on the national stage, "boys will be boys" is allowed. One would wonder what behavior is tolerated inside Trump's organization? Is this the conduct we expect of a presidential candidate? He would be out of the door at most organizations with this behavior. Is that we could expect of his treatment of senators and republicans of both sexes if he were president?
It just goes to show that even on the national stage, "boys will be boys" is allowed. One would wonder what behavior is tolerated inside Trump's organization? Is this the conduct we expect of a presidential candidate? He would be out of the door at most organizations with this behavior. Is that we could expect of his treatment of senators and republicans of both sexes if he were president?
6
I should watch the Democratic debate tonight and play the Bernie Sanders drinking game: every time he mentions another free government program, take a drink of someone else's beer.
3
Great idea but just don't drive afterward, likely to be several levels above legal limit by the time it's over.
2
If I drink every time he says Wall St, Goldman, or millionaires and billionaires, I won't live to see the end of it.
1
The U.S. can easily afford quality health care for all and tuition-free universities for it's young people. It's a very simple question of priorities; subsidize the wealthiest handful of Americans with bloated, wasteful military budgets and financial sector bailouts or, use the country's resources to help support the overwhelming majority of the country's people. Why is this difficult to understand?
1
Interesting that when Hillary Clinton wins so decisively in the South, Sanders' supporters dismiss the victories as being low information voters (meaning minorities) and irrelevant since the states are red. When Sanders wins in very red states like Kansas and Oklahoma, these same people find it deeply significant. Fact is the states or caucuses where Sanders wins are overwhelmingly white, with few Democrats (mostly liberal in the caucuses) and often with small populations.
It matters that Clinton wins among minorities, women, whites, and older voters as well as with Democrats.
It matters that Clinton wins among minorities, women, whites, and older voters as well as with Democrats.
11
You can tell yourself that again when prez trump has 80% of white male votes.
1
Will Trump have to wait until he is elected President to receive the Nobel Peace Prize or will he get it right after he wins Florida and Ohio?
8
Oh *sigh*, again...
Can Bernie Sanders ever break out from the strangle-hold of the "Super Delegates"? I find this concept as much appealing as the "Winner-Takes-All" approach on the Republican side (by which I mean: both are not really democratic...).
To give you all some insight from Germany: we have several parties (I voted today, the ballot looked like wallpaper...) but no primaries. It is a totally internal matter of the parties to select their candidate. Normally it's done at conventions where every districts (in the area the vote is about, like federal, state, county etc.) sends it's delegates. There are a few speeches, but basically none of them are on TV. Then there is a vote, sometimes several, and then the nominee is announced to the media. Simple! Easy! Cheap!
Then again we don't elect a guy/gal who has the finger on the red button...
But what I can't understand - for the life of me - is why in the U.S. you have to register WITH THE STATE to vote in a primary. What good does a "secret ballot" do if you have to reveal your political leanings long before you actually vote?
And if you claim to be an independent you can't vote in most primaries. Why not have the parties do the primaries for themselves, among their actual, paying MEMBERS? This way cross voting is eliminated, shenanigans are down, financing is secured and privacy is protected.
But I guess that would be too easy and not enough drama for the U.S. TV networks :-)
Can Bernie Sanders ever break out from the strangle-hold of the "Super Delegates"? I find this concept as much appealing as the "Winner-Takes-All" approach on the Republican side (by which I mean: both are not really democratic...).
To give you all some insight from Germany: we have several parties (I voted today, the ballot looked like wallpaper...) but no primaries. It is a totally internal matter of the parties to select their candidate. Normally it's done at conventions where every districts (in the area the vote is about, like federal, state, county etc.) sends it's delegates. There are a few speeches, but basically none of them are on TV. Then there is a vote, sometimes several, and then the nominee is announced to the media. Simple! Easy! Cheap!
Then again we don't elect a guy/gal who has the finger on the red button...
But what I can't understand - for the life of me - is why in the U.S. you have to register WITH THE STATE to vote in a primary. What good does a "secret ballot" do if you have to reveal your political leanings long before you actually vote?
And if you claim to be an independent you can't vote in most primaries. Why not have the parties do the primaries for themselves, among their actual, paying MEMBERS? This way cross voting is eliminated, shenanigans are down, financing is secured and privacy is protected.
But I guess that would be too easy and not enough drama for the U.S. TV networks :-)
3
A vote for Hillary is a vote for Trump. if Hillary wins over Bernie Sanders, then the Sanders supporters, the ones looking for a revolution, may decide to vote for Trump as opposed to Hillary in the General election. I am a Sanders supporter and would never ever vote for Trump, but after talking with Trump supporters I understand that many of the issues they care about are the same ones Sanders supporters care about and they desperately want a "change" in Washington and are willing to hold their noses and get it by voting for Trump. Sanders supporters may do the same. I think the democratic establishment and all voters should quickly get behind Bernie Sanders or else Trump will be our president.
So many voters want a change and they will get it. Will it be through Sanders or Trump?
So many voters want a change and they will get it. Will it be through Sanders or Trump?
12
Sanders wins two more states ( but the NYT's must state that Clinton
won the big prize -in a state,like South Carolina,that is known for it's
corruption. )I await Sanders victory and the NYT's spin on her loss for
the nomination. Yeah,Bernie.
won the big prize -in a state,like South Carolina,that is known for it's
corruption. )I await Sanders victory and the NYT's spin on her loss for
the nomination. Yeah,Bernie.
13
Count the votes. The number of votes actually matter.
2
Between the two, I'm not sure which is scarier, Trump or Cruz. Cruz could conceivably cement the conservative tilt of the Supreme Court for decades, which at this point should be the main concern for progressives. The ACA would also fall by the wayside, and Medicare and Medicaid would take hits as well.
This is likely the most significant election of the past 20 years, and the deep rifts between outsiders and traditional voters are showing on both sides.
This is likely the most significant election of the past 20 years, and the deep rifts between outsiders and traditional voters are showing on both sides.
10
Maybe before they came in droves to these comments to kvetch, the chronically complaining Bernie Sanders should have looked at the front page of the print edition: "Two Triumphs for Sanders -- Clinton Handily Wins in Louisiana."
But the truth is that despite Sanders' victories, he actually fell further behind Clinton in the delegate count on Saturday. Add up the delegates won in Nebraska, Kansas and Louisiana and you'll see that.
We hear from Sanders supporters that Clinton's overwhelming victories in Southern states mean nothing because these are red states that will surely go Republican in November. But when Sanders wins even redder states (none with a Democratic member of Congress, unlike every Southern state; none of which has gone Democratic for President since 1964, unlike every Southern state, which either voted for Carter, Clinton or Obama at least once) like Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Kansas, somehow these victories count.
No doubt they'll also tout Sanders' upcoming victories in caucuses in Wyoming, Idaho, Alaska, and Utah -- also redder than red states that never go Democratic while disparaging Clinton's forthcoming win this Tuesday in Mississippi.
One can see the difference; Sanders supporters apparently think black votes don't matter. Maybe they'd be happier to count the votes of Southern African-Americans as three-fifths of a white Democrat's vote?
But the truth is that despite Sanders' victories, he actually fell further behind Clinton in the delegate count on Saturday. Add up the delegates won in Nebraska, Kansas and Louisiana and you'll see that.
We hear from Sanders supporters that Clinton's overwhelming victories in Southern states mean nothing because these are red states that will surely go Republican in November. But when Sanders wins even redder states (none with a Democratic member of Congress, unlike every Southern state; none of which has gone Democratic for President since 1964, unlike every Southern state, which either voted for Carter, Clinton or Obama at least once) like Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Kansas, somehow these victories count.
No doubt they'll also tout Sanders' upcoming victories in caucuses in Wyoming, Idaho, Alaska, and Utah -- also redder than red states that never go Democratic while disparaging Clinton's forthcoming win this Tuesday in Mississippi.
One can see the difference; Sanders supporters apparently think black votes don't matter. Maybe they'd be happier to count the votes of Southern African-Americans as three-fifths of a white Democrat's vote?
13
You tell me what percentage of voters are people of color, whites, women, men. So far there are more white voters. The point is not that voters of color don't matter, the point is that any Democrat will need everyone, whites too. Is the black vote taken for granted? The white vote? The womens' vote? Don't take anyone's vote for granted, even the whites'.
2
Nebraska's congressional delegation has one Democrat: Rep. Brad Ashford, whose district includes Omaha, home of most of the state's Black population. Nebraska is one of two states (Maine) that do not follow the "winner takes all" rule in electoral votes. (Two go to the winner, and each congressional district sends its own.)
Now, for (at least) the 14th time, its "nonpartisan," almost-all-white-male-Republican unicameral Legislature wants to change that system.
Surprise, surprise, surprise.
Now, for (at least) the 14th time, its "nonpartisan," almost-all-white-male-Republican unicameral Legislature wants to change that system.
Surprise, surprise, surprise.
The disparaging part here is that the media continues to downplay key Sanders victories, indicating that they somehow don't really matter. They also continue to avoid polls that continue to indicate that Clinton would be defeated by Cruz ... as many of her "easy victories" are with states that - more often than not- vote republican. On the other hand, those same polls indicate that Sanders soundly -- soundly --- defeats Cruz (and Trump ... And Rubio). It's about name recognition and the problem for Hillary is that as people get to know Bernie, his numbers go up... It's a matter of time and he has the cash to go the distance. This race is not over and those of us who panic at the thought of a Trump or Cruz presidency will hopefully pull off what the media seems to be promoting.
15
People who think caucuses are "pure democracy" have likely never attended a caucus. Caucuses are the opposite of pure democracy. Caucuses exclude the elderly, disabled, military personnel stationed overseas, and the working poor and middle class who cannot afford to devote half a day or more and in some cases an additional day just to cast a vote for their candidate. During primary elections a person just needs to go to there polling place, vote, and leave. Done. Caucuses demand a great deal of time and physical stamina and sometimes attendees become tired, hungry, bored or frustrated and just leave. When that happens, their vote can be coopted by the opposing candidate's delegates. Does that sound like pure democracy? Congrats to Senator Sanders for his wins. A win is a win not matter how or where it happens but lets not be fooled into believing that a caucus is democratic.
14
As a Republican I see it this way.
The slightly lesser evil still has a chance.
Whoopee.
The slightly lesser evil still has a chance.
Whoopee.
7
While I share the great concern about a potential Trump presidency, learning that Ted Cruz is the only other viable GOP option is like learning that you have a choice between being shot in the front of the head or being shot in the back or the head.
16
To all those who are bothered by the NY Times' choice of how to report the Democratic results from yesterday, I understand. I support Bernie Sanders. And yes, he won 2 out of 3 states last night. But even leaving behind mathematical projections like Nate Silver are making about how he has to do to grab the nom, there're some inescapable data from last night that we have to face up to.
As of 11 this morning, the counts in the Democratic primaries of March 5 indicate:
Hillary Clinton got about 248,442 votes.
Bernie Sanders got about 117,630 votes.
Those numbers will change, but let's be fair to the Old Gray Lady. There is a legitimate point of view which calls last night a big win for Clinton, other than media bias. She got more than twice the votes Bernie did, as of this counting. I don't think that's a statistical error. She's drawing more people to come out and vote for her than Bernie is.
And yes, a lot of her support is coming from the Deep South. But there are two points: This is the only part of the election cycle where Louisiana Democrats get their voices heard. As a blue Michigander, I'm okay with Red Mississippi Dems being part of our nomination process. Democracy in action. And also, the latest Detroit Free Press poll shows her with a 25-point advantage here. If that holds, at some point we Sanders folks have to concede that Clinton, whatever else we think, is doing a better job than Bernie is, at getting people to the polls, end of story.
As of 11 this morning, the counts in the Democratic primaries of March 5 indicate:
Hillary Clinton got about 248,442 votes.
Bernie Sanders got about 117,630 votes.
Those numbers will change, but let's be fair to the Old Gray Lady. There is a legitimate point of view which calls last night a big win for Clinton, other than media bias. She got more than twice the votes Bernie did, as of this counting. I don't think that's a statistical error. She's drawing more people to come out and vote for her than Bernie is.
And yes, a lot of her support is coming from the Deep South. But there are two points: This is the only part of the election cycle where Louisiana Democrats get their voices heard. As a blue Michigander, I'm okay with Red Mississippi Dems being part of our nomination process. Democracy in action. And also, the latest Detroit Free Press poll shows her with a 25-point advantage here. If that holds, at some point we Sanders folks have to concede that Clinton, whatever else we think, is doing a better job than Bernie is, at getting people to the polls, end of story.
10
Good points and I appreciate your honest and candid assessment.
3
The naivete of the Bernie Sanders supportings is breathtaking. Their lack of knowledge about the history of primaries is stunning. Becoming a nominee is a numbers game. Sanders doesn't have the numbers. Louisiana is more important than the other two states because the number of delegates it delivered is better. It's not about how many states are won, it's about how many delgates are won.
As for historical crowds at speeches, well I guess they flunked history, or have forgetten about Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, and a loser, the Sandersesque Eugene McCarthy. Always big crowds. And based on population figures, larger percentage-wise than Sanders.
Sanders is another Ted Cruz. A do-nothing Senator, a gadfly who wants an economic "revolution," just as Cruz wants a Christian "revolution." They are two out-of-touch peas in a pod. America is a centrist nation, the pendulum may swing, but it will never swing to the extreme. Barry Goldwater learned that lesson.
I am also appalled at the thinly-veiled racism I'm reading in some of these comments. Sanders supporters are actually blaming African-Americans for Hillary Clinton's successes. They almost sound like some right-wingers. It's shocking that they think the black vote should be marginalized. That it doesn't count. They are whining: Without blacks voting, Sanders would be winning. Wow.
As for historical crowds at speeches, well I guess they flunked history, or have forgetten about Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, and a loser, the Sandersesque Eugene McCarthy. Always big crowds. And based on population figures, larger percentage-wise than Sanders.
Sanders is another Ted Cruz. A do-nothing Senator, a gadfly who wants an economic "revolution," just as Cruz wants a Christian "revolution." They are two out-of-touch peas in a pod. America is a centrist nation, the pendulum may swing, but it will never swing to the extreme. Barry Goldwater learned that lesson.
I am also appalled at the thinly-veiled racism I'm reading in some of these comments. Sanders supporters are actually blaming African-Americans for Hillary Clinton's successes. They almost sound like some right-wingers. It's shocking that they think the black vote should be marginalized. That it doesn't count. They are whining: Without blacks voting, Sanders would be winning. Wow.
18
All the handicappers amongst the readers comments focus on electability. Substance and integrity clearly matter too but those facets of the race for the Democrats do not seem to be as salient as they clearly are for the Republicans. There the absence of personal integrity for THE DONALD is front and center. To see him banish an African American woman from one of his gatherings with such hatred and scorn and intense arousal of the mob is a terrifying moment to see in a major presidential candidate. How far is that from the KKK and the likes of Benito Mussolini, Joseph Stalin and Adolph Hitler? Here in Topeka, Kansas at a Democratic caucus we had a spirited and affectionate cheering contest much like a local football game between opposing teams otherwise connected on multiple levels. Spending hours with friends and colleagues was a delightful way to participate. The focus was on community and friendly competition. My wife supports Hillary and so do I but Bernie tugs at me. I fiercely love Obama and have come to feel increasing affection for Bernie and his earnest and principled appeal to restore our country to for and by the people. Hillary is skilled, experienced and better prepared to deal with the chicanery of Washington politics. She is likely the better prepared for the savagery of the final campaign but Bernie...you gotta love him. The handicapping will fade. The realities of the candidates will emerge. I pray Republicans will choose Kasich not the scary tyrants.
4
Two corrupt authoritarians, two rageful pathological liars, two hucksters, one boorish with "small hands," the other boring with bloody hands. Either will make a dangerous president, but the latter has demonstrated that her evil knows no bounds.
Are "elites" on both sides really blind to their own responsibility for this mess?
The Clinton role in the Rwandan genocide, Haitian refugee repatriation to certain death, Ricky Ray Rector execution, expansion of mass incarceration—not to mention Clintons' reflexive abuse of women & power—should have long ago disabused "elites" of Clinton nostalgia.
"Elites'" Faustian bargain knowingly rests on a false premise—that one's virtuousness is determined by one's policy positions rather than whether one has a moral core. This compartmentalization spills toxicity into–corrupts–the culture.
This delusory thinking produces disturbing dissonance, often with dangerous consequences. Examples: Clintons cloak their reflexive abuse of women w/ VAWA, cloak their complicity in the Rwanda genocide with a few policy crumbs.
If policy positions–mere identification with good policies–make one virtuous, then those policies are iconographic–they just represent virtuousness, they don't necessarily do virtuous things. Clinton's iconographic policies strip meaning from society, systematically deconstructing it as a democracy
"Elites" made their Faustian bargain long ago, betraying not only women & blacks, but all of us. The devil is now getting his due.
Are "elites" on both sides really blind to their own responsibility for this mess?
The Clinton role in the Rwandan genocide, Haitian refugee repatriation to certain death, Ricky Ray Rector execution, expansion of mass incarceration—not to mention Clintons' reflexive abuse of women & power—should have long ago disabused "elites" of Clinton nostalgia.
"Elites'" Faustian bargain knowingly rests on a false premise—that one's virtuousness is determined by one's policy positions rather than whether one has a moral core. This compartmentalization spills toxicity into–corrupts–the culture.
This delusory thinking produces disturbing dissonance, often with dangerous consequences. Examples: Clintons cloak their reflexive abuse of women w/ VAWA, cloak their complicity in the Rwanda genocide with a few policy crumbs.
If policy positions–mere identification with good policies–make one virtuous, then those policies are iconographic–they just represent virtuousness, they don't necessarily do virtuous things. Clinton's iconographic policies strip meaning from society, systematically deconstructing it as a democracy
"Elites" made their Faustian bargain long ago, betraying not only women & blacks, but all of us. The devil is now getting his due.
16
Don't you think that if the Rs could find even probable cause that a crime had been committed, they would have demanded a prosecution? Many Rs are just insisting that she is "evil" because allegations are being spread on the net, not because there is any competent evidence. Furthermore, how many of us can claim to be completely free of some sort of wrongdoing, however trivial or egregious? She is human! Join the human race.
3
Until just recently, the most powerful Republican in Washington DC was House Speaker John Boehner. John Boehner weeps during the last 5 minutes of The Notebook. The only person weaker and more effeminate than Barack Obama in terms of political figures in Washington DC was Boehner.
The chair of the RNC is Reince Priebus, a scared little Washington DC insider whose claim to fame is being as tall as a doorstop.
Until the Republicans have actual leaders, there will be no prosecution. That's why I support Trump. President Elect Trump will order the DOJ to prosecute all the political sleaze in this town.
The chair of the RNC is Reince Priebus, a scared little Washington DC insider whose claim to fame is being as tall as a doorstop.
Until the Republicans have actual leaders, there will be no prosecution. That's why I support Trump. President Elect Trump will order the DOJ to prosecute all the political sleaze in this town.
1
DCBarrister,
Bill Buckley had it exactly right. A random sample of US citizens anytime over of the self-selected, corrupt or corruptible, power-hungry mediocrities our political machines reliably spit out. We need a new system—a national search for exceptional candidates.
What concerns me most about Trump is that he is unable to express ideas—one needs words and data to think and to convey those thoughts. Bottom line: He doesn't have the vocabulary or the knowledge to mount compelling arguments. His speeches and debate answers are, therefore, limited to polls, insults and shibboleths.
He says he gets his information from "the shows" He could hire world-class specialists to bring him up to speed, but doesn't because of this lack of awareness of his ignorance. He has an inflated view of his knowledge and his intelligence. We don't need another Obama. As we have seen, a despot can do a lot of damage in 4 yrs and a delusional one blinded by his own imagined brilliance will.
A modest proposal to mitigate damages, should Trump become President in spite of himself: Limit him to his area of expertise.
Let him do a timeshare conversion/reality show whereby anyone with the requisite $20 billion can be "President for a Day." This scheme would simultaneously pay down the entire projected $21 trillion Obama debt in 3 years–assuming no vacancies–and relieve Trump of all presidential duties. It would likely require a constitutional amendment, but everyone will be on board, I am sure.
Bill Buckley had it exactly right. A random sample of US citizens anytime over of the self-selected, corrupt or corruptible, power-hungry mediocrities our political machines reliably spit out. We need a new system—a national search for exceptional candidates.
What concerns me most about Trump is that he is unable to express ideas—one needs words and data to think and to convey those thoughts. Bottom line: He doesn't have the vocabulary or the knowledge to mount compelling arguments. His speeches and debate answers are, therefore, limited to polls, insults and shibboleths.
He says he gets his information from "the shows" He could hire world-class specialists to bring him up to speed, but doesn't because of this lack of awareness of his ignorance. He has an inflated view of his knowledge and his intelligence. We don't need another Obama. As we have seen, a despot can do a lot of damage in 4 yrs and a delusional one blinded by his own imagined brilliance will.
A modest proposal to mitigate damages, should Trump become President in spite of himself: Limit him to his area of expertise.
Let him do a timeshare conversion/reality show whereby anyone with the requisite $20 billion can be "President for a Day." This scheme would simultaneously pay down the entire projected $21 trillion Obama debt in 3 years–assuming no vacancies–and relieve Trump of all presidential duties. It would likely require a constitutional amendment, but everyone will be on board, I am sure.
1
I wholeheartedly agree with the comment that pointed out that the states where Hillary is winning will go to the Republicans in the general election.
Her "wins" are meaningless.
Her "wins" are meaningless.
10
I appreciate Sen. Sanders' ideas and experience, but objectively thinking, Sec. Clinton is better qualified, in my opinion. I am not convinced he is electable yet. But I too will vote for the Democratic nominee, simply because all of the R candidates are too awful to contemplate.
I strongly urge every American to seriously consider BOTH sets of candidates and vote for the one who has a proven record, not the ones who make promises that are not realistic or that defy the Constitution.
And if you are at least in 7th grade, reading the Constitution should not be an issue.
I strongly urge every American to seriously consider BOTH sets of candidates and vote for the one who has a proven record, not the ones who make promises that are not realistic or that defy the Constitution.
And if you are at least in 7th grade, reading the Constitution should not be an issue.
8
Perfect example of Lyin' Ted's behavior in the NYT story about him yesterday. Anyone who missed his lie about the Goofy watch on a murder victim can read it here. Cruz wanted it to be a Mickey Mouse watch. More dramatic for the SCOTUS.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/05/us/politics/ted-cruz-promoted-himself-...
(Reminds me of how Nixon always lied about his wife's birthday. He preferred St. Patrick's Day to the actual date.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/05/us/politics/ted-cruz-promoted-himself-...
(Reminds me of how Nixon always lied about his wife's birthday. He preferred St. Patrick's Day to the actual date.)
3
I am a Black attorney in Washington DC, and I've been here since December 2008. No human being who speaks English and works for a news organization that employs more than 5 people has ever asked Ted Cruz a single question about his lies.
Cruz runs around demagoguing everything and everyone within shouting distance, and like Barack Obama, Cruz gets a free pass. As a lawyer, some of Cruz's statements are so absurd that I laugh out loud when he says them.
Cruz runs around demagoguing everything and everyone within shouting distance, and like Barack Obama, Cruz gets a free pass. As a lawyer, some of Cruz's statements are so absurd that I laugh out loud when he says them.
2
So. What does being a Black attorney who lives in Washington DC sine 2008, have to do with Ted Cruz not being asked a single question about his lies?????
For those who predict the low Dem turnout represents big danger for them I would suggest that is could be the opposite. Voters are just not that uncomfortable with either candidate and the candidates themselves are sending a message that the difference between them is minor compared to the chasm between either one of them and the horror-circus on the other side.
It doesn't surprise me at all that Republicans are more excited about voting in the primary (it certainly has a high level of excitement)- some think Trump is blowing up their party and others think he's the Messiah, but no matter who they nominate between Trump and Cruz, it will create more than enough fear and loathing to motivate the dems to get out and vote for their nominee, whichever person it turns out to be.
I just hope if Hillary is nominated it isn't the result of the votes of the superdelegates. That might be a huge problem.
It doesn't surprise me at all that Republicans are more excited about voting in the primary (it certainly has a high level of excitement)- some think Trump is blowing up their party and others think he's the Messiah, but no matter who they nominate between Trump and Cruz, it will create more than enough fear and loathing to motivate the dems to get out and vote for their nominee, whichever person it turns out to be.
I just hope if Hillary is nominated it isn't the result of the votes of the superdelegates. That might be a huge problem.
4
If the Republicans could nominate John Roberts (with his promise to run) at their brokered convention, they'd get a huge consensus -- and two Supreme Court nominations ahead not just one. Democrats ought to prepare for such an opponent.
1
Cruzing Canadian born Cruz born to a Cuban father and an American mother has yet to have a general appeal other than to the extreme right wing conservatives of the Republican party. His failed attempt to shut the government down and to accomplish any worthwhile endeavor worries me. With Cruz and Trump on the Republican side and Hillary and Bernie on the democratic side still the remaining front runners, Cruz is the youngest of the viable candidates on both sides. that is hardly a qualification that one can be proud of. Cruz is a light weight who will not at all be able to be a formidable nominee against Hillary Clinton.
2
So Clinton is winning in the states that the Dems are sure to lose in November and she is losing in states that the Dems have a shot at winning. She is a horribly flawed candidate.
11
Of all the absurd claims by the Sanders people this is the least thoughtful (well, except for the racist ones about black voters).
She wins primary elections with a broader electorate the those who activists who show for caucuses. That means, and I'll use simple words here, she has a broader appeal. That means, again, slowly, she is a candidate with a better reach.
Also, the idea that the caucus states Sanders won most recently -- Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma -- are somehow more "in play" than the states Hillary wins is, well, nonsense.
She wins primary elections with a broader electorate the those who activists who show for caucuses. That means, and I'll use simple words here, she has a broader appeal. That means, again, slowly, she is a candidate with a better reach.
Also, the idea that the caucus states Sanders won most recently -- Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma -- are somehow more "in play" than the states Hillary wins is, well, nonsense.
5
I wonder what excuse the Berniebots will come up with in the next round of primaries where the delegate lead widens in Clinton's favor.
5
Question for tonight's debate in Flint Michigan for the "front-runner":
How can you work actively in behalf of fracking companies, who often evade regulation and poison drinking water supplies, and still self-righteously claim to be against the poison in the the water supply of Flint Michigan?
How can you work actively in behalf of fracking companies, who often evade regulation and poison drinking water supplies, and still self-righteously claim to be against the poison in the the water supply of Flint Michigan?
9
It is interesting to read letters from the pro-Sanders NYT readers. I can understand their passion for his policy positions. It would be nice if America functioned in accordance with his dreams. What I can't understand is how anybody can take seriously the premise that he will somehow transform our politics to achieve the legislative majorities required to accomplish anything, were he to be president. We (most NYT readers) are appalled at the obstructionism of the GOP, both past and current, to anything proposed by President Obama. Sanders would have even less of a chance to actually accomplish anything in the face of their wall-to-wall opposition. But I guess that would at least test the premise that their hatred of Obama was racist at its core.
But on the other side, there is a real and terrifying chance that Ted Cruz will end up being president. Should that occur, he actually could accomplish many of his goals, working with a GOP-lead House to overwhelm the remnants of sanity that might still exist in the Senate. Imagine Texas state politics on a national scale and then contemplate a president who fits in as a mainstream middle of the road politician by those standards.
Our only job is to elect a Democrat to the presidency. It is Bernie's conceit that he can label himself a Socialist and somehow explain that to a majority of American voters in November. If he is our nominee, Cruz wins and we lose what was once the world's leading democracy.
But on the other side, there is a real and terrifying chance that Ted Cruz will end up being president. Should that occur, he actually could accomplish many of his goals, working with a GOP-lead House to overwhelm the remnants of sanity that might still exist in the Senate. Imagine Texas state politics on a national scale and then contemplate a president who fits in as a mainstream middle of the road politician by those standards.
Our only job is to elect a Democrat to the presidency. It is Bernie's conceit that he can label himself a Socialist and somehow explain that to a majority of American voters in November. If he is our nominee, Cruz wins and we lose what was once the world's leading democracy.
11
My version of this article:
Cruz wins two states; Trump's rise, a horrible thing, is about to stop; soon he will be relegated to the outer darkness by the far superior Ted Cruz, a model nominee all right-thinking people should get behind.
On the Democratic side, Sanders won two measly states, serving merely to underscore how ridiculous continuing his hapless and hopeless campaign is to empower unicorns and leprechauns to steal free stuff from honest people.
Cruz wins two states; Trump's rise, a horrible thing, is about to stop; soon he will be relegated to the outer darkness by the far superior Ted Cruz, a model nominee all right-thinking people should get behind.
On the Democratic side, Sanders won two measly states, serving merely to underscore how ridiculous continuing his hapless and hopeless campaign is to empower unicorns and leprechauns to steal free stuff from honest people.
2
"Decisive Win for Clinton in Louisiana" says the sub-headline. Decisive? What did it decide? The Times gets a lot of complaint in these comment columns accusing it of favoring Clinton in its coverage and writing. If the paper wishes to appear balanced and fair it would help itself and its readers to use a bit more time and thought with its words. This is not the first time the heads and subheads have rung this bell.
4
I like what Bernie says but I'm voting for Hillary. Why? Because I'm afraid that Bernie Sanders will be a repeat of Jimmy Carter. Carter, whom I admire greatly as the most virtuous president of the 20th Century, couldn't get anything accomplished because Washington ate him alive. The Republicans have worked for 20 years to destroy Hillary and she's still standing. I'm voting for the person who will be able to get things done because she's learned from her mistakes and knows who her enemies are.
9
Who ever thought tne Electoral process would come to this. 5,749 passenger Cruise Ships must have something to do with it. JGAIA
The NYT's constant focus on Hillary is obnoxious! It's as if Bernie's wins do not count--one more example of the tone-deaf power elites fueling the fury of the ignored populace. There are never any headlines about Bernie. No matter what happens, the focus is on Hillary. So sick of it. I would cancel my subscription if there were anywhere else to get news.
8
In order to actually defeat Trump in the primaries, Rubio will likely have to opt out of the race. His voter ratings combined with Senator Cruz's might be enough to overcome Trump's poll numbers.
However, as long as the field remains divided, Trump will win the nomination. I would like to see a Cruz/Rubio ticket for the P/VP slot in the White House, and I think that may actually be the most electable situation, ironically.
There's been many conservatives who have vowed to boycott voting in the general should Trump be the GOP nominee, and even more moderates who will actually vote for Hillary Clinton should Trump win the primary. However, those same voters would be far more likely to vote for a Cruz/Rubio team in the general.
For these reasons, I suspect that the best way for the GOP to win the presidency is for Rubio to drop out and take a VP spot behind Cruz.
However, as long as the field remains divided, Trump will win the nomination. I would like to see a Cruz/Rubio ticket for the P/VP slot in the White House, and I think that may actually be the most electable situation, ironically.
There's been many conservatives who have vowed to boycott voting in the general should Trump be the GOP nominee, and even more moderates who will actually vote for Hillary Clinton should Trump win the primary. However, those same voters would be far more likely to vote for a Cruz/Rubio team in the general.
For these reasons, I suspect that the best way for the GOP to win the presidency is for Rubio to drop out and take a VP spot behind Cruz.
2
Trump down a notch. Cruz up a notch and now the main hope of the dismayed GOP powers to be.
Seventeen started, four remain, two of those, Rubio and Kasich hang on by a Florida and Ohio thread respectively. A harrowing ride into the night.
Looks like the battle is now Trump verses Teddy (the lesser of evils) backed by the Republican power brokers ensconced behind the green curtain.
Visions of Russian Roulette with all the chambers loaded. Brought to us all by the Party of Lincoln -- no more. Now the party of chaos.
Seventeen started, four remain, two of those, Rubio and Kasich hang on by a Florida and Ohio thread respectively. A harrowing ride into the night.
Looks like the battle is now Trump verses Teddy (the lesser of evils) backed by the Republican power brokers ensconced behind the green curtain.
Visions of Russian Roulette with all the chambers loaded. Brought to us all by the Party of Lincoln -- no more. Now the party of chaos.
3
It is deeply troubling that Mr. Cruz's status as a natural born citizen is still not resolved. There is a good case that can be made either way, but, until this very important question is resolved, everything Mr. Cruz is doing and every vote that is cast in a primary or a caucus is tainted by the possibility that Mr. Cruz is constitutionally disqualified to be president.
The facts are well known. The question is purely a legal question of a very basic nature that does not need a trial to resolve. This should be done without delay.
Similar issues overhang Mrs. Clinton, but they are much more thorny and difficult to resolve. However, if Mrs. Clinton did, in fact, misuse classified information, than, under 18 USC §2071, Mrs. Clinton would also be disqualified from holding office as president. Unfortunately, unlike the situation with Mr. Cruz, there is no quick route to a resolution of this question.
The facts are well known. The question is purely a legal question of a very basic nature that does not need a trial to resolve. This should be done without delay.
Similar issues overhang Mrs. Clinton, but they are much more thorny and difficult to resolve. However, if Mrs. Clinton did, in fact, misuse classified information, than, under 18 USC §2071, Mrs. Clinton would also be disqualified from holding office as president. Unfortunately, unlike the situation with Mr. Cruz, there is no quick route to a resolution of this question.
4
I live in suburban NYC. I'm a 1%er. Not exactly a Socialist demographic. I increasingly see Sanders lawn signs and bumper stickers around here (not a scientific survey, I grant you). To me, in this area, putting an Bernie sticker on your car represents the passionate support most of us feel for Bernie. I don't see Hillary bumper stickers.
Hillary supports are way too sensitive. It's the "why don't you like me" syndrome of the unpopular High School girl. You Hillary people need to stop worrying about whether we'll support you if you win. Yes, we will. Most of us with enthusiasm. We just want a fair shake from the MSM, we want to be able to express our passion about what Bernie stands for, and we want you all to realize that your candidate is flawed and needs to change or she could be beaten by a totally unacceptable Republican.
Fair enough?
Hillary supports are way too sensitive. It's the "why don't you like me" syndrome of the unpopular High School girl. You Hillary people need to stop worrying about whether we'll support you if you win. Yes, we will. Most of us with enthusiasm. We just want a fair shake from the MSM, we want to be able to express our passion about what Bernie stands for, and we want you all to realize that your candidate is flawed and needs to change or she could be beaten by a totally unacceptable Republican.
Fair enough?
11
Thank you Mitt!!!
I agree!
Thank you Mitt for paving the way for Donald Trump to be the GOP nominee.
Thank you Mitt for paving the way for Donald Trump to be the GOP nominee.
Let's see how HRC's handlers find a way to circumvent Democracy. It wouldn't be the first time. Go Bernie.
12
For proof that the system is rigged, I offer as Exhibit A Bill's deliberate flouting of the law as he strolled into polling places in greater Boston on Super Tuesday. Well-documented flagrant violations of the law (in one case disrupting voting for two hours) and yet nothing is done. One law for the Clintons, one law for everybody else.
1
Thats OK , NYT , we Bernie fans can survive your distorted journalism as long as Sanders keeps winning two our of three primaries. Sorry you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
16
What's really great for this lifelong Democrat to see is the utter collapse of a schizoid, bi-polar Republican Party. Cruz's couple of victories has slowed not if not halted the Trump juggernaut. That means the pain and misery for Republicans will continue, grinding them down, like mortar and pestle, and hopefully will escalate their civil war to a fever pitch right up to their convention in Cleveland.
The battle between the establishment versus the so-called outsiders is a problem which has been festering for years. Republican rank and file are rejecting their leaders. They are mutinying. And it's such a beautiful thing to see.
Republican leaders kept piling on the hate and obstructionism against President Obama to get their low-income, low-information voters to the polls to vote against their interests. What did they think they were doing? Didn't they realize even these dumb clucks would eventually catch on? But Republicans didn't tamp down their rhetoric, they doubled down. They just kept churning the pot of prejudice with no consequences.
Republican leaders thrived on the foment they used to their advantage for years. Now they are about to become the victims of their hate. Good riddance to them all. The "mistake on the Lake" a former derisive epithet used to describe Cleveland will be used now to describe the upcoming GOP convention there.
DD
Manhattan
The battle between the establishment versus the so-called outsiders is a problem which has been festering for years. Republican rank and file are rejecting their leaders. They are mutinying. And it's such a beautiful thing to see.
Republican leaders kept piling on the hate and obstructionism against President Obama to get their low-income, low-information voters to the polls to vote against their interests. What did they think they were doing? Didn't they realize even these dumb clucks would eventually catch on? But Republicans didn't tamp down their rhetoric, they doubled down. They just kept churning the pot of prejudice with no consequences.
Republican leaders thrived on the foment they used to their advantage for years. Now they are about to become the victims of their hate. Good riddance to them all. The "mistake on the Lake" a former derisive epithet used to describe Cleveland will be used now to describe the upcoming GOP convention there.
DD
Manhattan
5
Dennis,
First time I get to agree, wholeheartedly, with your comment.
Now, if only you supported Bernie, it would be terrific.
First time I get to agree, wholeheartedly, with your comment.
Now, if only you supported Bernie, it would be terrific.
1
As the Stop Trump effort shows success and momentum, more and more people will be emboldened to join in, the effort will pick up support and resources and the whole thing will gain steam.
Then as Trump grows frustrated, we will see even more offensive, crazy, worrisome pronouncements and rhetoric from his already unhinged psyche. He won't be able to handle losing the biggest prize of his, or anyone's life - a chance to be president. It will drive him mad.
Leading to more defections and condemnation of his oddball, insulting candidacy.
Then, the cycle repeats and gains more strength.
That's how this national nightmare will begin to end.
Keep up the pressure.
It will be over soon.
Then as Trump grows frustrated, we will see even more offensive, crazy, worrisome pronouncements and rhetoric from his already unhinged psyche. He won't be able to handle losing the biggest prize of his, or anyone's life - a chance to be president. It will drive him mad.
Leading to more defections and condemnation of his oddball, insulting candidacy.
Then, the cycle repeats and gains more strength.
That's how this national nightmare will begin to end.
Keep up the pressure.
It will be over soon.
1
For as much as we ridicule Trump's appearance, how does anyone think Cruz has broad appeal? I'm sorry, he looks super creepy. And his speech pattern is so coifed and nasally ... the guy sounds like a cult leader on stage doing snake rituals.
11
There was a reporter who interviewed people who knew Cruz in college. The reporter asked the question: "What words come to mind when you think of Ted Cruz," and four people separately, completely unprompted, used the word "creepy."
It's not just you. His Republican colleagues in the Senate hated him. He strikes me as the model of 1) a toxic co-worker, and 2) a complete sociopath. He shut down the government and caused 20 billion dollars in damage to the economy, just to make a political point and help his own career. I think he's more dangerous than Trump, and that is saying something.
It's not just you. His Republican colleagues in the Senate hated him. He strikes me as the model of 1) a toxic co-worker, and 2) a complete sociopath. He shut down the government and caused 20 billion dollars in damage to the economy, just to make a political point and help his own career. I think he's more dangerous than Trump, and that is saying something.
6
Saturday's Presidential Primary Results:
One of the keys I believe to understanding the results are not just victories and percentages, but number of voters. Louisiana was the key contest yesterday- with Hillary Clinton (221K votes) having 3X the number of voters than Sanders, and almost twice Trump's vote counts. The other primary states this past Saturday had tiny voter counts and were not representative of the state's population, for example: In Kansas, with a total population of 3 million, Ted Cruz: 35K votes versus Trump's 17K; and in Nebraska, with a total population of 1.9 million, Bernie Sanders won with 19K votes versus Hillary's 14K. Also, keep in mind that the number of delegates are assigned proportionally, and Hillary actually got more total delegates than Bernie on Saturday.
In my assessment Saturday's results continue to show strengths for Hillary and Trump, but MAY also reflect the hoped for slowing down of Trump- whether due to an erosion of his support, strengthening of Cruz, massive anti-Trump advertising, etc. However, the Tuesday Michigan primary will provide a better indication of whether Trump is being slowed down.
One of the keys I believe to understanding the results are not just victories and percentages, but number of voters. Louisiana was the key contest yesterday- with Hillary Clinton (221K votes) having 3X the number of voters than Sanders, and almost twice Trump's vote counts. The other primary states this past Saturday had tiny voter counts and were not representative of the state's population, for example: In Kansas, with a total population of 3 million, Ted Cruz: 35K votes versus Trump's 17K; and in Nebraska, with a total population of 1.9 million, Bernie Sanders won with 19K votes versus Hillary's 14K. Also, keep in mind that the number of delegates are assigned proportionally, and Hillary actually got more total delegates than Bernie on Saturday.
In my assessment Saturday's results continue to show strengths for Hillary and Trump, but MAY also reflect the hoped for slowing down of Trump- whether due to an erosion of his support, strengthening of Cruz, massive anti-Trump advertising, etc. However, the Tuesday Michigan primary will provide a better indication of whether Trump is being slowed down.
2
Hillary maintains her commanding lead with African-American voters, which looks like it is also going to hold outside of the South in states like Michigan according to the latest polls. And she learned her lesson from 2008 and has severely limited Sanders's delegate grabs in whiter caucus states, where he could otherwise run up the tab and catch up. Barring a Sanders win in Michigan, which does not seem likely, I think this is about over.
4
Romney supporters thought he had it in the bag, as well... until the 47% video came out. Let's wait for the transcripts/video release.
1
NY Times, your candidate Clinton wins one state to Sanders' two states, and once again you bury the story? No mention of Sanders on your front page headlines, only how Clinton maintains her "commanding lead" (which is only due to the current super delegate count.) Your only Sanders mentions are typically negative slants like today's "Don't Write Us Off' after Caucus Wins on Saturday." Such bias is a deep disservice to your readers and perilous to your reputation.
25
Bernie won two small states. Clinton's one win yesterday had more delegates than the two won by Bernie. At the end of the day, Clinton actually increased her delegate lead slightly (she gained 11 delegates on Sanders).
The commanding delegate lead you take issue with isn't taking into account super-delegates. She's over 200 delegates ahead without counting super-delegates. In 2008, at this stage, Obama had about a 100 delegate lead. Hillary was never able to catch up. Is it impossible for Bernie to win the nomination given the odds? No. Is it unlikely at this point? Yes.
The commanding delegate lead you take issue with isn't taking into account super-delegates. She's over 200 delegates ahead without counting super-delegates. In 2008, at this stage, Obama had about a 100 delegate lead. Hillary was never able to catch up. Is it impossible for Bernie to win the nomination given the odds? No. Is it unlikely at this point? Yes.
2
I take exception to what has been the consistent downplaying of Sanders by the corporate controlled press since the beginning of the primary season. Primaries are intended to flush out the issues and bring the strongest candidate to the convention and general election. Clinton's record has not yet supported the press' conclusion that she is a stronger candidate than Sanders in the general election, which is of great concern. It is deeply offensive for the mainstream press to be biased so early in the race, and to go as far as endorsing Clinton before the primary votes are cast. It only adds to the false perception that Sanders is unelectable. The press should stick to its responsibility of job of reporting objectively, and not peddle influence on behalf of their keepers. The country can no longer afford the failed status quo.
These primaries in which all the "super delegates" are awarded immediately afterwards is not democracy. Bernie has earned each one of his delegates and Hillary has been rewarded for her loyal support to the party elites of which she is one.
Sanders is bringing back democracy to America one authentic delegate at a time.
Sanders is bringing back democracy to America one authentic delegate at a time.
18
Interesting coverage. Interesting election cycle. The NYT comment section is my Sunday morning go-to for the real news.
14
"Decisive win for Clinton in Louisiana"? "Sanders' problem winning nonwhite voters"? Senator Sanders won two of the three states last night, and he won Kansas with almost as large of the percentage of the vote s Clinton won Louisiana (71-68). How about "Sanders takes to of three states"? and "Clinton's problem winning white voters"? I normally skip past the comments accusing the Times of bias, but I do think your endorsement is staring to bleed into your news coverage.
18
Idh, its been like that since day One. Bernie is so understated by the media that when he did win big in NH, it came as a surprise, then it was dismissed as, oh he is from the state next door. That is how we the people feel. The very media that is supposed to look out for us, keeps failing us.
1
If the Democrat’s “Super Delegates” number or approximately 437 (in which the NY Times even has an * stating, “Party leaders who are free to support any candidate”), who are not yet pledged, why is it that the NY Times includes them in the Hillary camp making her number look so much bigger than her opponent?
Without that super delegate count of un-pledged votes, it would be H-684 S-479. The NY Times should reflect this in their reporting. Just a thought.
Without that super delegate count of un-pledged votes, it would be H-684 S-479. The NY Times should reflect this in their reporting. Just a thought.
10
DCBarrister,
I agree entirely with your post, but I also believe Sanders is the other side of the Trump coin, the side that has true empathy, with Bernie and his supporters sincerely believing, a rising tide lifts all boats, a belief that government of the people, for the people, and by the people, should be precisely that, and nothing else.
The last several decades, in our United States, "we the people" have foolishly sat back and allowed the power elites to entirely take over all branches of our government, corrupting the idea of Democracy, reducing the poor and middle class to a life of penury, as economic slaves of the lowest order.
Why did we permit this state of affairs ? we were lulled into a false sense of security, kept distracted on a diet of Bread and Circuses, with occasional increases in the size of the breadcrumbs, if these elites recognized the discontent.
Well, they failed to see the discontent build, become complacent in their astonishing success, and now they face an end of their rule.
The mainstream media, the mouthpiece of these power elites, has been tasked with an impossible task, rein back in the discontent and bring out all tools to continue, and increase, the perception management technique that has worked so well.
Hillary is their candidate, and they use the Republican candidates as an additional weapon, aiding the perception program, sidelining as never before a candidate who is exemplary in all respects, Bernie Sanders, the peoples choice.
I agree entirely with your post, but I also believe Sanders is the other side of the Trump coin, the side that has true empathy, with Bernie and his supporters sincerely believing, a rising tide lifts all boats, a belief that government of the people, for the people, and by the people, should be precisely that, and nothing else.
The last several decades, in our United States, "we the people" have foolishly sat back and allowed the power elites to entirely take over all branches of our government, corrupting the idea of Democracy, reducing the poor and middle class to a life of penury, as economic slaves of the lowest order.
Why did we permit this state of affairs ? we were lulled into a false sense of security, kept distracted on a diet of Bread and Circuses, with occasional increases in the size of the breadcrumbs, if these elites recognized the discontent.
Well, they failed to see the discontent build, become complacent in their astonishing success, and now they face an end of their rule.
The mainstream media, the mouthpiece of these power elites, has been tasked with an impossible task, rein back in the discontent and bring out all tools to continue, and increase, the perception management technique that has worked so well.
Hillary is their candidate, and they use the Republican candidates as an additional weapon, aiding the perception program, sidelining as never before a candidate who is exemplary in all respects, Bernie Sanders, the peoples choice.
17
The Clinton team has expertly run the Nixonian Southern Strategy in reverse. Doubtful any of those states will follow a Democrat to the White House in November. The Repub double feature resembles Idiocracy vs. Fahrenheit 451. Socrates likens Trump to Il Duce, I'm coming to think of Cruz as Francisco Franco, fomenting a fascist civil war of the ugliest persuasion. The story I'm following, which Nate Cohen could feature is the demographics flocking to Sanders. The economically thriving areas of Colorado, he won 2 to 1. Clinton did not carry a single county in Minnesota. The Iowa coin toss. The white male majority for Sanders in South Carolina. Ms. Clinton has millions, she has a machine, time and fame, name and experience; but for so very many she hasn't got the stuff to make us believe in her.
14
Kansas "got it" and gave Ted Cruz a huge win over Trump when the latter looked unstoppable after his Super Tuesday stampede, and disoriented Establishment Republicans had come out in full force to try to stop the Trump Express before it got too late.
So, will we now stop asking "What's the Matter with Kansas?"
So, will we now stop asking "What's the Matter with Kansas?"
1
We've reached the point where all too many comments are going round in circles. Reminds me of elections past. But the dangers are far worse this year if either Cruz or Trump should win the general.
Please, let's all try to keep our eye on the ball: what is most important? And what is most dangerous? For us as a society.
The supporters of Cruz and especially Trump are frightening in their blind allegiance to frauds, hypocrites, dangerous and divisive attitudes.
Both Hillary and Bernie appeal to our better angels. Both bring something positive to the table. And, in my view, would be stronger together than as opponents. Dem debates are true policy events. Their audiences are respectful and polite. Which is a far, far cry from the near-bloodsport spectacles which the GOP is now staging. If any school, anywhere, held such events, the public would be alarmed! That actual adults, whether on stage or in the audience, are taking part in these shameful and alarming "events" is horrifying, an indictment of the GOP - which appears no longer to be a political party but a rabid incitement to social disorder, if not all-out social mayhem.
On the Dem side we have two candidates to be proud of. In this newspaper, The Times, we have a safe space to consider what is most important for our country. Blaming gets us nowhere. Think what matters: unity of purpose, Supreme Court, gaining the Senate, the presidency, a society of justice for ALL, equality of opportunity, peace...
Please, let's all try to keep our eye on the ball: what is most important? And what is most dangerous? For us as a society.
The supporters of Cruz and especially Trump are frightening in their blind allegiance to frauds, hypocrites, dangerous and divisive attitudes.
Both Hillary and Bernie appeal to our better angels. Both bring something positive to the table. And, in my view, would be stronger together than as opponents. Dem debates are true policy events. Their audiences are respectful and polite. Which is a far, far cry from the near-bloodsport spectacles which the GOP is now staging. If any school, anywhere, held such events, the public would be alarmed! That actual adults, whether on stage or in the audience, are taking part in these shameful and alarming "events" is horrifying, an indictment of the GOP - which appears no longer to be a political party but a rabid incitement to social disorder, if not all-out social mayhem.
On the Dem side we have two candidates to be proud of. In this newspaper, The Times, we have a safe space to consider what is most important for our country. Blaming gets us nowhere. Think what matters: unity of purpose, Supreme Court, gaining the Senate, the presidency, a society of justice for ALL, equality of opportunity, peace...
6
Trump is the last man standing after Cruz is ruled ineligible for being born outside the country and Hillary is indicted for improper handling of sensitive information.
3
Sanders wins two out of three, and your headline focuses on a decisive win for Clinton. I'm old enough to remember when the New York Times kept the editorials where they belong, on the editorial page.
30
You missed this sentence, I guess:
"That single victory was dominating enough that Mrs. Clinton netted more delegates than Mr. Sanders on the day."
"That single victory was dominating enough that Mrs. Clinton netted more delegates than Mr. Sanders on the day."
3
Sorry, but your headline does not reflect the facts. C,into may have won Louisiana, but Sanders won 2 states, and is winning or tieing Clinton outside of the old South. Clinton is supported by the DNC, Wall Street money and the African-American vote. While I do not discount the latter, a very significant demographic, Clinton is losing the kids by a wide margin, has little support among progressives, and is shaky in the Democrats' usual stronghold, white working-class voters, who are voting for Trump in frightening numbers. She is relying on superdelegates, just as in 2008, when she lost.
Aritcles in the Guardian and Nation, the first a set of interviews with Trump supporters and the second an analysis of Trump's Inroads among voters in Ohio and other, largely white working-class states, suggest that the outcome of a Clinton v. Trump contest would be far from certain, and that Sanders has more appeal to potential Trump voters then does Clinton. The NYT had better wake up to this potential disaster – a Trump victory over Clinton - lest Democrats make the same mistake that the Republicans have, by waiting until it's too late to gauge Trump's strength over the favored candidate and act to block him. I do not think Trump can beat Clinton in Ohio if curremt trends continue. Bernie can.
Sanders has 30 years experience in government, including as the senior member of a Senate committee. To dismiss him as a left-wing Trump, downplaying his successes, is simply dishonest.
Aritcles in the Guardian and Nation, the first a set of interviews with Trump supporters and the second an analysis of Trump's Inroads among voters in Ohio and other, largely white working-class states, suggest that the outcome of a Clinton v. Trump contest would be far from certain, and that Sanders has more appeal to potential Trump voters then does Clinton. The NYT had better wake up to this potential disaster – a Trump victory over Clinton - lest Democrats make the same mistake that the Republicans have, by waiting until it's too late to gauge Trump's strength over the favored candidate and act to block him. I do not think Trump can beat Clinton in Ohio if curremt trends continue. Bernie can.
Sanders has 30 years experience in government, including as the senior member of a Senate committee. To dismiss him as a left-wing Trump, downplaying his successes, is simply dishonest.
27
Maybe you'll tell me why, when Sanders won two out of three contests, the subhead reads 'Decisive Win for Clinton in Louisiana"?
26
Cool. Hillary is the Queen of the Red States. Meanwhile Trump won New Hampshire & Alabama. Examine how that would work out in the general election. This could mean a conspiracy between her & Trump to "raise the bar of super luxury living consistently" as Wall Streeters are groomed to occupy his properties here & worldwide, thus precluding typically indiscriminate neocon carpet bombing by Ted Cruz that might damage a property or occupant. Contingency thinking by American patriots. It's a win/win situation.
6
It's growing -- that persistent gnawing fear in the guts of Regime Clinton and her corporate apparatchiks. She cannot win. She loves more the idea of being president more than she loves the people over whom she will be presiding. Hers is the tragedy of a woman of great intelligence, good intent and good works whose campaign is being undone by her desire for the Ring of Power. She consorts with the demons of Wall Street and takes their evil bribes. He message morphs: "I'm a progressive !" (she's a war advocate and has a conservative authoritarian personality -- "first we must bring them [super-predators] to 'heel'). "What this country needs is more Love and Kindness (a cameo by her Dalai Lama personality.) If elected her political allegiances and authoritarian penchant will likely lead to four more years of worsening conditions for the american underclass. It's not all her fault. She played by the rules the democratic machine made her play by. She never considered -- who would ? -- that the machine would become irrelevant and tagged as part of the problem. The fact remains that the country needs candidates outside the corporate political machines -- and the obvious candidate of choice is Bernie Sanders. (Thank you SCOTUS for ruling that corporations are people. You've poured gas on the fire of corporate funding destroying our democracy. People are alarmed and beginning to act.)
16
Hillary believes that she is above the law and challenges anyone to convict her. Apparently there are a lot of Americans that agree with her.
9
Bill Clinton believes he is above law, he was out in the polling stations on the day of the primary in MA. Not overtly campaigning for Hillary but his very daunting presence send a message to the voters, vote for Hillary, or else. Yesterday Bill Clinton was in Michigan campaigning for Hillary http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/la-na-bill-clinton-bernie-sanders...
Obviously, being an insider in the corrupt system that he and Hillary are part of, entrenched in, he knows a lot about policy. He is going to live, re live his Presidency vicariously through Hillary. They have already lived in the White House for 8 years. Obama's election had rejected the Clintons. Now Hillary is portraying herself to be his heir. But do we need a continuation of Obama who failed to fulfill the vision he painted to get elected? NO. Bernie is the rightful heir to Obama because he promises the changes we truly need to transition from an oligarchy to a functioning democracy.
Obviously, being an insider in the corrupt system that he and Hillary are part of, entrenched in, he knows a lot about policy. He is going to live, re live his Presidency vicariously through Hillary. They have already lived in the White House for 8 years. Obama's election had rejected the Clintons. Now Hillary is portraying herself to be his heir. But do we need a continuation of Obama who failed to fulfill the vision he painted to get elected? NO. Bernie is the rightful heir to Obama because he promises the changes we truly need to transition from an oligarchy to a functioning democracy.
1
Witness Bill's well-documented behavior in Massachusetts on Super Tuesday for which of course he was not called to account. One law for them one, one law for everybody else.
Bloomberg has hinted again .... but NYC residents and readers of this paper (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/09/nyregion/for-some-landlords-real-money... (http://nymag.com/news/features/podolsky-homeless-shelters-2013-12/index1... know how Bloomberg's real-estate cronies arranged to get thousands of low-income working New Yorkers out of their homes, and how the landlords then made fortunes renting these spaces to the city for five or ten times as much.
Imagine what awaits working-class America with Bloomberg as president! https://www.facebook.com/Block-Bloombergs-Presidential-ambitions-5592217...
Imagine what awaits working-class America with Bloomberg as president! https://www.facebook.com/Block-Bloombergs-Presidential-ambitions-5592217...
4
remember how bloomberg corrupted the law to run a third term?
"Decisive Win", How does winning one third while your opponent wins two thirds of the Saturday contests become decisive? It appears that the New York Time's investment in the Hillary/Bill Clinton campaign for a third term has clouded your political judgement. What next a picture of the Clinton Twins on the NYT masthead?
The Hillary/Bill Clinton campaign is nothing more than a sentimental political trip back to the 90's where they sold out the middle-class to Wall Street and the Banksters.
Perhaps their new campaign slogan will be "Two for the Price of One!!!! Unfortunately that price will only further devastate the middle-class and working poor in favor of Clinton Foundation Contributors.
The Hillary/Bill Clinton campaign is nothing more than a sentimental political trip back to the 90's where they sold out the middle-class to Wall Street and the Banksters.
Perhaps their new campaign slogan will be "Two for the Price of One!!!! Unfortunately that price will only further devastate the middle-class and working poor in favor of Clinton Foundation Contributors.
25
Cruz's wins are probably a good thing. Bear with me a moment here. (I know how odious he is.)
Repubs cannot stand either him or Trump. All they want is for Cruz to take enough votes that Trump can't get a qualifying majority. Meanwhile, Cruz and Rubio have been destroying themselves for the general by their crudeness in responding to the crude Trump.
That tepid mess will lead to a convention that nominates someone else entirely—perhaps Paul Ryan.
Anyway, that's what I'm thinking. The Repub establishment doesn't want Trump, but they're not going to reward Cruz either.
Repubs cannot stand either him or Trump. All they want is for Cruz to take enough votes that Trump can't get a qualifying majority. Meanwhile, Cruz and Rubio have been destroying themselves for the general by their crudeness in responding to the crude Trump.
That tepid mess will lead to a convention that nominates someone else entirely—perhaps Paul Ryan.
Anyway, that's what I'm thinking. The Repub establishment doesn't want Trump, but they're not going to reward Cruz either.
3
Hillary will be indicted. Trump will be sandbagged by GOP.
I am hoping for Bernie vs Cruz
I am hoping for Bernie vs Cruz
7
The politicized Obama Justice Department will NEVER indict Hillary. They only go after political opponents. Hillary is quite safe from prosecution. It's a sad commentary on a country in which you could count on fairness under law, but that train left the station as soon as Obama became president. Now we are like any other corrupt, banana republic.
I predict the following: Trump gets his number before the convention and announces Cruz as his running mate. Cruz accepts. The ticket prevails at the convention.
The Sanders supporters are the biggest whiners I have ever seen in politics.
Just read the comments below: saying Hillary has more pledged delegates is somehow dishonest, saying he "took two" somehow assumes they were hers (did you guys ever read a sports page? It's a common headline), they say superdelegates are a "fix" (um, no, they have been part of the process for decades), they say her states "don't count".
It is tiresome and childish.
Just read the comments below: saying Hillary has more pledged delegates is somehow dishonest, saying he "took two" somehow assumes they were hers (did you guys ever read a sports page? It's a common headline), they say superdelegates are a "fix" (um, no, they have been part of the process for decades), they say her states "don't count".
It is tiresome and childish.
11
Note to Bernie supporters: the comments section of the NYT is not a personal caucus for Sanders. Breathe.
12
Ted Cruz' strategy is wrong. The goal is to deny Trump the majority of the delegates. In a two person race someone gets a majority. Refer to the 2008 race between Clinton and Obama, which was the closest race in history. If Rubio drops out, Trump most likely gets the nomination. Cruz' decision to expand his effort in Florida and Ohio serves to increase the likelihood of Trump winning both of these winner take all states. He should be aiming for Michigan and Mississippi. Besides, Rubio and Cruz appeal to different voters so there's no way to know whose votes Rubio's supporters would go to if he dropped out.
The media had nothing to say about Bernie until he lost something or there was a coordinated campaign to destroy him with his "self" proclaimed social democracy. Then he was accused of having done nothing after 40 years in local representation as a mayor or as a state representative in Congress. Then he won about 70% of the vote in the recent Democratic primary. Boy, does this guy know how to pull the wool over the voters. Or does he? Seems more like a lot of people he represents respect him as much as he respects them.
On the other side of this equation we hear a candidate for president continually and continuously say things as, " I will do (add the rest)." or "I can do (again add content)." Or "I will take care of (add content). or "I will ......"
The only consistency is the "I". Bernie says, "We will (add content)" or "Together, we will (add content)."
One candidate has or expresses a patronizing plantation attitude. The other speaks to collective democratic action. You decide which is which and which is your understanding of democracy and respect. One person's language says, "I will take care of you." while the other says, "Together we will solve the problems we all face."
One candidate says she is the most transparent.... while denyiong requests to release secret speeches to Wall Street for $600,000 plus dollars and use of PACs. Her response to date: "Well, that's what they (Wall Street) offered!"
Americans have a choice to make. Think Bernie.
Thank you.
On the other side of this equation we hear a candidate for president continually and continuously say things as, " I will do (add the rest)." or "I can do (again add content)." Or "I will take care of (add content). or "I will ......"
The only consistency is the "I". Bernie says, "We will (add content)" or "Together, we will (add content)."
One candidate has or expresses a patronizing plantation attitude. The other speaks to collective democratic action. You decide which is which and which is your understanding of democracy and respect. One person's language says, "I will take care of you." while the other says, "Together we will solve the problems we all face."
One candidate says she is the most transparent.... while denyiong requests to release secret speeches to Wall Street for $600,000 plus dollars and use of PACs. Her response to date: "Well, that's what they (Wall Street) offered!"
Americans have a choice to make. Think Bernie.
Thank you.
20
The sanctimonious Clintonites seem to have a serious persecution complex.
A word of caution to Clinton supporters, relax, there is a whole lot more worry ahead, for your candidate.
Bernie will rack up oodles more delegates as the electorate starts to feel that delightful "Bern".
I trust that disappointment in Hillarys' loss will not affect the mentality of her supporters, and they will naturally vote for Bernie, just as surely as we Bernie supporters would vote for Hillary, in the unlikely possibility she could be the nominee.
Our job, regardless, is to not let any Republican be our 45th., President.
A word of caution to Clinton supporters, relax, there is a whole lot more worry ahead, for your candidate.
Bernie will rack up oodles more delegates as the electorate starts to feel that delightful "Bern".
I trust that disappointment in Hillarys' loss will not affect the mentality of her supporters, and they will naturally vote for Bernie, just as surely as we Bernie supporters would vote for Hillary, in the unlikely possibility she could be the nominee.
Our job, regardless, is to not let any Republican be our 45th., President.
11
I'm a Clinton supporter and I'll never vote for Bernie. A man who visited the USSR when dissidents were rotting in camps? I'd as soon vote for a Nazi as for a socialist.
If you are a true Hillary supporter, you cannot abide the thought of a Cruz, or a Trump, as your President.
And if you do not vote, that's just as bad.
And if you do not vote, that's just as bad.
1
How telling about our current political environment - Republican insiders scrambling to figure out how to beat Trump and Democrat insiders stacking the superdelegates against Sanders.
Its time insiders realize that a large number of citizens want to replace the establishment, which has disappointed the electorate for decades.
As the Politico petition to the Democratic Party states [and it also applies to the Republican Party], “The race for the [Democratic] Party nomination should be decided by who gets the most votes, and not who has the most support from party insiders.“ http://pac.petitions.moveon.org/sign/superdelegates-dont-deny
Its time insiders realize that a large number of citizens want to replace the establishment, which has disappointed the electorate for decades.
As the Politico petition to the Democratic Party states [and it also applies to the Republican Party], “The race for the [Democratic] Party nomination should be decided by who gets the most votes, and not who has the most support from party insiders.“ http://pac.petitions.moveon.org/sign/superdelegates-dont-deny
10
Ted Cruz reminds me of the Martin Sheen character in the Stephen King movie "The Dead Zone". Especially with his making the sand glow comment.
3
Oh please New York Times. What is is going to take for you to acknowledge that Bernie Sanders IS a viable candidate? I can think of two things: He wins the nomination, OR he wins the general election. Your game is so blatantly obvious it makes my skin crawl. I have a head full of quandary as I seriously considered cancelling my digital subscription with your endorsement of HRC - but I could not, there are other things I enjoy in the paper. But really, it is really getting old.
23
Steve, Sanders is not a viable candidate due to the Democratic party's super delegate systems, with hundreds pledged to Hillary from the outset. Sanders just provides token opposition in order to create the illusion of a contest for Hillary. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that he is on the Clinton campaign payroll.
Commenters keep on asking why on earth African-American voters support Clinton over Sanders by such huge margins. It's not that hard to figure out. Clinton loyally served as Secretary of State under the nation's first black president. When offered the job, she accepted it rather than turning it down as an unappealing consolation prize.
In recent weeks people have been reminded that Sanders explicitly called for a primary challenge to President Obama in his 2012 re-election campaign. I don't think African-Americans appreciated this call by Sanders for Obama to be primaried. Had that happened, a la Ted Kennedy challenging Jimmy Carter in 1980, Obama would have been seriously weakened rather than strengthened and his general election campaign against Romney likely would have ended in a far narrower electoral vote breakdown.
Also, as I've written before, I just don't think voting on the basis of hostility to Wall Street is a top priority for African-Americans. This doesn't mean they are unaware of Wall Street as a problem, but they don't seem obsessed like Sanders.
FWIW, I wish Obama had considered Sanders for a cabinet appointment. Obama has gone so far out of his way to include Republicans in his cabinet (Chuck Hagel, Ray LaHood, Robert Gates) that balancing things out with a left-wing independent like Sanders would have sent a supportive signal to the left wing of the Democratic Party. Sanders was absolutely correct to vote against Geithner for Treasury, for example.
In recent weeks people have been reminded that Sanders explicitly called for a primary challenge to President Obama in his 2012 re-election campaign. I don't think African-Americans appreciated this call by Sanders for Obama to be primaried. Had that happened, a la Ted Kennedy challenging Jimmy Carter in 1980, Obama would have been seriously weakened rather than strengthened and his general election campaign against Romney likely would have ended in a far narrower electoral vote breakdown.
Also, as I've written before, I just don't think voting on the basis of hostility to Wall Street is a top priority for African-Americans. This doesn't mean they are unaware of Wall Street as a problem, but they don't seem obsessed like Sanders.
FWIW, I wish Obama had considered Sanders for a cabinet appointment. Obama has gone so far out of his way to include Republicans in his cabinet (Chuck Hagel, Ray LaHood, Robert Gates) that balancing things out with a left-wing independent like Sanders would have sent a supportive signal to the left wing of the Democratic Party. Sanders was absolutely correct to vote against Geithner for Treasury, for example.
5
Secretary of State is an unappealing consolation prize? Clinton, nor Obama, were projected to win. That's the best outcome she could have had. It set her up with more experience and name recognition, for her most important cause: to be President.
According to the graphic, yesterday Clinton won 55 delegates and Sanders won 49. Yet the headline proclaims Clinton had a "decisive" win.
Why not just a headline that says "Clinton wins 55 delegates; Sanders 49." Why not stick to the facts?
I'm neither a Sanders nor a Clinton supporter.
Why not just a headline that says "Clinton wins 55 delegates; Sanders 49." Why not stick to the facts?
I'm neither a Sanders nor a Clinton supporter.
18
The headline *actually* says "Decisive Win for Clinton in Louisiana." Given the margin of victory in that state, it's hard to view that lede as anything other than accurate.
2
Hillary has only won 2 blue states and that was by very narrow margins. Her mojo is all in red states through the minority black vote. How can she win a general election?
Bernie's support won't flock to Hillary, particulalrly with the patronizing media being so biased against our candidate. I know I won't.
Bernie 2016 is the only real choice. Hillary is who should leave the race.
Bernie's support won't flock to Hillary, particulalrly with the patronizing media being so biased against our candidate. I know I won't.
Bernie 2016 is the only real choice. Hillary is who should leave the race.
16
If Clinton becomes the candidate, and Bernie supporters refuse to vote for her, it will become abundantly clear that they care nothing for this country. That you would contribute to any of the Republican nominees becoming president, whether actively or passively, tells us all we need to know about you.
2
Cruz wins 2 of 4, and "keeps up the pressure." Clinton loses 2 of 3, and "does not alter the contours of the race."
If this were a sport, it would the Bizarro World Series.
If this were a sport, it would the Bizarro World Series.
9
Good for Cruz - he would be easier to beat that Trump I think, since it is said that 'everybody' hates him. Hillary will probably get the nomination and probably win by a respectable margin in November, but I wish I felt better about her.
Not that I'm negative, just not super positive. It wouldn't take much to distract me in November.
Not that I'm negative, just not super positive. It wouldn't take much to distract me in November.
Why is your headline, "Decisive Win for Clinton in Louisiana," rather than "Decisive Win for Sanders in two out of three states"?
25
That's easy to answer. Louisiana was a primary state--which mirrored what an actual general election "win" would be like. The entire state went to the poll like would be the case in a regular election. Caucuses aren't like a regular election. They're more like pep rallies with tedious rules and, for some, difficult to participate in. So if you win by a large margin in a primary election that's pretty decisive. To elevate a couple of "pep rally" wins in caucus states as some kind of huge statewide victory would be to misrepresent the significance as being the equivalent of an actual statewide election. Not that getting some delegates out of caucus states isn't important. But if you can't win in a state the way you would have to do so in a general election, a caucus win is less significant as an indicator of actual statewide support.
6
Correction: March 5, 2016
Because of an editing error, an earlier version of this article incorrectly described the vote in Kentucky in one reference. It was a caucus, not a primary.
But the Times can be forgiven.
After all, Kentucky only changed from a primary to a caucus system on the Republican side in August:
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08/23/politics/rand-paul-kentucky-caucus/
to specifically accommodate its favorite son, Rand Paul, so he could be kosher with the electoral rules in the Republican Party of Kentucky, which would not allow Senator Paul to run on both the senatorial (reelection) line and the presidential line on the ballot in November.
Oh, you remember Rand Paul, don't you?
Because of an editing error, an earlier version of this article incorrectly described the vote in Kentucky in one reference. It was a caucus, not a primary.
But the Times can be forgiven.
After all, Kentucky only changed from a primary to a caucus system on the Republican side in August:
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08/23/politics/rand-paul-kentucky-caucus/
to specifically accommodate its favorite son, Rand Paul, so he could be kosher with the electoral rules in the Republican Party of Kentucky, which would not allow Senator Paul to run on both the senatorial (reelection) line and the presidential line on the ballot in November.
Oh, you remember Rand Paul, don't you?
1
It would be interesting to know what the popular vote is in the primaries.
Democrats need to energize voters if they want to prevent the Trump/Cruz looming disaster. The number of comments in a blog, passionate as they may be, don't make up for the lack of voter turnout. (And no, it is not the media's fault for giving Mr.Trump so much free advertising . That just means that the candidates have to pay for what Mr. Trump so cleverly has gotten for free.
Democrats need to energize voters if they want to prevent the Trump/Cruz looming disaster. The number of comments in a blog, passionate as they may be, don't make up for the lack of voter turnout. (And no, it is not the media's fault for giving Mr.Trump so much free advertising . That just means that the candidates have to pay for what Mr. Trump so cleverly has gotten for free.
2
Clinton is a Southern Dem who did not make the switch. She can't win out side of the deep South.
8
I am an Independent Voter....and vote for honesty and experience....first
and ability to ....be bipartisan....
With this in mind: I like John Kasich....who has experience and has governed/
is governing.
With this in mind: I like Bernie Sanders....who also has experience and has
governed (Mayor of Burlington, VT)...
When one has the experience of being bipartisan....successfully...then one
is qualified to be a candidate for President of the USA..
Hillary....has not been an elected official who has governed in a bipartisan
way...and she her integrity is being investigated by the FBI.
So...I think we should be behind those who have proven records of honesty and
ability to govern.
and ability to ....be bipartisan....
With this in mind: I like John Kasich....who has experience and has governed/
is governing.
With this in mind: I like Bernie Sanders....who also has experience and has
governed (Mayor of Burlington, VT)...
When one has the experience of being bipartisan....successfully...then one
is qualified to be a candidate for President of the USA..
Hillary....has not been an elected official who has governed in a bipartisan
way...and she her integrity is being investigated by the FBI.
So...I think we should be behind those who have proven records of honesty and
ability to govern.
9
The so called GOP “establishment" is reeling, unable or unwilling to embrace the stark reality that a shady, bloviating liar is hardening the image of the party as a symbol of intolerance and division, whose quest for the presidency revolves around targeting religious and racial minorities and people with disabilities, who flirts with white supremacists and who has turned vicious ridiculing and slandering of those who disagree with him into a new political art-form. He makes a mockery of Paul Ryan’s assertion that the GOP “does not prey on people’s prejudices. It appeals to their highest ideals. This is the party of Lincoln.”
5
The Republican Party serves 1% oligarchs.
The difference with Trump is that he is an oligarch, he's not bought by one.
That's why people vote for him.
The difference with Trump is that he is an oligarch, he's not bought by one.
That's why people vote for him.
The Main Stream Media has consistently belittled the Sanders Campaign. If anyone writes about how frustrating this "slight" is, Sanders supporters are taken to task for being "vitriolic". Yet, when Bill Clinton is seen breaking election laws in Mass. and a petition by "the public" is put in place to hold Clinton accountable, the press is silent. Silent.
IN MASS. (days ago) Bill Clinton was seen electioneering. Just IMAGINE if anyone had been doing such a thing for Sen. Sanders. Wasserman Schultz would not tolerate electioneering if it were a "Sanders Issue".
This is a double standard and the public doesn't want anyone shoved down their throats. This delegate/super-delegate issue really has to be opened up to public scrutiny. Hi-jacking political parties in this manner has to end.
This is the most biased election coverage, and the people can see it. So they started a petition about Bill Clinton's illegal electioneering in MASS. and over 100,000 people have signed. There is video tape and he's clearly breaking the law.
But Sen. Sanders is hidden from the public. If he's such a non-event why not let your readers see it?
https://www.change.org/p/massachusetts-attorney-general-maura-healey-arr...
IN MASS. (days ago) Bill Clinton was seen electioneering. Just IMAGINE if anyone had been doing such a thing for Sen. Sanders. Wasserman Schultz would not tolerate electioneering if it were a "Sanders Issue".
This is a double standard and the public doesn't want anyone shoved down their throats. This delegate/super-delegate issue really has to be opened up to public scrutiny. Hi-jacking political parties in this manner has to end.
This is the most biased election coverage, and the people can see it. So they started a petition about Bill Clinton's illegal electioneering in MASS. and over 100,000 people have signed. There is video tape and he's clearly breaking the law.
But Sen. Sanders is hidden from the public. If he's such a non-event why not let your readers see it?
https://www.change.org/p/massachusetts-attorney-general-maura-healey-arr...
16
Give credit where credit is due. Bernie won 2 our of 3 states. When the NY Times diminishes his victories the voters feel shut out, unheard, and ignored. This unbalanced coverage is helping to drive some Bernie supporters away from Hillary.
22
I know the Times endorsed Clinton but Sanders has earned more positive coverage. Clinton will not drive people to the polls and actually drives many away. Sanders has a far better chance, according to national polls, of beating Trump. It's time for the kind of populism and integrity that Sanders represents and people know it.
13
Hillary has a burden to prove...that she is worthy of trust; and perhaps...
is the question lurking ....Her husband was almost impeached...
so
The general doubt about Hillary ...is...her lack of good judgment.
is the question lurking ....Her husband was almost impeached...
so
The general doubt about Hillary ...is...her lack of good judgment.
1
I fully support HRC. If Sanders get the nomination, I will vote for Sanders. C'mon Democrats and Independents (and Republicans are welcome, too), please get out and vote for the eventual Democratic nominee.
12
HRC.....has the burden to prove that ....we could really trust her.
And the same could be said of EVERY candidate...
1
I'm not sure what to make of all the Hillary-bashing. Yes, I like Sanders but I'd also like to WIN. Hillary is good enough. Sanders can't win a national election.
And who would YOU rather appoint the next Supreme Court Justice? Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, or Hillary?
And who would YOU rather appoint the next Supreme Court Justice? Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, or Hillary?
11
You are incorrect. Check any national/general election poll you want, from Fox to CNN--Sanders beats all Republicans by more than Clinton; Sanders is the only candidate from either party to have a majority approval rating. Go vote for Clinton if you want, but don't do it on a mistaken perception of Sanders electability.
1
The primary results so far confirm that Clinton will hardly be electable. Hilary will, in a general election, energize the conservatives while Bernie energizes the young democratic and independent voters in the states that matter. Go Bernie for a new New Deal for America.
11
Who will be running our Treasury Department, if Hillary is elected; methinks the status quo continues.
Intercept excerpt and Link -
"Goldman Sachs paid Hillary Clinton $675,000 for three speeches, but a bigger Wall Street player stands ready to mold and enact her economic and financial policy if she becomes president.
BlackRock is far from a household name, but it is the largest asset management firm in the world, controlling $4.6 trillion in investor funds — about a trillion dollars more than the annual federal budget, and five times the assets of Goldman Sachs. And Larry Fink, BlackRock’s CEO, has assembled a veritable shadow government full of former Treasury Department officials at his company.
Fink has made clear his desire to become treasury secretary someday. The Obama administration had him on the short list to replace Timothy Geithner. When that didn’t materialize, he pulled several members of prior Treasury Departments into high-level positions at the firm, which may improve the prospects of realizing his dream in a future Clinton administration. And his priorities appear to be so in sync with Clinton’s that it’s not entirely clear who shares whose agenda. Clinton, for her part, has refused to rule out a treasury secretary drawn from Wall Street. Fink’s ready-made team available for a move from Wall Street to Washington includes:"
https://theintercept.com/2016/03/02/larry-fink-and-his-blackrock-team-po...
Intercept excerpt and Link -
"Goldman Sachs paid Hillary Clinton $675,000 for three speeches, but a bigger Wall Street player stands ready to mold and enact her economic and financial policy if she becomes president.
BlackRock is far from a household name, but it is the largest asset management firm in the world, controlling $4.6 trillion in investor funds — about a trillion dollars more than the annual federal budget, and five times the assets of Goldman Sachs. And Larry Fink, BlackRock’s CEO, has assembled a veritable shadow government full of former Treasury Department officials at his company.
Fink has made clear his desire to become treasury secretary someday. The Obama administration had him on the short list to replace Timothy Geithner. When that didn’t materialize, he pulled several members of prior Treasury Departments into high-level positions at the firm, which may improve the prospects of realizing his dream in a future Clinton administration. And his priorities appear to be so in sync with Clinton’s that it’s not entirely clear who shares whose agenda. Clinton, for her part, has refused to rule out a treasury secretary drawn from Wall Street. Fink’s ready-made team available for a move from Wall Street to Washington includes:"
https://theintercept.com/2016/03/02/larry-fink-and-his-blackrock-team-po...
12
Looking at yesterday's results: Sanders wins 2 states to Clinton's 1. That's in spite of the fact that she received more than twice the number of votes than he did across all of the 3 Democratic contests. Yet her big wins in the larger states make her a less suitable candidate than his lesser wins in the smaller states?
4
Most of her wins are in Red States that probably won't yield any electoral votes for the Democrats. His are mostly in blue States.
1
Sanders Takes Two States From Clinton — your headline and subliminal message.
Did they belong to her? — as apportioned by mandate from above. We know where your preferences lay. We also know the anti-democratic DNC machine is force feeding its darling down our gullets.
The Republican electorate is in open rebellion, reclaiming its democratic voice. Ironically, mercenary agents of power brokers and plutocrats are muffling the Democratic electorate’s voice.
But you still have a responsibility to your readers, to the People..."At long last, have you left no sense of [journalistic] decency?"
Did they belong to her? — as apportioned by mandate from above. We know where your preferences lay. We also know the anti-democratic DNC machine is force feeding its darling down our gullets.
The Republican electorate is in open rebellion, reclaiming its democratic voice. Ironically, mercenary agents of power brokers and plutocrats are muffling the Democratic electorate’s voice.
But you still have a responsibility to your readers, to the People..."At long last, have you left no sense of [journalistic] decency?"
10
Now how often you guys are going to change from Hillary being the winner to Bernie the winner and back.
And don't you think readers will notice?
Or has the Art departement finally -(and hopefully) taken over and this is the beginning of thelong awaited ultimate NYT-Erection-Performance-ART-Peace?
And don't you think readers will notice?
Or has the Art departement finally -(and hopefully) taken over and this is the beginning of thelong awaited ultimate NYT-Erection-Performance-ART-Peace?
3
Who will be running our Treasury Department, if Hillary is elected; can I say the status quo continues.
Intercept excerpt and Link -
"Goldman Sachs paid Hillary Clinton $675,000 for three speeches, but a bigger Wall Street player stands ready to mold and enact her economic and financial policy if she becomes president.
BlackRock is far from a household name, but it is the largest asset management firm in the world, controlling $4.6 trillion in investor funds — about a trillion dollars more than the annual federal budget, and five times the assets of Goldman Sachs. And Larry Fink, BlackRock’s CEO, has assembled a veritable shadow government full of former Treasury Department officials at his company.
Fink has made clear his desire to become treasury secretary someday. The Obama administration had him on the short list to replace Timothy Geithner. When that didn’t materialize, he pulled several members of prior Treasury Departments into high-level positions at the firm, which may improve the prospects of realizing his dream in a future Clinton administration. And his priorities appear to be so in sync with Clinton’s that it’s not entirely clear who shares whose agenda. Clinton, for her part, has refused to rule out a treasury secretary drawn from Wall Street. Fink’s ready-made team available for a move from Wall Street to Washington includes:"
https://theintercept.com/2016/03/02/larry-fink-and-his-blackrock-team-po...
Intercept excerpt and Link -
"Goldman Sachs paid Hillary Clinton $675,000 for three speeches, but a bigger Wall Street player stands ready to mold and enact her economic and financial policy if she becomes president.
BlackRock is far from a household name, but it is the largest asset management firm in the world, controlling $4.6 trillion in investor funds — about a trillion dollars more than the annual federal budget, and five times the assets of Goldman Sachs. And Larry Fink, BlackRock’s CEO, has assembled a veritable shadow government full of former Treasury Department officials at his company.
Fink has made clear his desire to become treasury secretary someday. The Obama administration had him on the short list to replace Timothy Geithner. When that didn’t materialize, he pulled several members of prior Treasury Departments into high-level positions at the firm, which may improve the prospects of realizing his dream in a future Clinton administration. And his priorities appear to be so in sync with Clinton’s that it’s not entirely clear who shares whose agenda. Clinton, for her part, has refused to rule out a treasury secretary drawn from Wall Street. Fink’s ready-made team available for a move from Wall Street to Washington includes:"
https://theintercept.com/2016/03/02/larry-fink-and-his-blackrock-team-po...
7
As Cruz evidently begins to emerge from the netherworld of Republican primary politics, I seriously wonder if the guy has any core beliefs at all. Indeed, he scares the living daylights out of me. I may be buying some property in San Miguel Allende if this guy winds up in the White House.
5
I think it's worth pointing out the Alan Greenspan, appointed by Ronald Reagan, and who went on to serve G.H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and G.W. Bush called Bill Clinton "the most Republican President he served." So I really wonder who the GOP is really hoping for considering their general disdain for bot Trump and Cruz, but it also goes a long way in explaining why Sanders' supporters find Hillary so repugnant.
3
For all those who think Sanders people will not vote for Clinton or Clinton supporters for Sanders, give it up.
The democrat motto in 2016 is VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO!!!!
We have an embarrassment of riches, while the GOP is simply an embarrassment.
The GOP has a foul mess they can't clean off of themselves and it will stink of failure long after it is dead and buried.
The democrat motto in 2016 is VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO!!!!
We have an embarrassment of riches, while the GOP is simply an embarrassment.
The GOP has a foul mess they can't clean off of themselves and it will stink of failure long after it is dead and buried.
9
I definitely lean towards Clinton, but I'm annoyed that after Sanders wins two states and she, one, the headline is "Decisive Win for Clinton in Louisiana" with a subarticle "'Don't Write Us Off,' Sanders Says."
I come to this site for the news, you know, a factual accounting of events that transpired previously. Every day, it seems less like the NYT is interested in offering that. I hope you are aware that some people still want to read a newspaper, not collect opinion tidbits for Facebook.
I come to this site for the news, you know, a factual accounting of events that transpired previously. Every day, it seems less like the NYT is interested in offering that. I hope you are aware that some people still want to read a newspaper, not collect opinion tidbits for Facebook.
18
Fascinating.
Just when I thought that there is no way Trump can be contained, Cruz picks up even more steam and emerges as his major rival for the nomination.
Probably if Rubio and Kasich dropped out, Cruz, who is the most hated person in the Senate from both sides of the aisle, might indeed deny Trump the magic number of delegates to avoid a contested nomination.
Kasich will drop out after he loses Ohio in a week.
But Rubio will not drop out.
And that will make it even more interesting.
Trump senses that he is in trouble.
Nonetheless, whether Cruz is nominated in a contested convention and Trump, true to form, goes rogue, or Trump is nominated, the GOP loses either way.
Just when I thought that there is no way Trump can be contained, Cruz picks up even more steam and emerges as his major rival for the nomination.
Probably if Rubio and Kasich dropped out, Cruz, who is the most hated person in the Senate from both sides of the aisle, might indeed deny Trump the magic number of delegates to avoid a contested nomination.
Kasich will drop out after he loses Ohio in a week.
But Rubio will not drop out.
And that will make it even more interesting.
Trump senses that he is in trouble.
Nonetheless, whether Cruz is nominated in a contested convention and Trump, true to form, goes rogue, or Trump is nominated, the GOP loses either way.
2
When Trumps says he will bring back waterboarding it simply means that in times of increasing terrorism and crimes you dont make statements that you are reducing harsh punishments.How does that make him a violent person?When he said he will ban muslims, it only meant, he is going to be stricter about them entering the country.The wall idea was agreed and used by Cruz and Rubio in the last couple of debates.Trump is also the only person in the whole lot who has again again denouced more aggression in the middle east.TRUMP DOES NOT WANT MORE WAR.People please watch these debates and draw your own conclusions.Don't believe everything you read.TRUMP IS against war and violence.There's a lot of hate out there, look around,its not coming from Trump Supporters.Things are getting scary.All of these cannot be because of Trump's policies?Since when did any President do everything that they promised?This hate against Trump is to stop him from entering the White house and spilling the beans on some of the biggest secrets.And so, they will do anything and everything to stop him.
I am NOT a Trump fan, and I believe him to be a danger to America if he were within several miles of the Presidency. But I am appalled at the media meme (as represented in this article) that Trump alluded, without provocation, to his penis in the last Republican debate. Trump, notoriously angered by personal insults (really--as if he never engages in them) was responding to Marco Rubio's smarmy joke about this on the campaign trail. Neither of these people is fit for the Presidency. But get your thumb off the scale, NYTimes, and focus on accurate reporting.
4
Pathetic is the only word to describe The New York Times coverage of this election. Beating the drum for the war in Iraq was I thought your low point but The Times has surprised me with your unfiltered bias for Clinton, perhaps the least trusted, least liked even by her "base"consisting mainly of Wallstreeters and A.I.P.A.C., most egregious example of a bought and paid for politician in our history. We should have known when the credible columnists on your staff,as well as Bill Keller, started leaving or were dismissed. What has happened to responsible journalism? Even more reason to support the one man not on the payroll of the neocons and banksters! Bernie won two states last night that's twice as many as Queen Hillary won, really difficult to spin that one but you tried. PATHETIC!
18
really dont care about the republicans ...they wont get it...period.... doesn't matter who runs or wins
2
My husband and I have a new game. It's called "Guessing the Slanted Headline." After every primary or caucus, we try to figure out how the NYT headlines writers will spin the news to make sure it is as positive as possible for Clinton.
Today's was the best so far! Keep it up! We may be able to turn this into a drinking game soon!
Today's was the best so far! Keep it up! We may be able to turn this into a drinking game soon!
17
I agree with Samders' lament that his candidacy is disturbing the media narrative of Clinton's march hand in glove with special interests to the nomination no matter his appeal. The correct narrative is that but for the captured black vote she is being rejected by most Democrats. His revolution is happening. I think the focus of media attention should be on the black vote and what is happening there.
10
Actually, HC has won more Democratic votes so far -- that's why she has a substantial delegate lead (not counting Super Delegates). So it's flat out incorrect to say she's being rejected by "most Democrats." And her voters represent a more diverse demographic mix than Sander's, who is dominating mostly among white and younger voters.
3
More people voted in the Democratic Primary in Louisiana than in the Republican one. In a red state! That could be a really good sign for the Democrats, particularly Clinton's ability to do well in the South in the general. I still like Bernie better though.
2
The Republican establishment will back Cruz all the way to a brokered convention then discard him just as they want to discard Donald Trump...he is even more dangerous than Trump. At least Trump kind of "tells it like it is" on the trail. Cruz on the other hand, puts on the solemn face of a savior on the trail but hopes to become king of his own interpretation of the Constitution. If he should win, look forward to four more years of doing nothing in Washington. He is much more frightening than Trump, and the Republican's that back him now will ultimately nominate a candidate of their own choosing - and one who could beat Hillary Clinton (or so they think).
1
Sanders wins 2 states to Clinton 1, with a similar delegates count and the headline is a decisive win for the second! This is why I have recently stopped my subscription to the NYT, and I think the next step is to stop once and for all paying visit to your website! Journalism dies from the very moment you start disregarding the intellectual capacities of your readers. In the wide information spectrum from the ideal neutral press at one end to the propaganda organs at the other one, there's no doubt as to where NYT is shifting towards... Good luck to You The People of America!
10
Sanders is doing as well as he is because of a certain amount of what may be called charisma and because HRC hasn't really taken off the gloves. And that's probably a good idea, since we want a united party going into the general election. So far she's stayed away from painting him as a soft-on-defense Socialist, incapable of working effectively in Washington, and a loser in the general election. Let's hope things stay this way.
7
The NYT is seems to be shameless in its blatant bias toward Clinton. Headlining Clinton's win in Louisiana, an historically red state, is not big news. While Sanders takes two more state and continues to draw historic attendance at his rallies. All the while the NYT plasters Trump across the pages, everyday, relentlessly. Do you really think that all your readers what to hear about is the disfunction of the Republicans and the rubber stamping of Clinton? Time to wake up.
15
I can't believe that anyone is buying what Cruz has to say. He is just another politician who will promise the voters everything in order to get their votes and once elected will do absolutely nothing. I'll take my chances with Trump. He certainly can't do any worse than the others we have been foolish enough to elect, based on their promises to make things better, only to watch them make things worse than ever.
3
First off I want to say that I love the nyt. It's because of this that I feel obligated to express my concern about the clear pro-Clinton bias in your recent headlines. Today was a perfect example. Of the 4 candidates that won outright, only Sanders' name was missing from the headline. In fact, the title - "Decisive win for Clinton in Louisiana" gives the false impression that Clinton won the night, when in fact she and Sanders essentially split the delegate count. I am a Clinton supporter, so my perspective is at worst objective on this point, and I still think the bias here is glaring. The New York Times is supposed to be better than this.
11
Interesting and delusional title to this article. Is Clinton's 73% win much more decisive than Sanders' 68% win--particularly considering Sanders won Kansas?
14
Yesterday Hillary received 248,442 votes Bernie got 117639. And shed won more delegates
3
I am sure that I won't be the first to say this, nor the last, but the pro-Hillary Clinton bias the New York Times exhibits on a regular basis is starting to get annoying.
Bernie is the one bringing in many new young voters into the Democratic Party. He is also the one who polls better head-to-head against all the Republican candidates among independents.
Most of all Bernie is the only one who can beat Donald Trump. Clinton will lose to "The Donald" if she is the nominee. Is the New York Times TRYING to get Trump elected President?
I did this as a joke but some days it seems that this is closer to the truth than anything:
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/056.png
Oh well, I guess I better get used to saying President Donald Trump and Attorney General Chris Christie. Maybe if I start now it won't seem so weird next January.
And at least I won't have to work very hard to find material for my silly little cartoons:
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/058.png
However since hardly anyone understands the subtle multi-layered ironic sarcasm I employ now when the Democrats are in charge I may have to dumb down my jokes big time so that the Republicans can understand them:
Butt-Head: Hey Beavis, President Trump is stupid.
Beavis: Fire! Fire! Fire! Let's go get some tacos!
I will also probably have to find stronger drugs in order to better numb my brain, as thinking will only handicap me.
Would being shell-shocked by having to live in a USA run by "The Donald" qualify as PTSD?
Bernie is the one bringing in many new young voters into the Democratic Party. He is also the one who polls better head-to-head against all the Republican candidates among independents.
Most of all Bernie is the only one who can beat Donald Trump. Clinton will lose to "The Donald" if she is the nominee. Is the New York Times TRYING to get Trump elected President?
I did this as a joke but some days it seems that this is closer to the truth than anything:
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/056.png
Oh well, I guess I better get used to saying President Donald Trump and Attorney General Chris Christie. Maybe if I start now it won't seem so weird next January.
And at least I won't have to work very hard to find material for my silly little cartoons:
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/058.png
However since hardly anyone understands the subtle multi-layered ironic sarcasm I employ now when the Democrats are in charge I may have to dumb down my jokes big time so that the Republicans can understand them:
Butt-Head: Hey Beavis, President Trump is stupid.
Beavis: Fire! Fire! Fire! Let's go get some tacos!
I will also probably have to find stronger drugs in order to better numb my brain, as thinking will only handicap me.
Would being shell-shocked by having to live in a USA run by "The Donald" qualify as PTSD?
8
Ted Cruz is the 'best hope' for US Conservatism? Really?
Dear God, what does that say about the soul of US Conservatism?
Dear God, what does that say about the soul of US Conservatism?
4
To all the Sanders supporters. Do you think it was a good idea to hold negotiations with Iran? Do you think it was a good idea to open up relations with Cuba? Do you think Obama was selling out to Iran and Cuba by talking to them? If you want to make progress toward a single payer healthcare system, free college tuition for everyone, and better regulation of Wall Street and the financial industry; do you think it would be a better idea to elect a President who wouldn't talk with them, or would there be more progress with someone who has open communications?
4
Do you, for one moment, think that Sanders would have opposed any of these? Sanders is not an opponent to Obama's record when it has been progressive. On the other hand, Cllinton . . . well, her instincts are otherwise.
Cruz will never win any democrat in a general election but the overly conservative Midwest obviously do not wish to admit it. Sanders will never win in a majority election. His views are too extreme and people do not want to totally lose their financial independence to this guy to throw at a lot of programs. In the meantime, no jobs for many in many places in the U.S., the entrepreneurs and other hard workers have no incentive so money is not put into business and research.
1
Another blatantly biased headline from the New York Times.
Most of us know that it was Bernie Sanders that had a big night, not the self-anointed queen of deceit with all her super pac money and Wall Street ties, that was supposed to be a shoo-in for the Democratic nomination. While the New York Times diminishes Sanders, its readers thankfully, have broad access to the truth. It's just such a sorry state of affairs that the NYT - a newspaper that was once so introspective and intellectually honest - can't be more objective or even fair for the sake of its readership and the paper's reputation.
Most of us know that it was Bernie Sanders that had a big night, not the self-anointed queen of deceit with all her super pac money and Wall Street ties, that was supposed to be a shoo-in for the Democratic nomination. While the New York Times diminishes Sanders, its readers thankfully, have broad access to the truth. It's just such a sorry state of affairs that the NYT - a newspaper that was once so introspective and intellectually honest - can't be more objective or even fair for the sake of its readership and the paper's reputation.
15
Trump wins 2 states, Cruz wins two states and Bernie wins two states.
NY Times Head line Hillary wins decisive win in Louisiana.
Three paragraphs down Hillary Clinton underlined and High lighted Scored a commanding victory in Louisiana.
No Bias reporting here.
NY Times Head line Hillary wins decisive win in Louisiana.
Three paragraphs down Hillary Clinton underlined and High lighted Scored a commanding victory in Louisiana.
No Bias reporting here.
12
Oh gee... how come not "Decisive Loss for Clinton in Kansas" ? The Time's editorial slip is showing.
12
You know, if it wasn't for the commentariat in this paper I think I would have cancelled my subscription. The bias of the lame stream media and the NYT in particular towards Clinton is breathtaking sometimes.
13
"The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated." -- Mark Twain
Bernie is not the first to be prematurely written off as a goner. I expected more from "the newspaper of record."
Bernie is not the first to be prematurely written off as a goner. I expected more from "the newspaper of record."
11
How much longer till Clinton and Sanders join forces? I want the strongest possible FORCE on the Dem side, come November. (I agree with Lindsey Graham - neither Trump nor Cruz! Neither shot nor poisoned.)
Right now it's like watching a slow motion train wreck on the GOP side.
Dems like both candidates. Please, dear god, can't we have both?
Right now it's like watching a slow motion train wreck on the GOP side.
Dems like both candidates. Please, dear god, can't we have both?
4
I will support either Democrat in the general - but Bernie supporters, please cut the Times some slack. This is not skewed journalism - the times made it clear that Hillary won more delegates last night, but Bernie also had a very good night, and that this race is not over. There's no conspiracy here people - so go out and campaign.
13
why not separate out the superdelegate tally from the primary/caucus delegates as even Wasserman Schultz has explicitly advocated? When NYT reports tally from AP, it does, but then it's own tally, just moshes them together. No bias?
You have a point.
Bernie Sanders won two of three states yesterday. Hillary Clinton won one. Yet your headline is "Decisive Win for Clinton in Louisiana". No mention of Sanders' win. The headline should be "Sanders Beats Clinton in Two of Three States". Your pro- Clinton bias is disturbing to me.
22
Maybe the Times made that decision because Clinton won more total pledged delegates in the three states than did Sanders. Perhaps you are right, though, a better headline would have been "Sanders Beats Clinton in Two of Three States but Falls Further Behind in Delegate Count."
2
Interesting On-line Headline: "Clinton wins big in Louisiana" Clinton gets 71% of vote in LA. Sanders gets 68% in Kansas; 58% in Nebraska. Is there an editor who reviews these or a Clinton campaign worker. Unbiased and objective is the NY Times, if I want crazy, opinionated and sensationalized headlines - I will read the Post.
17
Time for Sanders and Trump to bow out. This will allow Cruz an open field to reveal his unappealing self-righteous religious plans for America and give the Presidency and at least four SCOTUS Justices. Amen
3
The only GOP presidential candidates worse than Trump are Cruz and Rubio.
7
Do we assume that the voters in Maine and Kansas are obedient to Romney or voting their concience?
1
Please do not stop covering Bernie. The race isn't over yet. And please start telling us what Cruz stands for. I listened to his victory speech last night and was horrified. No IRS? No EPA? What else does he stand for?
11
The Trump juggernaut keeps chugging along despite a few hiccups from Cruz, who is only a de facto US citizen and should not be allowed to run for the presidency. The big surprise of the day, of course, was the win by Sanders, which the New York Times tried to under play by noting Clinton's win in Louisiana. I hope Clinton is indicted soon by the DOJ for mishandling classified information and putting national security at risk. That will end her fraudulent campaign, and hopefully, send her to prison where she belongs. Cheers!
4
Enough with your totally biased coverage! We are tired of it. Plus, it is dishonest journalism.
16
You call it biased only because Clinton leads....Anyway, can you even vote in U.S. elections????
Can someone explain why it really is that Sanders isn't being supported by such a significant majority of African-American voters???
12
because they don't think he understands their issues? why is this difficult?
4
My guess is that most Americans have Fox News on in their residence almost 24/7 -- that's why they have little knowledge of Bernie, what he stands for, and how inclusive he is of all Americans.
1
Because the Clintons, like Jimmy Carter, were white southern politicians who weren't bigots when bigotry was the easiest path. They've earned it.
2
The Clinton camp is getting a bit delusional. Yes, Clinton's running strong with African-American voters. And, the states she's won thus far have predominantly had a high proportion of African-American voters.
Consider the corollary: Clinton is losing in just about every voter group other than African-Americans. And, most of the remaining 30+ states which haven't voted yet (and which include the largest populations and delegates) predominantly have smaller proportions of African-American voters. I'd put my money on Sanders winning nearly all of them.
Consider the corollary: Clinton is losing in just about every voter group other than African-Americans. And, most of the remaining 30+ states which haven't voted yet (and which include the largest populations and delegates) predominantly have smaller proportions of African-American voters. I'd put my money on Sanders winning nearly all of them.
15
This notion that a bunch of screaming scolds and cheerleader cults in caucus states for Bernie are indicative of ''a more democratic process'' confuses mobocracy for demos.
The same can be said for the Trump pets - brown shirt thuggery on their part does more damage to our international image in this day of the internet loop than can be imagined.
Cruz control seems to thrive in closed states which is consistent with the pajama version of evangelical hawkish neo-conservatism he espouses. Trump never had a focus. He has talking points, which seem limited to the size of his wall, the size of his polls and the size of his, pole.
Hillary Clinton took Louisiana, which is another purple tinged southern state she could well return to the Democrats fold in November, especially if a schism occurs between the neocon Cruz faction and the more populist Trump component in the Republican party. A Sanders victory in the south would be played, unfortunately, as a leftist coup with very little traction for the traditional southern democratic voters. There seems very little capacity for rational analysis among Sanders fanatics, but they really should consider the facts when the high they experience from 'the bern' ebbs.
The same can be said for the Trump pets - brown shirt thuggery on their part does more damage to our international image in this day of the internet loop than can be imagined.
Cruz control seems to thrive in closed states which is consistent with the pajama version of evangelical hawkish neo-conservatism he espouses. Trump never had a focus. He has talking points, which seem limited to the size of his wall, the size of his polls and the size of his, pole.
Hillary Clinton took Louisiana, which is another purple tinged southern state she could well return to the Democrats fold in November, especially if a schism occurs between the neocon Cruz faction and the more populist Trump component in the Republican party. A Sanders victory in the south would be played, unfortunately, as a leftist coup with very little traction for the traditional southern democratic voters. There seems very little capacity for rational analysis among Sanders fanatics, but they really should consider the facts when the high they experience from 'the bern' ebbs.
13
purple? last time that LA went for a democrat in a presidential election?
Around the time Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma did.
2
1932, 1936, 1940, 1944, 1950, 1960, 1976. That's FDR, Stevenson, JFK, and Carter. Oh, and 1992 Clinton! and 1996 Clinton! v. Bush I and Dole respectively.
4
I'm going to take what reader Justin O (below) said further. What would your lead article be titled if Sanders had taken all 3 states yesterday? "Clinton's STILL gonna win!"?
Related, by now, I think we all have a pretty good idea that Senator Bernie Sanders is from Vermont. (I notice you don't identify Clinton as former secretary of state in every article.) Yup, we get it, Vermont's a small state. Yet, who thinks bigger, beyond his own back door, and back pocket? Sanders or Clinton? NO MATTER how the public votes your bias is shamelessly clear. I think it'd be great if you could restrain yourself and save those biases for the Op-Ed page.
Related, by now, I think we all have a pretty good idea that Senator Bernie Sanders is from Vermont. (I notice you don't identify Clinton as former secretary of state in every article.) Yup, we get it, Vermont's a small state. Yet, who thinks bigger, beyond his own back door, and back pocket? Sanders or Clinton? NO MATTER how the public votes your bias is shamelessly clear. I think it'd be great if you could restrain yourself and save those biases for the Op-Ed page.
20
May I ask the NYT to give us some numbers of votes, instead of just percentages? I've read (too many) articles about the "appeal" of Trump or Cruz- quotes from talk show hosts, pundits, and various men-in-the-streets. But I'd like some numbers to convince me that either there is hope (and the numbers reflect a tiny percentage of a tiny percentage that is vocal enough to get outsized media attention), or there is no hope (there are really millions who find these men and their views acceptable in this world), so I know I was right in moving to another country.
4
In my heart I still "Feel the Bern" and was thrilled that Bernie made such a strong showing after Super Tuesday. In this year of the anti-establishment candidate, he is the truly sane one despite the cries about "Medicare for All" (which already has 53 million happily enrolled including this writer) being "unrealistic." In a political system that has clearly failed over the past 30 years to meet the needs of the vast majority, why do we want a mainstream, Wall Street retro-candidate like Hillary Clinton with her continued poor judgment from her email server to hawkish regime change in Libya or a blasphemous, bigoted billionaire in Donald Trump? My biggest fear, however, is Ted Cruz--an ideologically, rigid, extremely destructive authoritarian personality who makes The Donald look cozy and nice by comparison. For this voter of over 50 years this is the most fascinating and perhaps most significant election in my lifetime as the very future of our democracy seems to be on the line this November.
11
Isn't the bigger story here that Sanders is still coming on even while the Clinton campaign continues to act like he is not a threat? Or, that Clinton absolutely needs the Black vote to win while Sanders is still attracting voters more diversely? The headline for Sanders is a negative: "the road gets rougher" when it could be that the race gets tighter for Clinton?
The media is such a manipulative accomplice in the 2016 election! Featuring Trump as the successful outsider without delving into his flim-flam business acumen albeit known from articles the media has published about him for decades! Could Sanders have been the outsider with his solid, respectable history and had interesting positive headlines? No, its been the deception of Clinton with emails and Libya: what you would not publish about Trump and his failed businesses, bankruptcies and litigious idiocies was featured about Clinton and Sanders was not involved in Civil Rights in his early years. Trump attacks the media while the media follows him like puppy love and been nearly silent about his misgivings. Yesterday, an article that smacks down Trumps statement that he "never thought he would be running for President" appears demonstrating his calculated moves since 2013 to run. Trump said the NYT did good: a bonafide hustler when its about him.
In this article Ted Cruz keeps Up Pressure on Donald Trump but Sanders does not keep up the pressure on Clinton?
Is the New York Times just about hustling its readers?
The media is such a manipulative accomplice in the 2016 election! Featuring Trump as the successful outsider without delving into his flim-flam business acumen albeit known from articles the media has published about him for decades! Could Sanders have been the outsider with his solid, respectable history and had interesting positive headlines? No, its been the deception of Clinton with emails and Libya: what you would not publish about Trump and his failed businesses, bankruptcies and litigious idiocies was featured about Clinton and Sanders was not involved in Civil Rights in his early years. Trump attacks the media while the media follows him like puppy love and been nearly silent about his misgivings. Yesterday, an article that smacks down Trumps statement that he "never thought he would be running for President" appears demonstrating his calculated moves since 2013 to run. Trump said the NYT did good: a bonafide hustler when its about him.
In this article Ted Cruz keeps Up Pressure on Donald Trump but Sanders does not keep up the pressure on Clinton?
Is the New York Times just about hustling its readers?
23
"Is the New York Times just about hustling its readers?"
Its about a whole lot more than that; the Times is unashamedly the mainstream media mouthpiece for Hillary, as likely instructed by her, and her corporate backers, one such being Carlos Slim, the Mexican magnate, who is said to be the richest man on the planet; not so far back, he purchased a 17% interest in the NY Times, and more recently Mrs. Clinton was feted by him in Mexico, after which he contributed $1,000,000.00 to her, an amount when published was carefully managed to make it appear to be $250,000.00.
Begin with the premise that Hillary and Trump are one and the same, in their avarice, and both will do what it takes to manipulate public perception, including lying, cheating, stealing, you name it, to accomplish their goals.
One way they differ is Trump shoots from the hip, not caring about the reaction, whereas Hillary is cunning, devious, and aided by her handlers, she is presenting a facade that many uninformed citizens fall for.
Neither will make it; people are waking up big time.
Bernie will come from behind, pushed to the fore by a very angry populace.
Its about a whole lot more than that; the Times is unashamedly the mainstream media mouthpiece for Hillary, as likely instructed by her, and her corporate backers, one such being Carlos Slim, the Mexican magnate, who is said to be the richest man on the planet; not so far back, he purchased a 17% interest in the NY Times, and more recently Mrs. Clinton was feted by him in Mexico, after which he contributed $1,000,000.00 to her, an amount when published was carefully managed to make it appear to be $250,000.00.
Begin with the premise that Hillary and Trump are one and the same, in their avarice, and both will do what it takes to manipulate public perception, including lying, cheating, stealing, you name it, to accomplish their goals.
One way they differ is Trump shoots from the hip, not caring about the reaction, whereas Hillary is cunning, devious, and aided by her handlers, she is presenting a facade that many uninformed citizens fall for.
Neither will make it; people are waking up big time.
Bernie will come from behind, pushed to the fore by a very angry populace.
Well, there's no question that Clinton would win the presidency of the Confederate States of America, if the voting were restricted to voters in the Democratic Party. Clinton's strength in the African-American demographic, coupled with the timing of Super Tuesday, effectively front-loaded the race for delegates in her favor.
Sanders has been competitive and occasionally dominant outside of the South.
The results to this point suggest the race could tighten, perhaps substantially. Clinton's supporters should not be looking ahead to the general election just yet, unless Clinton shows dominance in one of the remaining regions of the country.
Sanders has been competitive and occasionally dominant outside of the South.
The results to this point suggest the race could tighten, perhaps substantially. Clinton's supporters should not be looking ahead to the general election just yet, unless Clinton shows dominance in one of the remaining regions of the country.
10
in the biased NYTimes, Hillary's victories are always "commanding" & Bernie's are "surprising". Bernie is the best "egghead" - head & heart - since Adlai. May he go "all the way".
23
Stop the mythology of older Democrats preferring HRC. I'm 82 years old, have known who Bernie is for years and voted for him in the primary. All my friends, young and old, are Bernie Sanders voters.
28
Going in, i knew Kansas would go for Cruz, they are both about as bad as it gets!
2
I don't get it. What did Bernie Sanders ever do to black voters to make them dislike him? What did Hillary Clinton ever do for black voters to make them love her? Here's what else I don't get. Black voters are electing Clinton as the nominee in states that are solid Republican and that she can never win in the general election. This is supposed to be a good thing? Again, I don't get it.
18
Black voters are not electing Hillary - they are electing Bill Clinton.
1
Amazing so many go for what Sanders and Trump is selling. We Republicans are giving Hilary the keys to the White House. And the saddest thing is that she will be another two term President. Wow!
We are witnessing the "Fall of the Roman Empire"
We are witnessing the "Fall of the Roman Empire"
The NY Times editors, reporters, and opinion writers are headed down the path toward losing their reader base. I recommend they all read "It's The Corruption, Stupid" at
http://www.salon.com/2016/02/23/its_the_corruption_stupid_hillarys_too_c...
http://www.salon.com/2016/02/23/its_the_corruption_stupid_hillarys_too_c...
13
I am tempted to drop into name calling and derision, but will hold my breath and just ask, if Ted Cruz is the new hope of the Republican Party, how far have you fallen? Ted may be great leading a religious revival meeting, and a true zealot when it comes to following the old testament, but do you really, honestly see him as the leader of the free world?
This is the man who would bomb ISIS to glass, suspend all abortions, defund planned parenthood, end taxes on the wealthy, insist that everyone own a gun (and carry it), turn Cuba into an enemy, throw 11 million people out of the country,and reinstate our old health care systems. You call that leadership?
This is the man who would bomb ISIS to glass, suspend all abortions, defund planned parenthood, end taxes on the wealthy, insist that everyone own a gun (and carry it), turn Cuba into an enemy, throw 11 million people out of the country,and reinstate our old health care systems. You call that leadership?
7
The Gray Lady indeed resembles the Miss Havisham whom Pip described to us in his first description of her in "Great Expectations." She is mouldering away in her cobwebs with the house shuttered in darkness and time stopped.
As many readers have previously observed, and as many more are observing this morning, "The Times" wants no movement of American life into the 21st Century. "Times" reporters/editors have consistently placed their bets on the Clinton Campaign so far in Campaign 2016. It has been a long time, if ever, since I have read such biased, slanted and non-objective reporting in what are supposed to be hard news articles.
The Times can say what it wants on its Editorial page but it is doing great disservice to the nation in colouring its newspages in the colours of the Clinton Campaign. The New York Times may as well be the house organ of the carpet bagging former senator from New York. The Times has been seduced by the old girl network of Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin and Kirsten Gillibrand. The Gray Lady and Friends of Hillary, indeed!
The Times is deathly afraid of moving out of old "New Democrat" politics. It is deathly afraid of giving anything more than stylish lip service to a world which is leaving it behind. To see this newspaper capitulate to a corrupt political family with corrupt political ways is heartbreaking. The Sulzbergers must have an awful lot to gain by seeing America retreat back to the soap days of the early 1990's.
As many readers have previously observed, and as many more are observing this morning, "The Times" wants no movement of American life into the 21st Century. "Times" reporters/editors have consistently placed their bets on the Clinton Campaign so far in Campaign 2016. It has been a long time, if ever, since I have read such biased, slanted and non-objective reporting in what are supposed to be hard news articles.
The Times can say what it wants on its Editorial page but it is doing great disservice to the nation in colouring its newspages in the colours of the Clinton Campaign. The New York Times may as well be the house organ of the carpet bagging former senator from New York. The Times has been seduced by the old girl network of Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin and Kirsten Gillibrand. The Gray Lady and Friends of Hillary, indeed!
The Times is deathly afraid of moving out of old "New Democrat" politics. It is deathly afraid of giving anything more than stylish lip service to a world which is leaving it behind. To see this newspaper capitulate to a corrupt political family with corrupt political ways is heartbreaking. The Sulzbergers must have an awful lot to gain by seeing America retreat back to the soap days of the early 1990's.
14
I am Asian (Indian-American), and I am sensitive to issues of race (a great admirer of James Baldwin, Ralph Ellison, and even Ta-Nehisi Coates), and to me, it's a powerful statement about Bernie Sanders that he marched in the Civil Rights movement and got arrested at an anti-segregation protest long before he had any realistic dreams of running for President. To my fellow non-whites: please consider what a candidate has done, not just what he/she says; please consider too that free college, higher taxes on the rich, and other liberal-socialist ideas have a better chance of lifting non-white people out of poverty than those of an Establishment candidate. No candidate for President has inspired me as much as Bernie Sanders, and I even include Barack Obama, who I supported and hold in high regard.
23
The antagonism and zealotry of the clinton crowd will hopefully spell the death of the democratic party as we know it. Maybe we can finally see the big business cronies split off and go join their republican brothers and we can regain the populist roots of the party.
10
What will Hillary promise voters next? Perhaps that she can personally fix the drought in California?
Although I do not personally agree with most of Bernie Sanders ideology to improve the economy, the trend that the media, including the NYT has taken to focus more on Trump and less on the Democratic race is very evident.
What is very clear is that the party leaders and establishment of both parties were truly unprepared for both Trump, Bernie and even perhaps Cruz, which appears to benefit Hillary, but she has the most to loose.
One silver lining and I hope he can survive is Governor Kasich who may be overall the best person both qualified, trustworthy and a viable plans. Sadly though is that in these types of races the best person does not always win...
Although I do not personally agree with most of Bernie Sanders ideology to improve the economy, the trend that the media, including the NYT has taken to focus more on Trump and less on the Democratic race is very evident.
What is very clear is that the party leaders and establishment of both parties were truly unprepared for both Trump, Bernie and even perhaps Cruz, which appears to benefit Hillary, but she has the most to loose.
One silver lining and I hope he can survive is Governor Kasich who may be overall the best person both qualified, trustworthy and a viable plans. Sadly though is that in these types of races the best person does not always win...
2
I'll take Trump over Cruz, but its hard to take either. They are equally obnoxious, so how could they deal with people.
Cruz is "most-hated" in Senate we are told, and we've seen his antics in the campaign.
Pray very hard, daily,Bernie or Hillary can beat either one. Good luck to us all.
Cruz is "most-hated" in Senate we are told, and we've seen his antics in the campaign.
Pray very hard, daily,Bernie or Hillary can beat either one. Good luck to us all.
7
As a Muslim that will be enrolled in Trump's database, I am proud to have voted for Bernie Sanders. For the first time in my life, I donated toward a political cause (I have donated $150 to Bernie Sanders). Imagine that: a Muslim wholeheartedly supporting a Jewish man to lead. Bernie Sanders is a Uniter and he inspires me. I still don't understand why the NYTimes is decidedly against Mr. Sanders' campaign. The man won two out of three states on Saturday -- report it like it is!
17
The NYT did report Sanders' wins. So what's the problem?-- Did you want a full-length picture???
Hillary has the Elderly and the Black votes locked up, which sadly is enough apparently to win the Democratic primaries in many states, albeit with dramatically low turnout overall. But is that going to go far in a general election? Her tack to the left while tactically necessary to deny Bernie clear differentiation from her, is tremendously limiting going forward, though with a Clinton she always stakes out a position with enough weasel words to tack back without - technically - doing so. But again, is that what we want to put up in a general election?
3
Yup, Clinton has won lots of states where she has a snowball's chance in hell of winning in the fall.
8
And you think Oklahoma will be a landslide in November for Sanders?
Don't get caught in the SAND trap.
I'mWithHer
Don't get caught in the SAND trap.
I'mWithHer
1
There was an amazing moment on one of the cable news stations last night
(not Fox) in which a pundit from Louisiana was describing an older woman who said of course she voted for Clinton because she was saying "Bernie who?" Only minutes before this report, the station had cut off a live speech by Senator Sanders in Michigan. (He had just won two states in the heartland.) That's why many voters don't understand the race on the Democratic side, although they know so much about Trump. And at that, what do voters know about what their favorite candidates really stand for?
(not Fox) in which a pundit from Louisiana was describing an older woman who said of course she voted for Clinton because she was saying "Bernie who?" Only minutes before this report, the station had cut off a live speech by Senator Sanders in Michigan. (He had just won two states in the heartland.) That's why many voters don't understand the race on the Democratic side, although they know so much about Trump. And at that, what do voters know about what their favorite candidates really stand for?
9
Senator Sanders received adequate votes on super Saturday in a Southern and mid-western state to continue to stay viable in the race against a formidable opponent and ensure his nomination from the democratic side should there be a fair and thorough investigation of the email scandal and a scrutiny of her stint as secretary of state leading the charge against the now destroyed countries of Libya, Yemen and Syria, which could find her candidacy flawed and tainted by her past.
11
I urge all black Americans to vote for Sanders. He genuinely has the interests of the people at heart and he fought for civil rights. I am saying this from an outsider's view (I am black British- and Kenyan) but I believe the outcome affects us all.
17
The closer Cruz gets to the nomination the less the chance the GOP wins the White House. Cruz is likely the only guy with less chance of winning a national election than Trump. As he would say 'praise the lord'.. please let Cruz be the nominee.
2
See it went from Sanders wins two states to Clinton wins decisive in Louisiana. The Times is so scared to help Sanders out at all. God forbid they do the right thing.
15
For the love of God Times, is this how you're going to play EVERY SINGLE headline when Bernie wins something??
This just in: Bernie wins 66.6% of the days contests. Times says "the math just doesn't work out" when converting 2/3 to a percentage. Meanwhile, Clinton stubs big toe, obviously regains momentum.
1. It's going to get really awkward for the NYT to keep up the editorial bias all the way into July, because that's where this is going.
2. This once highly regarded periodical is starting to bear a striking resemblance to Fox News, and that ain't a good thing.
This just in: Bernie wins 66.6% of the days contests. Times says "the math just doesn't work out" when converting 2/3 to a percentage. Meanwhile, Clinton stubs big toe, obviously regains momentum.
1. It's going to get really awkward for the NYT to keep up the editorial bias all the way into July, because that's where this is going.
2. This once highly regarded periodical is starting to bear a striking resemblance to Fox News, and that ain't a good thing.
21
Probably because Hillary won more delegates, which is the math that counts. 66% of the states up for grabs does not equal 66% of the delegates at stake on a given day.
1
"Decisive" win for Clinton with 71% in a "commanding victory".
Cruz with two "decisive" victories - both in the 40 percentiles.
While Bernie Sanders "won" two states - one with 68%.
We know who you endorse NYT. Quit yelling it.
Are trying to affect the outcome with biased reporting?
Cruz with two "decisive" victories - both in the 40 percentiles.
While Bernie Sanders "won" two states - one with 68%.
We know who you endorse NYT. Quit yelling it.
Are trying to affect the outcome with biased reporting?
21
I don't understand why Republican bigwigs think Cruz would be better for Trump for the rest of the the party. Cruz is so unlikeable his fellow senators can't stand him. Those who went to school with him despise the guy. He physically unattractive and appears arrogant and annoying. Trump, on the other hand, has charisma.
Clinton or Sanders would easily beat Cruz. I'm not so sure Clinton could beat Trump though, especially once he is able to moderate his message.
Clinton or Sanders would easily beat Cruz. I'm not so sure Clinton could beat Trump though, especially once he is able to moderate his message.
4
Why are they so afraid of Trump? Both the GOP and Media.
Skeletons in the closet? Really makes you wonder. (Smokes there's fire)
Skeletons in the closet? Really makes you wonder. (Smokes there's fire)
1
The old joke is that an American and a Russian had a footrace in which the American won.
An American newspaper reported that with the headline "American Defeats Russian in Footrace."
A Russian newspaper reported that withthe headline "Russian Second in Footrace; American Next to Last"
Right, got it.
"Hillary BLOWS AWAY Bernie (Who ONLY Wins 2 out of 3)"
How come you do not print using Cyrillic typescript?
An American newspaper reported that with the headline "American Defeats Russian in Footrace."
A Russian newspaper reported that withthe headline "Russian Second in Footrace; American Next to Last"
Right, got it.
"Hillary BLOWS AWAY Bernie (Who ONLY Wins 2 out of 3)"
How come you do not print using Cyrillic typescript?
18
Taking one of three States The Fox Times of New York declares Clinton the winner.
14
I do not trust mainline political liberals. In my lifetime, President Truman, a liberal, stumbled into the Koran War. The liberal President Eisenhower overthrew democratic governments and the outcomes haunt us now decades later. The supposedly liberal President Kennedy illegally attempted to murder the leader of Cuba. He either blundered into murdering or deliberately murdered the head of our puppet government in South Vietnam. President Johnson, a liberal Democrat, promised not to send American young people to fight a counter-revolutionary war in Southeast Asia and then did just that. The liberal Republican President Nixon promised to end that war on the day he took officer. He lied. I just don’t trust liberal Democrats or liberal Republicans were there still any to do what is right, to do what t hey claim they will do, or to show any sense of responsibility though I think maybe President Obama wanted to be responsible and decent.
I will not let Democratic Party supporters shame me into voting for Ms. Clinton. The shame is their refusal to support Sen. Sanders. .They a hell bent to elect Mr. Trump. Ms. Clinton cannot him unless may be lot of Republicans vote for her.
Ms. Clinton worries me. She offer me any confidence in her judgment, outlook, and character.
I will not let Democratic Party supporters shame me into voting for Ms. Clinton. The shame is their refusal to support Sen. Sanders. .They a hell bent to elect Mr. Trump. Ms. Clinton cannot him unless may be lot of Republicans vote for her.
Ms. Clinton worries me. She offer me any confidence in her judgment, outlook, and character.
5
I find Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio far more menacing than Donald Trump. And you can throw in Mitt Romney, for that matter...
9
When a candidate says "don't write us off" he or she knows
the show is over.
Mrs. Clinton went into the night with a big lead and came out
of it with a big lead.
the show is over.
Mrs. Clinton went into the night with a big lead and came out
of it with a big lead.
7
Way to take his words out of context. He asked media to keep coverage about him fair – neither embellished nor non-existent. You're kind of reaching with that conclusion – Chelsea Clinton level of reaching.
Let's reserve our judgement until either candidate has over half of all states' pledged delegates combined, shall we?
Let's reserve our judgement until either candidate has over half of all states' pledged delegates combined, shall we?
Unfortunately for her, we are soon going to run out of Southern states.
And fortunately for her, there's still California and New York.
GAME OVER on the Republican side? To quote the best known Republican President, "I hope to have God on my side," Abe Lincoln is reported to have said early in the civil war, "but I must have Kentucky (KY). I think to lose KY is nearly the same as to lose the whole game" Cruz, Rubio and Kasich who did not visit KY to campaign and lost it will have lost the whole game. The words of of the world famous statesman could still ring true and Trump could well be the Republican nominee and if the Republican establishment chooses not to respect Lincoln's best known words "Democracy by the people for the people and of the people will prevail" the Republican party will be forever tainted. The world is watching, America the beacon of democracy and the American spirit of running fair elections. If attempts are made by the likes of Romney, McCain, Graham etc to hijack the democratically won nomination even if it is that of Donald J Trump, it would not sit well with the American voters and this independent voter will sit out of the general election. Rubio who has only won a single state so far and running a distant 3rd and Kasich who has won none of the states so far and running a distant fourth should honorably withdraw before they loose their home states and leave it to Cruz and Trump to duke it out until one them has the required delegates for the Republican nomination before the convention. One can say with certainty that game is over for Rubio and Kasich. Maybe not for the VP post.
1
Cruz may win some caucuses, but what I'm glad to see is that slowly, Kasich's movement is growing. Did he get some Carson voters? Would he get more Rubio voters than you'd think? It may be too little too late. If Rubio drops out after Florida and JK starts to look viable and can somehow win Ohio, perhaps the media and party will stop treating him like a fairy tale step-child. There is also that outside shot at the convention. I hope so, because I do not consider any of the others respectable candidates, each for their own reasons, I hate to think of any of them in the White House. None of the others can even approach being a president for all of the people and it means 4 to 8 more years of divisiveness.
44
Kasich? You mean the guy who wants to 'Uberize' the government??
Read P. Krugman from March 5... . . . & take a look at some excellent comments about what that really means!
Read P. Krugman from March 5... . . . & take a look at some excellent comments about what that really means!
1
I'm in Ohio, and I ask you Why would ANY woman vote for Kasich? Completely destroying women's rights here. Why would any WORKER support this man? Remember his StateBill5? All the state's unions, both pubic and private, came together to defeat this bill. Kasich is big business all the way -- look at his donors, hugely rich people who are also said to be, even by the conservative Cincinnati Enquirer, his best friends!
Caucuses regardless of how much larger than the last President election involve a small number of votes. To vote one must drive to the county site for the caucus, wait in line, affirm they are eligible to vote and spend hours on the process. This system discourages many to not vote. Then you must choose between Donald Trump or Ted Cruz. what kind of choice is that?
46
Great. It looks like we'll have a closet liberal (Trump) running against a closet conservative (Clinton) in the general election.
7
The article makes two points that illustrate how enfeebled the Republican Party elites have become. First, Trump is now warning them to not run a third party candidate against him; whereas a few months ago they were concerned that he would run as a third party candidate against them!
And second, they are now thinking they might adopt Cruz as their candidate to beat Trump. That is certainly eating humble pie - supporting Cruz who has defied Party leaders since he was elected to the Senate.
If Cruz wins the nomination, the Party will twist itself into knots to make him appear to be a viable presidential candidate. But, he won't tow their line. In my opinion, he is a power hungry demagogue interested more in making himself an elite than in serving the old elites.
And second, they are now thinking they might adopt Cruz as their candidate to beat Trump. That is certainly eating humble pie - supporting Cruz who has defied Party leaders since he was elected to the Senate.
If Cruz wins the nomination, the Party will twist itself into knots to make him appear to be a viable presidential candidate. But, he won't tow their line. In my opinion, he is a power hungry demagogue interested more in making himself an elite than in serving the old elites.
4
Republican version of a "revolution". If I did not laugh, I would cry.
Thus far HRC has trounced Bernie in South Carolina and Louisiana, two reliably Democratic States. Except of course they're not, haven't been for decades and won't be this time either.
Are Sanders' plan unrealistic, yes they are in today's world, but he is pointing a direction to which we can move. At the least he is driving this Clinton away from the GOP lite of the past and opening a path toward a fairer, more inclusive, more moral (not in the religious sense) country.
If you don't try, you never achieve. Sanders is the pathbreaker and the details will force many a twist and turn, but at least we can hope to set out in a better direction.
Are Sanders' plan unrealistic, yes they are in today's world, but he is pointing a direction to which we can move. At the least he is driving this Clinton away from the GOP lite of the past and opening a path toward a fairer, more inclusive, more moral (not in the religious sense) country.
If you don't try, you never achieve. Sanders is the pathbreaker and the details will force many a twist and turn, but at least we can hope to set out in a better direction.
7
The small state emphasis is distorting the nominating process beyond recognition! 8 or the 10 largest states have yet to weigh in. Fewer than 19,000 Republicans voted in Maine yesterday - and we're supposed to read exactly what into the results? If they are going to be taxed equally, residents of California, New York, Illinois and Pennsylvania deserve to be heard equally - not be forced to accept a small state-edited list of candidates.
It's time to start this process over.
It's time to start this process over.
4
"But while Mrs. Clinton is now heavily favored to be the Democratic nominee..."
As this paper reports, HRC has captured 663 delegates to Bernie's 457. The superdelegates, although not obliged, should cast their votes in accordance with the will of the people in their district/states. If they do not, then one should question why we bother to participate in the primaries to begin with.
Senator Sanders is right when he says, "“I don’t want to disturb the media narrative too much — don’t get people too upset, but don’t write us off,” Mr. Sanders said. “I think we have a path toward victory.”"
As this paper reports, HRC has captured 663 delegates to Bernie's 457. The superdelegates, although not obliged, should cast their votes in accordance with the will of the people in their district/states. If they do not, then one should question why we bother to participate in the primaries to begin with.
Senator Sanders is right when he says, "“I don’t want to disturb the media narrative too much — don’t get people too upset, but don’t write us off,” Mr. Sanders said. “I think we have a path toward victory.”"
11
When the non-member of the party decided to run for its nomination he accepted the rules. -- rules that have been around for decades.
So, tough.
So, tough.
2
I have to go against this great Paper and say that the news gets better and better. I would hate to see that woman become President - whatever the politics and 'class warfare' is involved. Trump has the intelligence, the drive and the mentality to become a very successful leader. The best of the bunch for my money. Isn't it about time the USA had someone with his business savvy in charge? He;s a fair minded guy, not ust interested in the rich.f
1
Sanders was supposed to energize millennials and increase voter turnout. That isn't happening—something HIS supporters blame on Clinton fatigue even though SHE is racking up big victories in large states.
If he get s the nomination, it does not bode well for the general election in a year when it is anything but business as usual. We'll all be feeling more than the Bern with the GOP controlling all 3 branches of Government.
m
If he get s the nomination, it does not bode well for the general election in a year when it is anything but business as usual. We'll all be feeling more than the Bern with the GOP controlling all 3 branches of Government.
m
7
A note to ScottyUSA7: Your hero, Bernie Sanders, has lived off of the public dole since first elected to office as mayor of Burlington in 1980. From the time he graduated from college in 1964, to the time of that election, he held no real job. At one point he was reduced to sleeping on a friend's floor. As a member of congress, he has accomplished very little. Find one piece of significant legislation proposed by him that has been enacted. Bernie Sanders is an aged "flower child," living in a cotton candy world, convincing other, "something for nothing" followers that there is a free lunch. Perhaps there is, as HE seems to have found one-we the taxpayers.
In the meantime, Hillary was actually doing something with her life. As an attorney for the Arkansas Children's Defence Fund, she was working to better the lives of others. Although not in office, she was working to improve education in that state.
You might want to check your dates regarding Hillary and her support of NAFTA. She was First Lady at the time it passed. Constitutionally, I don't believe First Ladies get a vote. Much of what you are currently blaming her for was the result of her husband's past actions. Since when does blame for a spouse's actions transfer to the spouse? God forbid that I be blamed for my Republican husband's political viewpoint!
In the meantime, Hillary was actually doing something with her life. As an attorney for the Arkansas Children's Defence Fund, she was working to better the lives of others. Although not in office, she was working to improve education in that state.
You might want to check your dates regarding Hillary and her support of NAFTA. She was First Lady at the time it passed. Constitutionally, I don't believe First Ladies get a vote. Much of what you are currently blaming her for was the result of her husband's past actions. Since when does blame for a spouse's actions transfer to the spouse? God forbid that I be blamed for my Republican husband's political viewpoint!
10
Why isn't the times reporting on the fact that Clinton's wins are in states which will, most likley, go to the republicans anyway, while Sanders' wins are int he swing states?
Why isn't anyone reporting on how poll after poll shows Sanders doing much better against any of the republican candidates in a general election, especially among independent, or potentially undecided voters.
If the democrats want to win against Cruz, they need Sanders to be the nominee.
Why isn't anyone reporting on how poll after poll shows Sanders doing much better against any of the republican candidates in a general election, especially among independent, or potentially undecided voters.
If the democrats want to win against Cruz, they need Sanders to be the nominee.
4
Bernie Sanders is wonderful but his success as President depends upon what he himself terms a "revolution", and the truth is that there is no revolution happening. He cannot unilaterally change our health care system to the preferred single payer approach no more than he can make tuition free at public universities. There is no tidal wave of support for Bernie that is going to change control of the Senate. And for the NYTimes to acknowledge that reality cannot fairly be blamed on biased journalism.
9
The Republican clown car does not appear to be that entertaining anymore. It has acquired a sinister aspect as the prospect of a Trump or Cruz presidency seems more and more within the realm of possibility. Nominating Hillary Clinton is possibly a grave risk for the Democrats as her campaign might blow up just before the elections. I believe that in the coming weeks many people will give Bernie Sanders a second look and will be impressed by what they see. Given how the deck is stacked against him, it is amazing how far Bernie has come.
I really wish that he had sharper political teeth, but his bulldog tenacity will carry him all the way to the convention.
I really wish that he had sharper political teeth, but his bulldog tenacity will carry him all the way to the convention.
2
Ironic that the GOP establishment will now have to coalesce around Ted Cruz. In so many ways he poses a far greater threat to this country. Yes, Trump's comments regarding Hispanics and Muslims are abhorrent, but do we really believe any of this bombast? Cruz is a religious ideologue whose positions on immigration, health care, abortion and same-sex marriage are divisive, disturbing and misogynistic. Imagine the Supreme Court nominees he would put forward. We have all seen what happens to societies when religious zealots take control. It usually does not end well for the majority of the citizenry.
8
Sanders beats Clinton in Nebraska and Kansas, and the headline is about Clinton. Okay, whatever. Keep up the biased reporting.
You know, all this cheerleading for Clinton. Has it ever occurred to you that the Republicans have been building up decades of dirt to throw at her. They can't wait to start attacking her. She is such an easy target for them, with her scandal ridden past, disastrous time as Sec of State, and close ties to Wall Street.
Meanwhile, the Republicans have nothing on Sanders. All they can say is that he's a "socialist". A label he proudly owns.
It's almost like the NYT wants the next President to be Republican.
You know, all this cheerleading for Clinton. Has it ever occurred to you that the Republicans have been building up decades of dirt to throw at her. They can't wait to start attacking her. She is such an easy target for them, with her scandal ridden past, disastrous time as Sec of State, and close ties to Wall Street.
Meanwhile, the Republicans have nothing on Sanders. All they can say is that he's a "socialist". A label he proudly owns.
It's almost like the NYT wants the next President to be Republican.
15
Very true, the NY Times is always writing about Hillary is winning, Hillary is better, etc., while ignoring Bernie. Polls show that Sanders would beat Trump (or Cruz), Clinton would win also, but by a smaller margin. Do not write off Bernie!
I still find it terrifying that the alternative to Trump is a Joe McCarthy like psychopath who is universally hated by everyone in the Senate. Does the Republican Party really think that Cruz with his equally bilious and disingenuous rhetoric will salvage them? Either one of them is nothing but a dissembling, xenophobic, chauvinistic, homophobic individual who will say anything or do anything to get elected. I do not think that having a guy who cooks bacon on the tip of an automatic rifle is a sane alternative to Trump.
9
I am shocked and appalled by the liberal racism from Sanders supporters in this thread regarding Hillary Clinton's strength with African Americans across the South. The problem isn't with the choices of the voters, it's with your candidate who is unable to connect with and speak to the rising black and brown electorate. Thank heavens for black and brown women who are coming out in droves for Hillary. You Bernie Bros are learning how women have felt for centuries. Get in the back seat and come along for the ride.
16
Bernie was an activist in the 1960's. Hillary wasn't an activist in the 1970's. Strange that she's claiming moral superiority on the issue, since she has never done anything to advance either gender or racial equality.
You start your comment by talking about how Sanders supporters are racist and whatnot, and then end it with a sexist "Bernie bros" remark. You've insulted millions of women (and indeed men) who support him for his inclusive agenda, authenticity and lack of Wall Street bribery. Even this month, Clinton has expensive fund-raiser dinners with donors (ex-NRA, big pharma, investment bankers; you name it, she's taking their money) while Sanders is beholden almost exclusively to small donors – We The People. He's not a war hawk with neocon foreign policy advisors, (because Cheney turned out fine!) His priority is to take money out of politics, because it's stopping all the positive change, that the wealthy don't want, from happening.
Sanders is the people's candidate. Clinton is that of big-corporation executives, who very transparently buy these elections. Unless you're making over $250k a year, you're voting against your own interests.
Sanders is the people's candidate. Clinton is that of big-corporation executives, who very transparently buy these elections. Unless you're making over $250k a year, you're voting against your own interests.
Look. The 1960's was ages ago. And one Civil Right March doesn't make anyone an activist.
The fact is, Sanders is a virtual unknown to African-American and "Minority" voters. WHY?? -- Because he's only coming around now for votes.
The fact is, Sanders is a virtual unknown to African-American and "Minority" voters. WHY?? -- Because he's only coming around now for votes.
That headline is wishful thinking on the part of the Times. Cruz only won a couple of caucuses, which by their very nature are Republican insider votes. Trump won a caucus (which is a surprise) and trounced Cruz in a primary vote, which is the one that counts. It would appear that Trump will be the Republican nominee, and he will probably beat Clinton. So it becomes up to the Republican Party and Congress to keep him in line for four years. As long as he doesn't nuke anything or start a major war, I figure the Republic can survive.
But the larger issue is the needs of the people who support him. This is not the racist faction of our country; it is people who are losing in an economy dominated by oligarchs. (I mean, read the Times article on evictions and the exploitative economy! The suffering in this country is mind boggling.) Neither party is doing anything to address this. The Republicans are welded to ideologies written by the oligarchs, while the Democrats have become little more than the party of gun bans and weird sex.
Trump is a wake up call. But I fear we respond by hitting the snooze button and cursing the alarm clock.
But the larger issue is the needs of the people who support him. This is not the racist faction of our country; it is people who are losing in an economy dominated by oligarchs. (I mean, read the Times article on evictions and the exploitative economy! The suffering in this country is mind boggling.) Neither party is doing anything to address this. The Republicans are welded to ideologies written by the oligarchs, while the Democrats have become little more than the party of gun bans and weird sex.
Trump is a wake up call. But I fear we respond by hitting the snooze button and cursing the alarm clock.
1
The Democrat and Republican establishment are terrified by Cruz.
A Clinton or Sanders Presidency would be a continuation of the rule of the oligarchs as would a Kasich or Rubio or Trump.
Cruz won in Iowa after recommending that all energy subsidies including ethanol, oil, and renewable be eliminated. Elimination the special gifts would take money out of the pockets of the 1%.
A Clinton or Sanders Presidency would be a continuation of the rule of the oligarchs as would a Kasich or Rubio or Trump.
Cruz won in Iowa after recommending that all energy subsidies including ethanol, oil, and renewable be eliminated. Elimination the special gifts would take money out of the pockets of the 1%.
Interesting how the 457 delegates of Sanders appear on the front page of the online Times (table) to be fewer than the 378 of Trump or the 295 of Cruz. The Times is using a different scale for the democratic tabulation but doesn't bother to note it. They also routinely place democratic results either below republican results, or show only republican by default and require a mouse click to reveal democratic results. Among other things, It's an easy way to place, and keep, Sanders at the bottom.
Also interesting that the Times presents Clinton's gain of 35 delegates in a deeply red state to be more significant than Sanders's gain of 37 delegates.
Bias is everywhere, and is apparent daily in the New York Times.
Also interesting that the Times presents Clinton's gain of 35 delegates in a deeply red state to be more significant than Sanders's gain of 37 delegates.
Bias is everywhere, and is apparent daily in the New York Times.
11
It befuddles me why anyone, I mean, anyone would want Hillary to be the next POTUS. OK, Trump is full of warts; he's brash and disrespectful, and his grasp of history and other important things is somewhere between middle and high school despite a degree in economics from Wharton. But, he knows what he needs to know to protect America, solve the immigration mess, and improve the economy. Hillary? Just more empty promises of free stuff she cannot deliver. Oh, and did I mention, there's a big FBI investigation of her, her aides, and the Clinton Global Foundation that accepted $25 million from Saudi Arabia where women are treated like cattle. There's more but I think you get the point. Trump makes a "veiled reference" to his genitalia as a joke and gets hammered for it while that's all that Hillary has going for her and uses it at every turn for which she is praised. Hypocrisy!
7
Why? Because her plans are feasible. She has been on the world stage as our secretary of state, Senator from New York State with a population of 20 million , Sanders a senator from a state of 600,000-can you believe that? And his C grade by the Gun Lobby for climbing into bed with them and voting against the Brady Bill, Five times!, stating his constituents don't need to be regulated! While the rest of the United States reaps your vote as well Mr. Sanders? How thoughtful of him. Hillary meanwhile gets an F for her not selling out to the Gun Lobby.
Sander's plans if he gets elected, have been challenged over and over again as dreams. Once as puppies with lottery tickets hanging from their collars.
Sander's plans if he gets elected, have been challenged over and over again as dreams. Once as puppies with lottery tickets hanging from their collars.
2
Really. All this Hillary-bashing isn't making your candidate appear any better.
Want to make a point? Come up with something a bit more original than some warmed-over trope.
Oh. And if you think Trump isn't so bad, it's probably safe to assume you're not Mexican, Muslim, or African-American.
Want to make a point? Come up with something a bit more original than some warmed-over trope.
Oh. And if you think Trump isn't so bad, it's probably safe to assume you're not Mexican, Muslim, or African-American.
Is a Cruz win truly a victory for "the establishment?" Has a single senator endorsed his candidacy? Sad state of affairs that this is the best the country or the Republicans have to offer their party.
6
The establishment promptly switched their support to Rubio when Bush dropped out. The establishment, on both sides wants a crony socialist and prefers Clinton on the left and an establishment RINO from the Republicans. What neither the Republican or Democrat establishments want is an anti-crony as President.
Trump is not a Republican. What the Republican establishment should do is follow Lindsey Graham's suggestion. Assert that they hate Cruz but can work with him and he's better than Trump, Hillary, or Sanders.
Rubio has lost momentum since he's become the Republican and Democrat establishment pick.
Cruz is the outsider, disliked by the Republicans in Congress. But he will sign bills put forward by them if they throttle back the pork.
Trump is not a Republican. What the Republican establishment should do is follow Lindsey Graham's suggestion. Assert that they hate Cruz but can work with him and he's better than Trump, Hillary, or Sanders.
Rubio has lost momentum since he's become the Republican and Democrat establishment pick.
Cruz is the outsider, disliked by the Republicans in Congress. But he will sign bills put forward by them if they throttle back the pork.
Cruz is always saying he believes in the Constitution. It's an old Tea Party applause line. Since he doesn't say anything more specific, the line doesn't mean anything. Abortion, gun control, Obamacare, the income tax system all depend on the meaning of the Constitution's words. Apparently, that's too much detail. I've been to the National Archives. The Constitution is there. I don't have to believe in it. I've seen it with my own eyes. Maybe I'll run for President.
3
@alan
RE "Sanders winning anything reveals how flawed Hillary is as a candidate."
For years the GOP has been waging a veritable war of attrition on the Clintons ... their legacy and their character. They have used every propaganda trick and legislative gimmick deliberately designed to literally destroy them ... code-words, dog whistles. endless congressional investigations and widely publicized kangaroo-court-style hearings, and even pointless impeachment proceedings ... all based on contrived lies and obfuscations ... ultimately going no where. Yet these exaggerated notion's of Hillary Clinton's being "untrustable" and baseless one sided attacks on her record persist as evidenced in comments like this.
RE "Sanders winning anything reveals how flawed Hillary is as a candidate."
For years the GOP has been waging a veritable war of attrition on the Clintons ... their legacy and their character. They have used every propaganda trick and legislative gimmick deliberately designed to literally destroy them ... code-words, dog whistles. endless congressional investigations and widely publicized kangaroo-court-style hearings, and even pointless impeachment proceedings ... all based on contrived lies and obfuscations ... ultimately going no where. Yet these exaggerated notion's of Hillary Clinton's being "untrustable" and baseless one sided attacks on her record persist as evidenced in comments like this.
9
With the Republicans in complete disarray and Clinton under possible felony indictment it really seems that Bernie Sanders will be the last candidate standing and be the one taking the presidential oath of office next year. Support for Sanders shows faith in a better deal for all Americans.
10
Can you please stop including the superdelegate count as though they have already voted? They haven't. Your inclusion of this number is wrong and misleading.
22
In looking over the state by state results, HRC cannot claim that she has a clear mandate if she is the Democratic candidate.
8
Here's an interesting little tidbit for ya; a blowhard billionaire Republican stakes positions to the "left" of the self-styled "progressive" establishment Democrat on issues of war, empire, military spending, trade, taxes and, maybe health care. The contempt and open hostility the Democratic Party leadership (along with much of it's rank-and-file) has for the concerns of the overwhelming majority of Americans is the single most interesting aspect of the current campaign. That the corporate, mainstream media is working overtime to minimize and obscure this reality only serves to further expose it's own complicity in the farce that passes for political life in the United States.
6
Why does the Times continue to mislead its readers by counting Superdelegates in its count of Democratic delegates? Superdelegates are not committed. The actual delegate count between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton is far closer, and this race is far from over. The Times should stick to the facts and not anoint Hillary Clinton as the Chosen One.
21
The bias of the NYT for Clinton continues to show. Cruz wins two caucus states, and he is said to be pressuring Trump. Sanders wins two as well, and about the only thing said is that Clinton continues her march towards the nomination.
Clinton is strong with two demographic groups; the elderly (particularly women) and blacks. Sanders is strong with the young and the left. The problem for Clinton is that she has been winning big recently because most of the voting has been in southern states where the black vote, which she overwhelmingly won, makes up a majority of the Democratic votes. They do not make up a majority of overall voters in those states though, and the south will be as red come November as the west coast will be blue.
Clinton is strong with two demographic groups; the elderly (particularly women) and blacks. Sanders is strong with the young and the left. The problem for Clinton is that she has been winning big recently because most of the voting has been in southern states where the black vote, which she overwhelmingly won, makes up a majority of the Democratic votes. They do not make up a majority of overall voters in those states though, and the south will be as red come November as the west coast will be blue.
9
Well, I'm an elderly woman and I am all in for Bernie!
'You are not asking the right person about what has happened to America. The nuns in France were very careful when it came the study of history, we had the only male teacher, an affable Monsieur Mordact who droned on for an hour once a week, most likely about unfortunate submarines. Politics were never ever mentioned, left to the parents, and we were told to go home to our family during the Student Riots in 1968.
It was by sheer accident that I ended up working as a typist in the Corporate World beginning in 1980 for nearly two decades. Republicans and Democrats, the Powers of America, and occasionally future Heads of State would pass through our Office.
Now. You asked why we failed the President. The Republican Party went home, after deciding not to support him in rebuilding our Country. He has prevailed with little help and is beyond extraordinary. People do not seem to care for Mrs. Clinton, to be asked to roll up our sleeves to continue to restore the Country, and many of us feel the appeal of a famous rich businessman, 'the American Dream Retrieved', with promises of free Golf on Sundays for the Poor.
The most dangerous candidate of all is a self-proclaimed man of God. His name is Cruz. America is on the verge of becoming 'Holier-Than-Thou' because of our empty pockets. When politics and religion are mixed into this State of Affairs, you are witness to a Holy Crusade and mistrust between the People, an American Idol like Trump is loved; the Great Brayer.
It was by sheer accident that I ended up working as a typist in the Corporate World beginning in 1980 for nearly two decades. Republicans and Democrats, the Powers of America, and occasionally future Heads of State would pass through our Office.
Now. You asked why we failed the President. The Republican Party went home, after deciding not to support him in rebuilding our Country. He has prevailed with little help and is beyond extraordinary. People do not seem to care for Mrs. Clinton, to be asked to roll up our sleeves to continue to restore the Country, and many of us feel the appeal of a famous rich businessman, 'the American Dream Retrieved', with promises of free Golf on Sundays for the Poor.
The most dangerous candidate of all is a self-proclaimed man of God. His name is Cruz. America is on the verge of becoming 'Holier-Than-Thou' because of our empty pockets. When politics and religion are mixed into this State of Affairs, you are witness to a Holy Crusade and mistrust between the People, an American Idol like Trump is loved; the Great Brayer.
2
I continue to hope that Bernie and his followers will put country first but I'm sometimes discouraged. Of course many of his 'supporters' could very well be stealth Republicans...
If he wins the nomination, so be it. But the constant whining about the media seems misplaced. And if he and they decide on a slash and 'bern' approach, the country loses.
The Dem candidates have, of course, run a comparatively respectful campaign. It should continue throughout this important election cycle.... for the good of the country.
The whiners and the destroyers ??? Again, probably stealth Republicans.
If he wins the nomination, so be it. But the constant whining about the media seems misplaced. And if he and they decide on a slash and 'bern' approach, the country loses.
The Dem candidates have, of course, run a comparatively respectful campaign. It should continue throughout this important election cycle.... for the good of the country.
The whiners and the destroyers ??? Again, probably stealth Republicans.
8
Please tell us why you think that that the "constant whining about the media seems misplaced"?
Any unbiased reader of the NY Times as long as readers/viewers of other media would reach the same conclusion.
One obvious tactic; with rare exception, counting the super-delegates in the Clinton column, when they have no obligation to vote for Clinton at the convention, unlike those selected in the primaries. Isn't the goal of those counts to be to demoralize Sanders' supporters?
Any unbiased reader of the NY Times as long as readers/viewers of other media would reach the same conclusion.
One obvious tactic; with rare exception, counting the super-delegates in the Clinton column, when they have no obligation to vote for Clinton at the convention, unlike those selected in the primaries. Isn't the goal of those counts to be to demoralize Sanders' supporters?
Cruz keeping up the pressure on Trump is a bit like Norman Bates keeping up the pressure on Hannibal Lecter.
4
Sanders is 74 years old and has had a career in Congress for nearly 30 years. He had plenty of time to prove to the American people about his ability to carry out his ideas. But his undistinguished record in Congress and elsewhere cast doubts on voters’ minds. In contract, Hillary’s record convinces her supporters that she is capable of bringing real changes to America.
Hillarycare was the first universal healthcare plan brought to the Congress, a trailblazer to Obamacare. Now Sanders is preaching the more “progressive” single-payer healthcare plan, as if he has not seen Obamacare’s struggle to stay, amid Republicans’ constant appeals. Sanders ideas of free college tuition, minimum wage of $15 an hour, etc. all sound great and certainly please his voters. Yet, it is Hillary who is truly honest. She continues to make realistic assessments, refusing to make promises that she cannot keep, even at the cost of losing voters.
Sanders calls for increasing taxes for the rich, but changes have to start by earning more Democrat seats in the Congress. Hillary has been fundraising hard for years for Democrat candidates at both local and national elections. They collectively are helping to carry out Democrats’ more liberal agendas. These examples point to the fact that Hillary is a “doer” but Sanders is a “talker.” She is more likely to get things done for the American people. This is why she is now earning both the super delegates' and popular votes.
Hillarycare was the first universal healthcare plan brought to the Congress, a trailblazer to Obamacare. Now Sanders is preaching the more “progressive” single-payer healthcare plan, as if he has not seen Obamacare’s struggle to stay, amid Republicans’ constant appeals. Sanders ideas of free college tuition, minimum wage of $15 an hour, etc. all sound great and certainly please his voters. Yet, it is Hillary who is truly honest. She continues to make realistic assessments, refusing to make promises that she cannot keep, even at the cost of losing voters.
Sanders calls for increasing taxes for the rich, but changes have to start by earning more Democrat seats in the Congress. Hillary has been fundraising hard for years for Democrat candidates at both local and national elections. They collectively are helping to carry out Democrats’ more liberal agendas. These examples point to the fact that Hillary is a “doer” but Sanders is a “talker.” She is more likely to get things done for the American people. This is why she is now earning both the super delegates' and popular votes.
14
Oh, Hillary is a doer? Yes, a supporter of middle-class killing trade deals. And, a prior supporter of universal healthcare, but not anymore. What else is Hillary going to do to support her top 1% donors?
The only way that we get more Democrats in Congress is to be inspiring and mobilizing more voters to get out to vote for their interests. Surely, you wouldn't claim that Hillary is by any stretch of the imagination in the same league as Bernie with respect to being inspirational.
The only way that we get more Democrats in Congress is to be inspiring and mobilizing more voters to get out to vote for their interests. Surely, you wouldn't claim that Hillary is by any stretch of the imagination in the same league as Bernie with respect to being inspirational.
I know the people who brought "Hilarycare" to Congress. If you check the record you will see that they locked themselves in a room and consulted very few people.
They did not build coalitions, even with their supporters, and certainly not with anyone who disagreed with them in the slightest,
That's why they lost.
The same arrogance and isolation continues today, except it is fueled with extraordinary amounts of corporate cash for "speeches" and such.
The ACA suffers, in part, because the current administration cut deals with corporate interests in pharma and insurance. Hilarycare had nothing to do with the ACA.
Bernie comes from one of the few states that still is run by local town meetings. His record is precisely that he was elected by a diverse population for so many years.
Hilary has never been elected to much of anything.
She has the machine behind her.
That's why Bernie is still in this.
They did not build coalitions, even with their supporters, and certainly not with anyone who disagreed with them in the slightest,
That's why they lost.
The same arrogance and isolation continues today, except it is fueled with extraordinary amounts of corporate cash for "speeches" and such.
The ACA suffers, in part, because the current administration cut deals with corporate interests in pharma and insurance. Hilarycare had nothing to do with the ACA.
Bernie comes from one of the few states that still is run by local town meetings. His record is precisely that he was elected by a diverse population for so many years.
Hilary has never been elected to much of anything.
She has the machine behind her.
That's why Bernie is still in this.
I'm continually shocked that many Democratic officials are beholden to corporate donors & do their bidding - the most egregious example: Joe Lieberman blocking single payer Obamacare because the longtime Connecticut senator needed to repay his corporate donors in the insurance industry. Nearly 30 million Americans still without health insurance because of one lousy corrupt politician!
I look on the Clintons as a sham, always doing anything necessary to win elections, satisfy donors & enrich themselves, even as they became experts in the performative aspect of empathy. "I feel your pain." The results of their past policies - the mass incarceration of nonviolent black males, "superpredators," the destruction of meaningful welfare which increased poverty, Marian Wright Edelman repudiating the Clintons - even as Hillary constantly invokes her name but never mentions the repudiation, Hillary's support of a punishing bankruptcy bill that outlawed student loan discharge after telling Senator Warren the bill was terrible.
Hillary supporters point out the Clintons' belated realization these policies were a mistake they now regret. But how can anyone support the Clintons just because they claim they regret their past policies - which you'd expect from callous politicians trying to maintain their political viability. At what point does the damage the Clintons caused lead people to oppose reinstating their rotten instincts, personal scandals and bad judgement?
Never???
I look on the Clintons as a sham, always doing anything necessary to win elections, satisfy donors & enrich themselves, even as they became experts in the performative aspect of empathy. "I feel your pain." The results of their past policies - the mass incarceration of nonviolent black males, "superpredators," the destruction of meaningful welfare which increased poverty, Marian Wright Edelman repudiating the Clintons - even as Hillary constantly invokes her name but never mentions the repudiation, Hillary's support of a punishing bankruptcy bill that outlawed student loan discharge after telling Senator Warren the bill was terrible.
Hillary supporters point out the Clintons' belated realization these policies were a mistake they now regret. But how can anyone support the Clintons just because they claim they regret their past policies - which you'd expect from callous politicians trying to maintain their political viability. At what point does the damage the Clintons caused lead people to oppose reinstating their rotten instincts, personal scandals and bad judgement?
Never???
10
Re Kentucky error - shouldn't the Times also correct the paragraph saying "Mr. Trump has lost in 7 states having caucuses rather than primaries" ? It would be helpful if the Times showed the number of delegates each candidate has won in the primaries so far. Is the Times hiding that to improve Mr. Cruz's chances ? Is it afraid, also, to show the increase of voter turnout in the Republican races in comparison to the overall turnout for the Democrats ? I believe Mr. Trump has energized the primaries & even if he fails to get the nomination, his influence on the winner may help those candidates' approach to their run in November. A. B. C. C. C.- "Anybody But Career Criminal Clinton !"
1
Seems Clinton's popularity is centered in the South... Where Republicans dominate... How appropriate...
10
Here is the real public response so far:
Unsure of Donald's Diarrhea (or is that Dysentery?).
Confused with Cruz's Christ (or is that self crucifixion")
Rude awakening to RubiO's Rubella (or is that running with Rat Terrier?)
Knowing little about Kasich (and his work with Reagan, more like Karakuls. Yes Karakuls is a word, look it up in Scrabble Dictionary).
Hinting at Hillary's Hot Button Issues (or, hiding it somewhere)
Burning On or Burning Out with "Feel the Bern" (Location North Only, Dislocation Everywhere else).
We all need more silence, sleep and skim milk
AND LOTS OF NEW PARTIES...
Even the ones in which you go, "Jump, shake and move, feel that groove).
I need a vacation from this long drawn out race....
It's getting ridiculous,
We need a new mental health plan to help people with "trauma of long crazy overly, but badly, covered Presidential campaigns".
Unsure of Donald's Diarrhea (or is that Dysentery?).
Confused with Cruz's Christ (or is that self crucifixion")
Rude awakening to RubiO's Rubella (or is that running with Rat Terrier?)
Knowing little about Kasich (and his work with Reagan, more like Karakuls. Yes Karakuls is a word, look it up in Scrabble Dictionary).
Hinting at Hillary's Hot Button Issues (or, hiding it somewhere)
Burning On or Burning Out with "Feel the Bern" (Location North Only, Dislocation Everywhere else).
We all need more silence, sleep and skim milk
AND LOTS OF NEW PARTIES...
Even the ones in which you go, "Jump, shake and move, feel that groove).
I need a vacation from this long drawn out race....
It's getting ridiculous,
We need a new mental health plan to help people with "trauma of long crazy overly, but badly, covered Presidential campaigns".
2
I don't get it.
The Republican race results today occupy some 80% of this story. In the past, you have separated the Republican results from the Democratic results in separate stories. Not today.
You have buried Sanders' victories in two states deep into this muddled article, and celebrated Clinton's victory in the Deep South, yet again, in the headline as well.
Please respect the intelligence and integrity of your subscribers and readers, and stop flacking for Hillary in your news stories. It's OK if you want to endorse her in your editorials (even tho' you're now running several editorials asking HRC to adopt Bernie's positions), but please straighten up your news reporting. It's seriously lopsided, and these stories are really disingenuous and demeaning.
The Republican race results today occupy some 80% of this story. In the past, you have separated the Republican results from the Democratic results in separate stories. Not today.
You have buried Sanders' victories in two states deep into this muddled article, and celebrated Clinton's victory in the Deep South, yet again, in the headline as well.
Please respect the intelligence and integrity of your subscribers and readers, and stop flacking for Hillary in your news stories. It's OK if you want to endorse her in your editorials (even tho' you're now running several editorials asking HRC to adopt Bernie's positions), but please straighten up your news reporting. It's seriously lopsided, and these stories are really disingenuous and demeaning.
22
Bernie supporters: Nobody is conspiring against your candidate, and swarming the social media comment boards is not the equivalent of leading in delegate count.
I've volunteered for liberal Democratic candidates since McGovern. I drove out to Ft. Dodge, Iowa to knock on doors for Howard Dean. I canvassed for Obama.
This year I'm enthusiastically for Hillary. She is by far the most qualified, competent, and experienced candidate. She has weathered a 30-year smear campaign from the right. She has a long record of fighting for progressive causes where it counts, and actually accomplishing changes for the better. So what if she was a Goldwater Girl when she was 17 or accepted large speaker fees -- those talking points mean nothing. And no, she's not going to be indicted. Give me a break.
I like Bernie's critiques, but he's not even a Democrat -- he merely decided to call himself one to run for president. You Bernie supporters can spin and accuse and hope all you want, but get real: If he were the nominee, the right wing smear machine (currently deafeningly silent) would eat him alive. A socialist Jewish atheist back-bencher who has accomplished virtually nothing during the decades he's been in Congress, who honeymooned in the USSR, praised Castro's Cuba, and who actually served as an elector for the Socialist Workers' Party has ZERO, I repeat ZERO chance of winning a general election. I don't want another McGovern or Dukakis.
I've volunteered for liberal Democratic candidates since McGovern. I drove out to Ft. Dodge, Iowa to knock on doors for Howard Dean. I canvassed for Obama.
This year I'm enthusiastically for Hillary. She is by far the most qualified, competent, and experienced candidate. She has weathered a 30-year smear campaign from the right. She has a long record of fighting for progressive causes where it counts, and actually accomplishing changes for the better. So what if she was a Goldwater Girl when she was 17 or accepted large speaker fees -- those talking points mean nothing. And no, she's not going to be indicted. Give me a break.
I like Bernie's critiques, but he's not even a Democrat -- he merely decided to call himself one to run for president. You Bernie supporters can spin and accuse and hope all you want, but get real: If he were the nominee, the right wing smear machine (currently deafeningly silent) would eat him alive. A socialist Jewish atheist back-bencher who has accomplished virtually nothing during the decades he's been in Congress, who honeymooned in the USSR, praised Castro's Cuba, and who actually served as an elector for the Socialist Workers' Party has ZERO, I repeat ZERO chance of winning a general election. I don't want another McGovern or Dukakis.
12
So, accepting large speaking fees when planning to run for President means nothing? You don't seem to have picked up any knowledge of what drives the political system in the USA.
1
As goes Maine, so goes Kansas.
5
Sanders took two states from Clinton? Really? You should look into your bias. This headline implies that these states are hers to begin with! Please let's be more impartial in reporting - and headline crafting.
15
Thank you for your vote today! Bernie 2016.
Wave election
World-wide the celebrations of children
Have turned into Boko boy soldiers in equatorial jungles
& desert girls in burkas I guess
Hiding their suicide vests.
Syrian toddlers still wearing their little shoes
Breathe their last in roiled seas everywhere risin'
Like the refugee mobs in their hated multitudes.
Surely goodness and mercy are a memory, n disaster alone is left
Looming like a tsunami, building on the horizon, taking the sky.
Does anyone see which way to higher ground???
But short-fingered Trump no trump only points to a poll
And tells us a story about his imaginary wall...
Nothing is revealed.
World-wide the celebrations of children
Have turned into Boko boy soldiers in equatorial jungles
& desert girls in burkas I guess
Hiding their suicide vests.
Syrian toddlers still wearing their little shoes
Breathe their last in roiled seas everywhere risin'
Like the refugee mobs in their hated multitudes.
Surely goodness and mercy are a memory, n disaster alone is left
Looming like a tsunami, building on the horizon, taking the sky.
Does anyone see which way to higher ground???
But short-fingered Trump no trump only points to a poll
And tells us a story about his imaginary wall...
Nothing is revealed.
3
Hauntingly, this poem captures the mood and sad reality of our world.
1
As someone has mentioned previously, Hillary is winning the south, states that will undoubtedly be won by the GOP in the general (looking at 2012). Thus, I find it baffling that the DNC thinks it's a good idea to put all their eggs in the "Hillary basket." IF, Trump does indeed win the nomination--one would think the DNC would choose to run their "outsider" as well.
Another pressing matter is the voter turn outs for the GOP. The GOP is smoking the Democrats undoubtedly in that aspect. The Nevada caucus alone had more people "stumping for Trump," than all the GOP candidates did in 2012 in Nevada.
Whether one likes Trump or not; this will be no easy feat for the democrats in November.
Also: Monday will be a big day for Bernie, even more so for Hillary; as both of them will be participating in a Fox "town hall," with Brett Baier. Which I find ironic as Hillary hasn't been on Fox since 2014. Originally, only Bernie was going to do it, whilst Hillary "had prior commitments." Therefore, I can only imagine how this will be for Hillary as Brett Baier is no fan.
Another pressing matter is the voter turn outs for the GOP. The GOP is smoking the Democrats undoubtedly in that aspect. The Nevada caucus alone had more people "stumping for Trump," than all the GOP candidates did in 2012 in Nevada.
Whether one likes Trump or not; this will be no easy feat for the democrats in November.
Also: Monday will be a big day for Bernie, even more so for Hillary; as both of them will be participating in a Fox "town hall," with Brett Baier. Which I find ironic as Hillary hasn't been on Fox since 2014. Originally, only Bernie was going to do it, whilst Hillary "had prior commitments." Therefore, I can only imagine how this will be for Hillary as Brett Baier is no fan.
3
Bernie won Kansas and Nebraska, two other states that will go red in November; are you going to discount those, too?
2
We can gloat over the disarray in the GOP because of Trump's popularity - when Bernie Sanders starts seriously threatening Clinton, the same "crisis" will grip the Democratic Party, with some celebrated has-been coming out to denounce Sanders as unrealistic, a disastrous choice for the country, etc...
What Sanders' and Trump's popularity reveals is that more and more people are rejecting the establishment and the status quo. Change is what they want.
What kind of change is the real question.
And only Bernie Sanders can defeat Trump.
What Sanders' and Trump's popularity reveals is that more and more people are rejecting the establishment and the status quo. Change is what they want.
What kind of change is the real question.
And only Bernie Sanders can defeat Trump.
18
Sanders supporters are boasting tonight about how he's beating Clinton:
***BERNIE WON TWO STATES AND HILLARY ONLY WON ONE***
This is is kind of silly -- the one state Clinton won is Louisiana, with more delegates than the two Sanders won (and it might actually vote Democratic in November so those voters could actually matter, unlike Kansas and Nebraska).
More important, the reason Sanders is winning anywhere has been the relentless anti-Clinton ads from the Republicans, which have been attacking her for more than a year. This makes Sanders look better to voters who aren't paying attention, at least at present. But the REASON the Republicans are running anti-Clinton ads (you NEVER see a Republican anti Sanders ad) is because they're desperately hoping Sanders will win the nomination. And the reason for that is they know his support is so narrow that it would be impossible for him to win in November. If Sanders is the nominee, Trump could actually win. If it's Clinton, they know they're doomed.
The comments here certainly display the enthusiasm of Sanders supporters --you make up in enthusiasm what you lack in numbers. But Sanders understands, even if you don't, that his true role in this election is not to win, but to push Clinton to the left (and maybe if we're lucky to run on the ticket as her Vice-President).
***BERNIE WON TWO STATES AND HILLARY ONLY WON ONE***
This is is kind of silly -- the one state Clinton won is Louisiana, with more delegates than the two Sanders won (and it might actually vote Democratic in November so those voters could actually matter, unlike Kansas and Nebraska).
More important, the reason Sanders is winning anywhere has been the relentless anti-Clinton ads from the Republicans, which have been attacking her for more than a year. This makes Sanders look better to voters who aren't paying attention, at least at present. But the REASON the Republicans are running anti-Clinton ads (you NEVER see a Republican anti Sanders ad) is because they're desperately hoping Sanders will win the nomination. And the reason for that is they know his support is so narrow that it would be impossible for him to win in November. If Sanders is the nominee, Trump could actually win. If it's Clinton, they know they're doomed.
The comments here certainly display the enthusiasm of Sanders supporters --you make up in enthusiasm what you lack in numbers. But Sanders understands, even if you don't, that his true role in this election is not to win, but to push Clinton to the left (and maybe if we're lucky to run on the ticket as her Vice-President).
15
Two corrections:
1) Yes, Clinton won the larger state. A state that will, without a shred of doubt, vote red in November. Her support there is close to meaningless.
2) Why the Republicans, and you, think Hillary is more formidable in the general election is confusing to me. Perhaps it's because of the inevitability-baiting of the mainstream media? The FACT is that in EVERY SINGLE general election matchup, including those of individual states, Bernie does better than Clinton.
Please, stop insulting people's intelligence.
1) Yes, Clinton won the larger state. A state that will, without a shred of doubt, vote red in November. Her support there is close to meaningless.
2) Why the Republicans, and you, think Hillary is more formidable in the general election is confusing to me. Perhaps it's because of the inevitability-baiting of the mainstream media? The FACT is that in EVERY SINGLE general election matchup, including those of individual states, Bernie does better than Clinton.
Please, stop insulting people's intelligence.
Maybe David Brooks will write a column telling us which the Republican establishment hates the most, Trump or Cruz.
1
The way I see it a win for Cruz at this stage helps Trump.
Cruz will not do well inn New York, New Jersey or California.
If Trump wins those states he has the nomination.
Cruz's victories were enough to keep him in the game but not enough to really mean anything.
Cruz has to drop out and let Rubio run against Trump.
I am convinced If Rubio can run against Trump the votes would have gone to Cruz will go to him and he will beat Trump
So in the long run Trump lost nothing by Cruz winnig because if Cruz had lost Cruz would have dropped out which would have been bad for Trump.
Cruz will not do well inn New York, New Jersey or California.
If Trump wins those states he has the nomination.
Cruz's victories were enough to keep him in the game but not enough to really mean anything.
Cruz has to drop out and let Rubio run against Trump.
I am convinced If Rubio can run against Trump the votes would have gone to Cruz will go to him and he will beat Trump
So in the long run Trump lost nothing by Cruz winnig because if Cruz had lost Cruz would have dropped out which would have been bad for Trump.
So...the crazed ideologue wins a couple primaries over the fatuous blowhard...and this is the "hope" of the GOP?! That's called no hope, which is a perfect fate for the Party of No.
6
Wow, by now it should be plain obvious to everyone but the folks in NYT that something is at the very least odd about the coverage of Democratic race between Sanders and Hillary. To say it has been lopsided in favor of Hillary is an understatement. So Sanders wins 2 out of 3 but the headline says Hillary won a "resounding" victory in LA. But by the same account and logic, so did Sanders in Kansas. Factually correct reporting perhaps, but grossly off in spirit. And that is not what I expect of NYT.
There are only 2 folks contesting and Sanders is a true phenomenon that simply cannot be willfully wished away. As a newspaper of record, it is bit bizarre to read your coverage. And I hope someone, at least the Public Editor, takes a closer look and ensures there is some degree of fairness. The fact that Bernie has come this far should at least merit some serious coverage instead of simply writing off as someone who is winning the "liberal white vote as expected". I am not white by any means and so are hundreds and thousands of Bernie supporters.
There are only 2 folks contesting and Sanders is a true phenomenon that simply cannot be willfully wished away. As a newspaper of record, it is bit bizarre to read your coverage. And I hope someone, at least the Public Editor, takes a closer look and ensures there is some degree of fairness. The fact that Bernie has come this far should at least merit some serious coverage instead of simply writing off as someone who is winning the "liberal white vote as expected". I am not white by any means and so are hundreds and thousands of Bernie supporters.
23
My dictum to the wind:
A Faustian, or Trumpian, bargain not without merit,
yet Clinton's is not a bargain but a trumped-up sale:
"Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, and I — …"
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/is-this-the-end-of-big-money...
At the fork in the road, I will heed either Yogi Berra’s or Robert Frost’s advice...
http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/173536
A Faustian, or Trumpian, bargain not without merit,
yet Clinton's is not a bargain but a trumped-up sale:
"Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, and I — …"
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/is-this-the-end-of-big-money...
At the fork in the road, I will heed either Yogi Berra’s or Robert Frost’s advice...
http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/173536
2
I find it very interesting the panic apparent in the Sander's supporters. They wring their hands if Bernie is not credited enough in the articles and point to the fact that he is "different" than any other democratic candidate. What I see is a standard politician who promises what can't be delivered, who smears as good as any other candidate, and wants to be elected as much. The point is that Mr. Sanders has a position that would change a trillion dollar economy; that would require a grand push from most of the citizenry where a large number does not support his stands. So how will he get his platform adopted? He never really says what he would do if the invisible groundswell doesn't come about (as apparent as it is that it won't come about). There simply is no reality in this candidacy no matter what dreams his supporters have.
14
As a result of the media coverage of these primaries, I have gone from disliking Clinton to deeply despising her....her and her husband...because the 2 Clintons are a package deal on a cruise to nowhere...to nowhere except the status quo and the Clintons'/Wall Street's pocket books.
20
And how exactly has the media done that?
1
I was just on the Foz news website and they were running a bot named GeorgeWallace (they had misspelled George) with a steady stream of insults about the democrats .The Fox crowd didn't even notice.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/03/05/vote-counting-underway-in-gop...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/03/05/vote-counting-underway-in-gop...
1
Clinton wins once again south of the Mason-Dixon Line in the Old Confederacy...like a good Republican or an old-time Dixiecrat.
16
Are you trying to say, from your perch in Manhattan, that the votes of people below the Mason Dixon line mean less than yours?
1
She wins with black votes. The analogy is absurd.
1
I had lunch with my only neo-con friend today. Even he is upset about the Republican clown circus lead by the CLOWN with the big hands and he claims something just as big as well? Hey, CLOWN, I am 62 and hit a golf ball 334 yards the other day which is 54 yards better than your 280 and I used a wood driver! Trump is the worst candidate in the history of the United States. Australia, here I come if the CLOWN cons the American people in November!
5
Mark - "Australia, here I come if the CLOWN cons the American people in November!"
I agree with you completely. You and your ilk who refer to other Americans, who think differently than you, as "neo-cons" should leave America and never return. We need unity not petty partisan divisiveness.
I agree with you completely. You and your ilk who refer to other Americans, who think differently than you, as "neo-cons" should leave America and never return. We need unity not petty partisan divisiveness.
Sanders tends to win caucus states, where Democratic activists (i.e. the most liberal voters) tend to win -- because they are the ones most likely to knock themselves out and go to a caucus. Hillary wins primaries where people vote, and voting is an easier proposition that draws a broader range of people. It is the same reason the most conservative candidate in the Republican race, Cruz, also wins in caucus states. You can't use them as a gauge for the general election (where an even broader electorate participates), it is an inaccurate conclusion. This isn't opinion, it is political science fact.
The Sanderistas spent last week saying their candidate wins in states that are in play - oh? like Kansas and Nebraska? When did those two (or OK for that matter) last go blue in November?
One of their tin-foil hat conspiracy claims is that the superdelegates are some kind of Hillary trick that shouldn't be in the media delegate counts. Of course they should be counted -- their convention votes count. What would be dishonest would be to pretend they don't exist. And they are not new, they have been around for decades.
On a positive note, this week I see fewer posts from Sanderistas saying black people don't know what is in their own interest. Which, y'know, is racist.
The Sanderistas spent last week saying their candidate wins in states that are in play - oh? like Kansas and Nebraska? When did those two (or OK for that matter) last go blue in November?
One of their tin-foil hat conspiracy claims is that the superdelegates are some kind of Hillary trick that shouldn't be in the media delegate counts. Of course they should be counted -- their convention votes count. What would be dishonest would be to pretend they don't exist. And they are not new, they have been around for decades.
On a positive note, this week I see fewer posts from Sanderistas saying black people don't know what is in their own interest. Which, y'know, is racist.
11
Is it also racist to say it if a black person like Spike Lee says it? Similarly, is it racist to say that poor and working class whites have been duped into voting against their own interests over the last century or so? Or should we assume that people always vote in their best interests and that their choices are therefore beyond criticism in this regard?
Has anyone asked The Donald just how he is going to carry out these promises of his..??
We had the Benghazi Panel of agony and dumb questions like " Mrs Clinton, did you sleep on the night of the raid on the Embassy, and were you alone..??"
That is a personal question and plainly stupid. With such persons trying to break Hillary with 11 hour grillings they do not deserve to have political power.
So now that Hillary has been grilled 3 times maybe a panel has to ask Mr Trump how specifically is he going to make America great again without going to war or stealing Iraqi oil, and how does he propose to make Mexico pay for the huge wall..??
STAN CHUN
Wellington
New Zealand
6 March, 2016.
We had the Benghazi Panel of agony and dumb questions like " Mrs Clinton, did you sleep on the night of the raid on the Embassy, and were you alone..??"
That is a personal question and plainly stupid. With such persons trying to break Hillary with 11 hour grillings they do not deserve to have political power.
So now that Hillary has been grilled 3 times maybe a panel has to ask Mr Trump how specifically is he going to make America great again without going to war or stealing Iraqi oil, and how does he propose to make Mexico pay for the huge wall..??
STAN CHUN
Wellington
New Zealand
6 March, 2016.
3
STAN CHUN - "Has anyone asked The Donald just how he is going to carry out these promises of his..??"
Perhaps ALL the candidates should be asked how they are going to carry out their promises to the American people. Why just stop at one candidate?
Perhaps ALL the candidates should be asked how they are going to carry out their promises to the American people. Why just stop at one candidate?
It would be wonderful if just once headlines could be about Democrats and articles could lead with information about them. Am I the only one who would still read the NYT if articles about the GOP candidates were somewhere at the bottom of the page? I doubt it.
It's no wonder Republicans vote more than Democrats do; they get more attention from the media, both liberal and conservative. When you get attention you're inspired to participate and energized in that process. When you’re ignored or relegated to second position some part of you, conscious or not, believes that you’re not important and that your actions can’t make a difference. Psych 101.
On the subject in hand, though, I like and admire Bernie Sanders but I like and admire Hillary Clinton more and I don’t buy the volumes of vitriolic untruths that are being dumped into cyberspace so liberally and that often seem based on GOP attacks on her throughout her career. There’s irony for you.
As for the GOP candidates expecting Rubio to withdraw before Florida to avoid a humiliating slap in the face seems a mite unrealistic. But maybe he will. I can’t imagine him getting behind Ted Cruz though. I expect he’ll join Chris Christie as a Trump blood-sucker. Then the two of them can fight it out to be Trump’s running mate! And Kasich waits it out, hoping for a brokered convention.
The momentum against Trump is building, nationally and internationally. Which leaves Ted Cruz. Good God.
It's no wonder Republicans vote more than Democrats do; they get more attention from the media, both liberal and conservative. When you get attention you're inspired to participate and energized in that process. When you’re ignored or relegated to second position some part of you, conscious or not, believes that you’re not important and that your actions can’t make a difference. Psych 101.
On the subject in hand, though, I like and admire Bernie Sanders but I like and admire Hillary Clinton more and I don’t buy the volumes of vitriolic untruths that are being dumped into cyberspace so liberally and that often seem based on GOP attacks on her throughout her career. There’s irony for you.
As for the GOP candidates expecting Rubio to withdraw before Florida to avoid a humiliating slap in the face seems a mite unrealistic. But maybe he will. I can’t imagine him getting behind Ted Cruz though. I expect he’ll join Chris Christie as a Trump blood-sucker. Then the two of them can fight it out to be Trump’s running mate! And Kasich waits it out, hoping for a brokered convention.
The momentum against Trump is building, nationally and internationally. Which leaves Ted Cruz. Good God.
11
Well I am always complaining about the Times coverage of Bernie Sanders. As of right now he is in the title line of this story. And the delegate count on the lead page has the pledged and won delegates, and not the super delegate total. Maybe they are finally coming around.
10
Here's my take on the many comments I've just read: there's too much bickering and back and forth over the same territory. Let's just all vote for our favorite candidate and when the primaries are over and the votes counted, we'll know who won the nomination. (Unless there are brokered conventions, at which point it will be time to tune back in.) In the meantime, let's find more productive uses for our time and energy.
8
How come Hillary 'wins' primaries, but Bernie 'took' primaries from her, at least according to the headline on the home page?
22
Because he's a distant second and not expected to get through the bigger prizes ahead. It's called reality. You'll simply have to look for your student loan debt relief somewhere else.
1
Bernie only won caucuses yesterday.
1
Also, Hillary get a "commanding" lead, while Bernie just "won." Note to NYT: Sanders won Kansas 67.7 to Clinton's 32.3. Sounds like Bernie had a "commanding lead," too. I've started to read the NYT coverage of the Democratic race as spin-spin-spin.
This dragged out primary/caucus process makes no sense to me. Why not just have 5 debates and let ALL states vote on one Saturday? I am fed up with the over-analysis of voting patterns - by color of skin, race, geography, rural vs urban, Evangelicans vs the rest, etc, etc. We are all Americans. Lets just get the primaries done in one day and talk about more important things going on in this world
7
So for something as important as selecting presidential candidates there is not time to do it thoughtfully and thoroughly? At my place of work new employees are on probation the 1st year to see how they perform. Think of the primary / caucus system as probation. But you're right the demographic analysis seems divisive.
Amen! For national elections we need a national system, accessible to every adult. Caucuses are not accessible-parents of young kids, people who or evenings and others cannot participate. We desperately need election reform (including how it's paid for, by hom!)
It's great to see the Democrats so fired up! They'll need it to win in November, 'cause the Republicans are turning out scary numbers. Wow: Democratic turnout higher than in 2008, in Kansas and Colorado; big in Nebraska and New Hampshire. Record-setting small contributions in February. Whoever won those states, by 14-36 points (!), and brought in those record-setting contributions, is really firing up the Democrats. Guess what, it's Bernie Sanders.
11
"....really firing up the Democrats."
I'm pretty sure that should read, Democrats on both sides.
Wait till you see what happens as Hillary's supporters in the North come out like the African Americans and Latinos have in the South. There's more at stake here than your dream of Bernie providing the Student Loan Debt Relief Act if he's elected.
I'm pretty sure that should read, Democrats on both sides.
Wait till you see what happens as Hillary's supporters in the North come out like the African Americans and Latinos have in the South. There's more at stake here than your dream of Bernie providing the Student Loan Debt Relief Act if he's elected.
2
And "whoever won" was Bernie Sanders. Just given' credit where credit is due. ;)
"Sanders Takes Two States From Clinton"
"Bernie Sanders also took two states from Hillary Clinton, but she won handily in Louisiana."
He took those states from Clinton? She was the owner of those states?
But she "won handily in Louisiana" not she took that state from Sanders?
Huh?
"Bernie Sanders also took two states from Hillary Clinton, but she won handily in Louisiana."
He took those states from Clinton? She was the owner of those states?
But she "won handily in Louisiana" not she took that state from Sanders?
Huh?
23
What is it with you Bernie supporters?
Merriam Webster definition of "take":
-to secure by winning in competition
-to get into one's hands
-to seize or capture
-to get possession of
You need to open your neural pathways to what IS the real world and not what you THINK it should be.
Merriam Webster definition of "take":
-to secure by winning in competition
-to get into one's hands
-to seize or capture
-to get possession of
You need to open your neural pathways to what IS the real world and not what you THINK it should be.
3
I'm not sure why the Times continues to attempt framing Hillary as having the momentum when clearly she's hanging on by her nails, and in Southern States too boot, that when convenient, members of your club remind us don't count in the democratic race anyway as they are "Red and Republican". So how about some objective reporting for a change we are just beginning to get over The Times beating the drum for the invasion of Iraq: yes the war of choice in which thousands of young Americans died along with hundreds of thousands of people who were in no way responsible for 9/11; resulting in the worst refugee problem in the History of Europe. A war that the darling of Wall Street and all things Israel voted for and the American and European middle class taxpayers will be paying for for generations. That anyone would vote for this duplicitous woman boggles the mind although it does confirm the adage "you get the government you pay for", Hillary like her counterparts Cruz and Rubio are merely bought and paid for shills of A.I.P.A.C., Wall Street and Corporate America: if you are not wealthy or well connected you would be well advised to send your children to Canada as it is all but assured there will be a draft, if anyone thinks these poor kids dying for special interests in the M.E. can go back for one deployment after the other they are delusional. Bernie is the only one running who truly wants to halt the race to the bottom for Americas middle class. It's up to you please vote!
23
Hillary did not vote for us to go to war with Iraq.
George Bush spoke to the senate and requested that body to vote to give him THE AUTHORITY TO GO TO WAR WITH IRAQ. NOT TO DECLARE WAR WITH IRAQ.
Listen up. Hillary and the rest of the Senate did not directly vote to go to war with Iraq. Bush told the senate by granting him the power to invade Iraq, this would force Saddam Hussein's hand to let weapon's inspectors back into Iraq, with the belief Weapons of Mass Destruction would be found, therefore eliminating the need to go to war.
But the pressure from the Neocons forced Bush's hand. Instead he betrayed the Senate and invaded Iraq. This is fact and not fiction. You are not telling the truth because you are listening to the spin that's out there.
Hillary has been successfully on the world stage, firstly as a woman in a mans world, the First Lady, the Force behind what became the seed stock for ObamaCare-HillaryCare. Senator from New York State, population 20 Million (Bernie is a senator of a state of 600,000-that's right, that few). Obama's selection for Secretary of State. She's ready to hit the floor running, with the prime objective to produce a rising tide to affect ALL CLASSES, ALL RACES. With Bill doing the decorating.
So please try and get outside your snow globe. What's really going on in the world is way more complex than what you think.
George Bush spoke to the senate and requested that body to vote to give him THE AUTHORITY TO GO TO WAR WITH IRAQ. NOT TO DECLARE WAR WITH IRAQ.
Listen up. Hillary and the rest of the Senate did not directly vote to go to war with Iraq. Bush told the senate by granting him the power to invade Iraq, this would force Saddam Hussein's hand to let weapon's inspectors back into Iraq, with the belief Weapons of Mass Destruction would be found, therefore eliminating the need to go to war.
But the pressure from the Neocons forced Bush's hand. Instead he betrayed the Senate and invaded Iraq. This is fact and not fiction. You are not telling the truth because you are listening to the spin that's out there.
Hillary has been successfully on the world stage, firstly as a woman in a mans world, the First Lady, the Force behind what became the seed stock for ObamaCare-HillaryCare. Senator from New York State, population 20 Million (Bernie is a senator of a state of 600,000-that's right, that few). Obama's selection for Secretary of State. She's ready to hit the floor running, with the prime objective to produce a rising tide to affect ALL CLASSES, ALL RACES. With Bill doing the decorating.
So please try and get outside your snow globe. What's really going on in the world is way more complex than what you think.
1
Why the constant stress on Sanders's portion of the black vote? I find this harping on race shifting from an a point of campaign strategy to an implicit qualification for the Democratic nomination.
12
And that kack of understanding is why he can't expand beyond his narrow white base.
5
If the Republican party had not been spent so much energi on opposing President Obama on every issue, comment, and disrespectfully for the past 8 yrs and they can deny it all they want, but it was down about race, maybe they could of used that time and energi to build the party stronger on the issues. And by the way were are the issues? The party with or without Trump is becoming a laughing stock world wide. IF they lose, they deserve to lose and have handed it over to the Democrats on a silver platter. Sander´s is respected for his very radical for the US politics, because we know he won´t win and he is a elderly man, very respetced, who with a passion wants several big changes, that are a long time due. Changes that already are in Canada and in Europe. IF Hillary had said the same things she would of been booed out a long time ago.
6
Ever hear the term loyal opposition? Parties advocate the positions of their members. Esp with someone as radical as Obama
I am enjoying watching members of the Republican party form a circle with or without their NRA sanctioned firearms and take each other out. If the United States of America is really lucky, by the end of the primary season there won't be many Republican politicians or voters left standing.
I think the NYT coverage of the most lewd parts of the Rubio/Trump exchanges have been covered enough and are ready to be buried. Or is the NYT trying to take readers away from the Daily News? Hard to tell these days.
And I agree with readers who are taking the NYT to task for exaggerating Hillary Clinton's current lead over Bernie Sanders. I am going elsewhere for less overtly biased coverage of the Democratic race.
I think the NYT coverage of the most lewd parts of the Rubio/Trump exchanges have been covered enough and are ready to be buried. Or is the NYT trying to take readers away from the Daily News? Hard to tell these days.
And I agree with readers who are taking the NYT to task for exaggerating Hillary Clinton's current lead over Bernie Sanders. I am going elsewhere for less overtly biased coverage of the Democratic race.
3
Talk about burying the lead.
Twenty seven paragraphs down, we read that Bernie has beaten Hillary two out of three. The Times' lack of objectivity is becoming laughable.
www.newyorkgritty.net
Twenty seven paragraphs down, we read that Bernie has beaten Hillary two out of three. The Times' lack of objectivity is becoming laughable.
www.newyorkgritty.net
23
He won two states where he go a total of 45,390 votes. She got 30,847 votes in those states, and 221,615 in LA.
1
The population of Louisiana is roughly that of the other two states added together. That's why it matters more.
Everything isn't a conspiracy.
Everything isn't a conspiracy.
2
Do you consider the Electoral College a conspiracy? If population mattered, Al Gore would be president today. The objective is winning states.
Don't read too much into the Cruz win in the ridiculously undemocratic Maine GOP caucus. There were only 22! caucus sites across the entire state, and Maine is not a small state geographically. Just to put into perspective how abysmally low turnout was, around 18k people voted in Maine, while in New Hampshire which has about the same population, there were more than 280k total votes. This was basically just a gathering of the party faithful, who would tend to support someone like Cruz.
Cruz will net a good number of delegates out of caucus states like Maine and Kansas, and these definitely matter. Unfortunately for him, out of the remaining states, only two more (Hawaii, Montana) will hold a caucus instead of a primary.
Cruz will net a good number of delegates out of caucus states like Maine and Kansas, and these definitely matter. Unfortunately for him, out of the remaining states, only two more (Hawaii, Montana) will hold a caucus instead of a primary.
5
I just read several top Reader's Picks' comments and all were about the same thing, which this one-line top comment captured perfectly: "Bernie wins two out of three and still can't grab the headline?", ergo there is a clear bias against the Vermont Senator.
While I cannot comment on the veracity of the charge of bias, here's a point that I can make that has nothing to do with bias, but should concern Senator Sanders' supporters even more: Bernie's two wins to Hillary's one win netted her more delegates (55) than him (47), illustrating a reality that Hillary knows only too well. The fact that on the Democratic side of the these presidential nominating contests the delegates are award proportionately means that the just over 200-delegate hole that Bernie is in right now, which is twice as deep as the one Hillary got in and could not get out of in 2008, is virtually insurmountable. Therefore, the number of states that Bernie wins is not as important as the margin by which he wins them since it's the latter that will determine whether or not he can overtake her. If he wins two states and she wins jut one but nets more delegates, then it can be argued that a headline trumpeting her one win is appropriate, no?
While I cannot comment on the veracity of the charge of bias, here's a point that I can make that has nothing to do with bias, but should concern Senator Sanders' supporters even more: Bernie's two wins to Hillary's one win netted her more delegates (55) than him (47), illustrating a reality that Hillary knows only too well. The fact that on the Democratic side of the these presidential nominating contests the delegates are award proportionately means that the just over 200-delegate hole that Bernie is in right now, which is twice as deep as the one Hillary got in and could not get out of in 2008, is virtually insurmountable. Therefore, the number of states that Bernie wins is not as important as the margin by which he wins them since it's the latter that will determine whether or not he can overtake her. If he wins two states and she wins jut one but nets more delegates, then it can be argued that a headline trumpeting her one win is appropriate, no?
6
In 2008, after it was clear that young voters preferred Barrack Obama, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, on behalf of the Democratic Establishment, ordered Hillary Clinton to stop campaigning and support Obama for president. If she would do that, they promised her the White House in 2016. That is why the Media is so biased against Sanders. The headline should have read "Sanders Beats Clinton and Momentum Is Gaining Among Democratic Voters." Instead of focusing on her base and the super delegates, a fair reading would have been to focus on the great movement within the progressive side of the party, as Sanders continues to build support in spite of the overwhelming name recognition advantage held by HRC as a nationally recognized politician.
13
This is an amazing insight, thank you. And I always felt a deal had been made with her quick appointment as Secretary of State. And even the NYT writes about how poorly she did in that role, even disastrously if you look at Libya.
The amount of whining by Sanders fans here is rather revealing. It's Republicans that are supposed to have the problem with arithmetic. Remember! The good news was Sanders won KS/NE. The bad news was Sanders ended the day further from the nomination than he started it. Right now about 1.6 million more people have voted for Clinton than Sanders
12
so we know there are at least 1.6 million americans incapable of seeing whats in their best interest
stay tuned
theres millions more
stay tuned
theres millions more
Both Kansas and Nebraska voted for Romney in 2012. In both Kansas and Nebraska, Romney defeated Obama by more than 25%. Both Kansas and Nebraska are really red-red states, meaning super-conservative. What it implies is that they would never in our life time vote for a colored candidate or female candidate.
Sanders may win, but I hope Sanders supporters will not distort facts.
Sanders may win, but I hope Sanders supporters will not distort facts.
3
Yes, NE and KS will never vote Democrat. But nether will UT, ID, MT, Nd, SD, TX, AZ, LA, MS, AL, GA, NC, SC, VA, KY, TN and IN. FL, CO, IA and NV could go either way.
Let's see who wins Michigan. If Ms. Clinton wins like she did in LA and TX, then that proves the diversity argument. If Mr. Sanders wins, or MS. Clinton wins like she did in MA or IA; she has problems.
Let's see who wins Michigan. If Ms. Clinton wins like she did in LA and TX, then that proves the diversity argument. If Mr. Sanders wins, or MS. Clinton wins like she did in MA or IA; she has problems.
3
I wonder if billionaire Ken Griffin is happy with his investment in Marco Rubio...
4
Probably not but billionaires diversify their investments. A few gone bad don't matter as long most pay off.
1
Every Sanders comment must include a boast and a charge of bias. All of their comments are pretty much interchangeable. Still, they all get lots of recommendations. Apparently Sanders people never get tired of reading the same thing. Some comments do add nasty criticism of Clinton. Those probably get extra credit. The ironic thing is that, if they canvassed for Sanders rather than writing all these comments, the guy might actually win. Apparently, they like bragging about winning more than they like actually working for the cause.
11
Every Clinton comment must include a criticism of Sanders supporters. Every single one. You can't ever say anything about why we should support your candidate because her record of being a warmonger who is in bed with Wall Street really is nothing to brag about. These things are all documented including in this very newspaper. Yet Clintonistas like you say that these are nasty smears made by right wing trolls or uniformed naive Berniebots. It is getting old. By the way I'd say that with the 2,000,000 individual contributions made to the Sanders campaigns and the huge turnouts to Sanders speeches, phone banking and canvassing, it his supporters that are showing their support not the Clintonistas such as you.
1
I urge all black Americans to vote for Sanders. He was involved in civil rights struggles and his interests are genuinely for the people. I am black British (and Kenyan) but I follow US politics as I believe the outcome affects us all.
15
What is it with Sanders' supporters always telling (or, in this case urging) Blacks how to vote?? Don't you get it?-- the main reason why he's not getting their vote is because most people don't even know who he is.
Yes, the outcome of the U.S. election will affect us all, but it's still our own decision to make.
Yes, the outcome of the U.S. election will affect us all, but it's still our own decision to make.
I wonder if the Bernie-people planning a 'protest vote' for Trump will be bothered, when he's keeping his #1 promise-- to hunt down eleven million men, women and children, and load them onto rail cars headed south. That's not a vote of conscience, it's a fit of pique.
7
Actually, polls show that Bernie beats ALL Republicans by wide margins, whereas Hillary beats Trump by less and Cruz by a worrying one point. Moreover, Bernie beats Trump by a wider margin. Here's results from the most recent poll from CNN: "Sanders -- who enjoys the most positive favorable rating of any presidential candidate in the field, according to the poll -- tops all three Republicans by wide margins: 57% to 40% against Cruz, 55% to 43% against Trump, and 53% to 45% against Rubio. Sanders fares better than Clinton in each match-up among men, younger voters and independents...Clinton tops Trump 52% to 44% among registered voters...But when the former secretary of state faces off with either of the other two top Republicans, things are much tighter and roughly the same as they were in January. Clinton trails against Rubio, with 50% choosing the Florida senator compared to 47% for Clinton, identical to the results in January. Against Cruz, Clinton holds 48% to his 49%, a slight tightening from a 3-point race in January to a 1-point match-up now."
Conclusion: Sanders is more electable than Hillary.
Conclusion: Sanders is more electable than Hillary.
You don't have to hunt down the illegals. If they can't earn a living most will return to their home country
Republicans, including Donald Trump, are looking at the Supreme Court and licking their lips like the big bad wolf salivating over Little Red Riding Hood. If the GOP, including Trump, wins the White House in November, the Constitution is toast. I'm a Hillary supporter, but if Bernie gets the nomination, I'll break my back to get him elected. Bernie supporters who can't bring themselves to vote for Hillary, get real! I don't doubt for a second if the GOPers win in November, Bernie will be permanently shut out by Republicans, as will Clinton and all Democrats. If you think GOP obstruction and destruction has been horrible for the last seven years, you haven't seen anything yet. Ensuring that the Supreme Court becomes a rubber stamp for the Greed Over People party is job one for the Republicans.
5
Darth Vader,
We'll see what the FBI, and her server administrator come up with; it could be as damaging as the White House tapes. Ms. Clinton has changed her story a few times in this regard. Same goes fro Benghazi. Same goes fro Wall Street speeches and the like. I am waiting for her "Checkers" speech.
We'll see what the FBI, and her server administrator come up with; it could be as damaging as the White House tapes. Ms. Clinton has changed her story a few times in this regard. Same goes fro Benghazi. Same goes fro Wall Street speeches and the like. I am waiting for her "Checkers" speech.
7
Hillary and Trump win in Louisiana: God help us if Louisiana's political inclinations infect the rest of the country. Really! (I should know; I grew up there; it is a nice place to be FROM).
2
Listen to Bernie, New York Times! Hillary is winning mostly Southern states that are probably going to go Republican in November.
Bernie has a lot of Latino votes here in Arizona, and I would guess in California and elsewhere, also. I think younger Black voters are behind him in much larger numbers than their elders. He's not as well known, but is gaining rapidly among minorities. He's not quitting, so don't count him out just yet. A lot of us haven't even gotten our turn to vote.
He's right about the super delegates, they will support the people's choice at the convention.
I'd love to see a chart with the actual head count of total votes in each state for each candidate, to get a feel for the popular vote so far. By the way, I'm 69 years old, not a college kid. Go Bernie!!!
Bernie has a lot of Latino votes here in Arizona, and I would guess in California and elsewhere, also. I think younger Black voters are behind him in much larger numbers than their elders. He's not as well known, but is gaining rapidly among minorities. He's not quitting, so don't count him out just yet. A lot of us haven't even gotten our turn to vote.
He's right about the super delegates, they will support the people's choice at the convention.
I'd love to see a chart with the actual head count of total votes in each state for each candidate, to get a feel for the popular vote so far. By the way, I'm 69 years old, not a college kid. Go Bernie!!!
11
As if Kansas and Nebraska will be going blue. Obama won the nomination by winning big in red states. Their voters also get to participate, whether in the southern or farm or mountain states that rarely vote Democratic on a statewide basis. As of course they should!
2
Super delegates can change their minds...they might too there is early republican surprise and they all dump her.
1
what about superduper delegates ?
Boy, at least here in the South the words "big prize" & Louisiana are never used in the same sentence. In these craziest of times since the Vietnam War, I comfort myself late at night by being thankful the Democratic Party is offering up 2 good people who both would do us well as our next President. While the Republican Party offers up zero good people for that post or for your local dogcatcher.
Personally, I love Hillary with my head, but love Bernie with my heart. After waiting for 8 years to vote for Hillary once again, my wife & I cast our votes for Bernie last Tuesday. We'll do OK living in Hillary's USA, but we dream of living in Bernie's USA.
The fundamental things Bernie says are wrong with America are truly wrong. The fixes he talks about are the only ways to fix what's wrong with America. Clinton Triangulation won't fix much, though Hillary will probably deliver 8 peaceful, prosperous years to our Oligarchs. It's going to take Bernie's Big Yank to get America back on track for the rest of us. Do it now, or do it 100 years from now, the same fixes will need be applied.
It's too late for me, so I worry about my young daughters. 100 years from now will be too late for them & long before 100 years pass by, the Oligarchs will solidify their money & power & own the US lock, stock & slave labor. Why should our children suffer just so super rich people can play this crazy game of Who Wants To Be the First US Trillionaire? This is not what life is about!
Personally, I love Hillary with my head, but love Bernie with my heart. After waiting for 8 years to vote for Hillary once again, my wife & I cast our votes for Bernie last Tuesday. We'll do OK living in Hillary's USA, but we dream of living in Bernie's USA.
The fundamental things Bernie says are wrong with America are truly wrong. The fixes he talks about are the only ways to fix what's wrong with America. Clinton Triangulation won't fix much, though Hillary will probably deliver 8 peaceful, prosperous years to our Oligarchs. It's going to take Bernie's Big Yank to get America back on track for the rest of us. Do it now, or do it 100 years from now, the same fixes will need be applied.
It's too late for me, so I worry about my young daughters. 100 years from now will be too late for them & long before 100 years pass by, the Oligarchs will solidify their money & power & own the US lock, stock & slave labor. Why should our children suffer just so super rich people can play this crazy game of Who Wants To Be the First US Trillionaire? This is not what life is about!
13
I have to suppose that an awful lot of you Sanders "supporters" are in truth either incredibly naive or, more likely, just GOP trolls throwing around all the usual anti-Clinton trash you can think of. It's been a national political pastime for the GOP since the dawn of our time.
I'm voting for Clinton, but if Sanders wins the nomination I'll vote for Sanders. And while I'm voting Clinton now, I'm not at the same time helping the GOP in the fall by launching invective on a guy who could become the Democratic candidate.
Most of the anti-Clinton commenters here, if they were in fact true Democrats and progressives, would be promising their support to Clinton if Sanders loses. Instead, these fake Democrats and progressives are ready to throw the election to the GOP and their soon to be nominated far right wing judges. That will fix things, won't it folks! Talk about cutting off your noses to spite your faces.
Sit at home if Clinton is the Democratic nominee. That's the legacy you folks will give to America. Yeah, the GOP won the election, but at least you can hold your heads high and tell your kids how you did the right thing and SAT down for your principles while your kids are being schooled in right wing science and being discriminated against because of their color, their race, their religion or their sexual preferences. But then I hope it makes you happy to selfishly reflect on your purity.
I'm voting for Clinton, but if Sanders wins the nomination I'll vote for Sanders. And while I'm voting Clinton now, I'm not at the same time helping the GOP in the fall by launching invective on a guy who could become the Democratic candidate.
Most of the anti-Clinton commenters here, if they were in fact true Democrats and progressives, would be promising their support to Clinton if Sanders loses. Instead, these fake Democrats and progressives are ready to throw the election to the GOP and their soon to be nominated far right wing judges. That will fix things, won't it folks! Talk about cutting off your noses to spite your faces.
Sit at home if Clinton is the Democratic nominee. That's the legacy you folks will give to America. Yeah, the GOP won the election, but at least you can hold your heads high and tell your kids how you did the right thing and SAT down for your principles while your kids are being schooled in right wing science and being discriminated against because of their color, their race, their religion or their sexual preferences. But then I hope it makes you happy to selfishly reflect on your purity.
13
It's so strange that Kasich gets no recognition. He has a successful record in Congress and as governor, his answers in the debates are articulate, and he acts with reserve and character befitting a presidential election.
3
Look at the list of remaining states. Bernie could catch up and overtake with just a few states with large delegate count, this is the year of what I am calling "disruptive" politics. I lived in the west...no one would ever have believed that a socialist democrat would beat out establishment democrat in Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska...say what!?...but of course democrat by today's definition is a republican so far right has swung the pendulum thanks to Koch Brothers and oligarchs.
Hold strong young voters, fight for your vision, its your future at stake and your country and this planet. Clearly the people want real significant social and political change unprecedented.
Hold strong young voters, fight for your vision, its your future at stake and your country and this planet. Clearly the people want real significant social and political change unprecedented.
8
Both Clinton and Trump are leading their respective parties in the delegate count. The analysis that is hardly ever broached is that in head to head competition Clinton defeats Trump; however loses to Rubio, Cruz, and Kasich.
However Sanders beats all of the GOP candidates. So if you really want a Democrat to win the general election, go with the Bern.
However Sanders beats all of the GOP candidates. So if you really want a Democrat to win the general election, go with the Bern.
8
Sanders has now won 6 of the last 7 primaries and caucuses outside the South. Clinton does not have a single decisive victory in a non-Southern state, as her victories in Iowa, Nevada, and Massachusetts were all close (she may in fact have lost Iowa) . Sanders has the support of a clear majority of white Democrats. The Latino breakdown is uncertain--Sanders did very well among Nevada Latinos.
Clinton's nomination, if and when it comes, will be the result of her support among African-Americans. She will owe the African-American community an enormous political debt. Whether she will consider this a debt that needs to be repaid is another story.
Clinton's nomination, if and when it comes, will be the result of her support among African-Americans. She will owe the African-American community an enormous political debt. Whether she will consider this a debt that needs to be repaid is another story.
4
Bernie Bros are mad that the NYT headline is not screaming in "THE WAR IN EUROPE IS ENDED!" type that Bernie won the caucuses in, er, Nebraska and Kansas.
Those states are not switching from red in November, Bros, hate to break the news to you.
Those states are not switching from red in November, Bros, hate to break the news to you.
8
I suggest anyone who dismisses HRC's relationship with Wall Street as being unimportant when selecting a candidate watch 'The Big Short'. It'll serve as a great reminder of how sinister and fraudulent the banks were. How they destroyed livelihoods. They knew the U.S. taxpayer would bail them out. These are the same people that HRC now 'owes' favors to and we all know how that will play out. #FeeltheBERN2016
17
I don't think I'm going to let a Hollywood production designed for drama and entertainment sway my vote.
No, you definitely shouldn't, but are you saying that paying someone $21+ million in "speaker fees" doesn't put them in your pocket?
1
A lot of voters who wouldn't normally go out and vote are doing so. Maybe they are voting so Trump doesn't get the Republican nomination.
That was strategic NYT, to pick a picture of Clinton talking to black men. Think you'll do a story on Bill Clinton in Massachusetts illegally clogging up voting areas? Naw, just focus on Republican's.
9
I see the same treatment of Bernie, re superdelegates on all the network news shows; they factor them in to Clinton's total, without explanation, as if they were a fait acompli, in essence telling Bernie voters to stay home or fall into line. Many will see these tallies and sink into despair. Mission accomplished plutocrats.
11
@Stan Continople
Brooklyn
Forget supers. Right now she has some 200 more pledged delegates than Sanders and has won about 1.6 million more votes. Nothing to do with plutocrats. In fact he's collecting and spending more money than she is.
Brooklyn
Forget supers. Right now she has some 200 more pledged delegates than Sanders and has won about 1.6 million more votes. Nothing to do with plutocrats. In fact he's collecting and spending more money than she is.
7
According to Republicans the American people are not yet dumb enough and not sick enough. Therefore, they want to get rid of the Department of Education and the EPA.
On the bright, side they trust the American people to do their own taxes on a postcard without the need for the IRS, which they will abolish.
Logic under their rule will be unnecessary and simply abolished.
On the bright, side they trust the American people to do their own taxes on a postcard without the need for the IRS, which they will abolish.
Logic under their rule will be unnecessary and simply abolished.
2
A vote for Bernie is a vote for Trump. Go Hillary! And what I mean here is that Bernie can't win, and even if he somehow got the nod, Trump would eat him for a snack. Bernie would be a speed bump in the way toward Trump winning the election. Hillary isn't perfect by any means, but if she's the only thing that stands between us and America becoming a dictatorship, then Hillary has my vote, and several donations, unlike the one that I gave to Bernie before the rise of Trump.
10
Trump is not a dictator. Why not stick to the truth?
Dictatorship? That is not our system. Any President in our system cannot be a dictator because we have separation of powers. Trump may be a good President, better than the Clintons.
Not according to Quinnipiac University poll in late February, or CNNs poll, or Fox's poll, all done recently. http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/nat...
Presidential matchups among American voters show:
Sanders over Trump 48 - 42 percent;
Sanders tops Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas 49 - 39 percent;
Sanders leads Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida 47 - 41 percent;
Sanders beats Bush 49 - 39 percent;
Sanders edges Kasich 45 - 41 percent.
Clinton with 44 percent to Trump's 43 percent;
Cruz with 46 percent to Clinton's 43 percent;
Rubio topping Clinton 48 - 41 percent;
Sanders is also the only candidate with a positive favorability rating.
The media, as in this article, misleads the public as to these poll figures. Sanders is the only viable candidate out there.
Presidential matchups among American voters show:
Sanders over Trump 48 - 42 percent;
Sanders tops Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas 49 - 39 percent;
Sanders leads Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida 47 - 41 percent;
Sanders beats Bush 49 - 39 percent;
Sanders edges Kasich 45 - 41 percent.
Clinton with 44 percent to Trump's 43 percent;
Cruz with 46 percent to Clinton's 43 percent;
Rubio topping Clinton 48 - 41 percent;
Sanders is also the only candidate with a positive favorability rating.
The media, as in this article, misleads the public as to these poll figures. Sanders is the only viable candidate out there.
At this point in the primary season, it's more than the lack of journalistic professionalism to use the news pages to editorialize for Hillary Clinton.
23
Even though Sanders has no chance, it's important that he keeps on fighting till the convention. Every state he wins is a symbolic victory for socialists and to send a message to Clinton.
9
Clinton is indeed listening, but she is deliberately not hearing, and this will be her downfall.
1
I think its guilt complex driving a large number of African Americans (including politicians) who are voting for Ms Clinton since they deserted her in droves in the 2008 election. This is in spite of a long standing relation of great worth. That wasn't a good choice then and their choice for not voting for Bernie Sanders would prove to be unwise also. Things haven't change much for them in the last twelve years under Obama administration, with all those deaths at the hands of law enforcement, tainted water supply. Bernie Sanders would serve the interests of African Americans better this tome around as Ms Clinton would have done in 2008 if she had received their votes.
6
I'm not black. But if I were, I'd probably feel offended by your comment. Best not to impute emotions to whole groups. Unless you're one of the. And have proof.
1
It's not guilt that motivates African Americans voting for Hillary Clinton - it's deep respect for the fact that she supported Obama loyally, and epitomizes the humility to understand that she and her husband were mistaken in believing incarceration was the answer to America's drug policy problems. The fact that she has the decades of experience to have spanned very different popular sentiments in these areas is an invaluable asset where she is concerned, because she has the capacity to admit she was mistaken.
Bernie Sanders has disappointed those of us who were hoping for more chagrin from him on having played along with the gun lobby on the issue of relief from public liability for that industry in its role promoting guns that are engineered for taking human life on a military scale- guns like the AR-15. Bernie gives the same speech every time he winds himself up. He has not changed in 25 years. That is endearing in a Senator. But, worrisome and tedious in anyone who might become a president being asked to deal with the world as it is today, not as it was in 1968.
Bernie Sanders has disappointed those of us who were hoping for more chagrin from him on having played along with the gun lobby on the issue of relief from public liability for that industry in its role promoting guns that are engineered for taking human life on a military scale- guns like the AR-15. Bernie gives the same speech every time he winds himself up. He has not changed in 25 years. That is endearing in a Senator. But, worrisome and tedious in anyone who might become a president being asked to deal with the world as it is today, not as it was in 1968.
5
The Grand Obstructionist Party has to change, no matter which Party is elected.
2
The Superdelegates (a.k.a. the establishment) of the Democratic Party, to help their party win the general election should Mrs. Clinton be the standard bearer, should be demanding she make public the transcripts of her speeches to Wall Street firms. The Democratic Party Superdelegates, by not demanding the release of Mrs. Clinton's transcripts for public review, is undermining the potential success of the Democratic Party.
What did she promise Wall Street firms that make these speeches so toxic that they shouldn't be made public during the Democratic primary season?
Also, what are the Democratic Party Superdelegates doing to ensure Email-Gate doesn't undermine the Democratic Party and the many Americans (e.g., African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Asian-Americans, White-Americans, etc.) who are putting their trust in the Democratic Party?
Main Street Democrats and other inquiring minds want to know what Wall Street Democrats and establishment Democrats know about Mrs. Clinton's speeches to Wall Street firms and the potential disaster of Email-Gate.
What did she promise Wall Street firms that make these speeches so toxic that they shouldn't be made public during the Democratic primary season?
Also, what are the Democratic Party Superdelegates doing to ensure Email-Gate doesn't undermine the Democratic Party and the many Americans (e.g., African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Asian-Americans, White-Americans, etc.) who are putting their trust in the Democratic Party?
Main Street Democrats and other inquiring minds want to know what Wall Street Democrats and establishment Democrats know about Mrs. Clinton's speeches to Wall Street firms and the potential disaster of Email-Gate.
19
That's too much for inquiring plebian minds to contemplate. Polish up your DNC goosestep and get back in line. The answers to these questions are way above our paygrade, so don't even bother.
Steven:
LOL.
LOL.
Forget the transcripts. They don't matter. She needs to return the money. While she's at it return the money to schools and or alumni associations. What kind of public servant when asked to speak to college kids puts her palm out and demands a couple hundred grand?
It is dishonest to say today's vote was 'decisive' for HRC. She won a few more delegates. 'Decisive' implies something was decided.
How do you sleep at night?
How do you sleep at night?
30
"While [Kansas and Nebraska] are overwhelmingly Republican states, each also retains an element of prairie populism, which benefits Mr. Sanders."
It was not mentioned that almost every state won by Clinton so far "are overwhelmingly Republican states". Very curious.
It was not mentioned that almost every state won by Clinton so far "are overwhelmingly Republican states". Very curious.
21
Bill Clinton signed into law the item that made credit default swaps unregulated financial instruments. After the mortgage crisis, Obama and the Democrats chose not to use the short period of consensus to try to fix the regulations and brink back Glass-Steagel.
1
That "decisive win" for Hillary Clinton in Louisiana will be of ZERO help in the General Election -- Much like her "huge victory" in South Carolina that turned out a record-breaking 600,000 voters for Trump in the GOP primary, and gave him all 50 delegate votes. Hillary Clinton has been losing to match-ups with GOP candidates since January, while Bernie Sanders beats ALL GOP candidates. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential...
20
What's wrong with Kansas?
Everything......
The Brownback/Republic Party Paradise on Earth supports President Cruz, much as it gave a lift to President Huckabee and President Santorum.
Trump is a loser..that's a fortuitous event.....to Tail Gunner Eduardo,
a lesser demagogue and authoritarian.
Let's us enjoy the spectacle to a brokered Republic Party convention.
Everything......
The Brownback/Republic Party Paradise on Earth supports President Cruz, much as it gave a lift to President Huckabee and President Santorum.
Trump is a loser..that's a fortuitous event.....to Tail Gunner Eduardo,
a lesser demagogue and authoritarian.
Let's us enjoy the spectacle to a brokered Republic Party convention.
2
Congrats, Bernie! Mr. Berra said it best, "It ain't over till it's over!"
Remember, no matter what the DNC's Chair, Ms. Wasserman thinks, Super Delegates are not super, they would be the kiss of death if they tipped the election to Clinton. More debates, please--- this isn't a coronation this is an election.
Transcripts? Secretary Clinton, please submit those Wall Street speech transcripts, who cares what Republicans will or won't release. Senator Sanders has already released his transcripts. Oh wait! Sanders didn't speak to Wall Street and make promises to them. It's called Transparency 2.0, Clinton get on that bus or be left behind. America is tired of the old corrosive revolving door that only serves the oligarchs, we want to advance forward on President Obama's agenda not regress from it.
Remember, no matter what the DNC's Chair, Ms. Wasserman thinks, Super Delegates are not super, they would be the kiss of death if they tipped the election to Clinton. More debates, please--- this isn't a coronation this is an election.
Transcripts? Secretary Clinton, please submit those Wall Street speech transcripts, who cares what Republicans will or won't release. Senator Sanders has already released his transcripts. Oh wait! Sanders didn't speak to Wall Street and make promises to them. It's called Transparency 2.0, Clinton get on that bus or be left behind. America is tired of the old corrosive revolving door that only serves the oligarchs, we want to advance forward on President Obama's agenda not regress from it.
22
Is it just me, or are all of the states Hillary is winning, solidly red states? I mean, I might be concerned that her lone strength appears to be winning primaries in states that she will have no chance in in November. Sanders' campaign is dead in the water, but his strength seems to be in states that are swing and battleground states. Hillary better show some strength in actual states she will need come November, or she is sunk.
11
Go, Michigan! — #FeelThe Bern
Let the Domino House, and dominion of the Clintons and the DNC, fall down. It's time to reclaim the open field!
Let the Domino House, and dominion of the Clintons and the DNC, fall down. It's time to reclaim the open field!
21
So Republican elite stop Trump by nominating one of the most disliked political figures in the country? The poor guys just can't catch a break this year. My guess is that Cruz has less chance of winning in the general election but the party elite loose either way. Which is the lesser of those two evils?
5
There was a lot of talk about President Obama as not having born in the US, well here we have Cruz who was born in Calgary! How come no one talks about that? Is that going to be a point of contention later on?
9
Voter caucuses are divided among candidates. If Clinton and Sanders are smart, they will caucus and devise a platform that entails stands from both campaigns. While the Republicans are divided and fighting, a Clinton/Sanders platform would appeal to all Democrats and some independent voters.
I'm actually quite surprised to see such widespread acceptance of Sanders Socialist Democrat principles. I had thought that many would have considered him too liberal, but the obvious way forward is to combine the best of both to win.
I'm actually quite surprised to see such widespread acceptance of Sanders Socialist Democrat principles. I had thought that many would have considered him too liberal, but the obvious way forward is to combine the best of both to win.
1
Media played into the hands of the HRC campaign by repeating for months that African-American voters in the South were going to be for her. True, Sanders is not as well known as HRC, but at some point she may get fewer votes from African-Americans as people remember she blew it on health care, and went along as President Clinton filled federal prisons and cut various types of public assistance. But, again, it was simpIy a tactic of the HRC campaign to fulfill its own prophesy by saying African-Americans were going to backs her.
Admittedly, she has done well with African-American primary voters and it could be wishful thinking that Sanders will get a serious second look before the primaries end.
Huge states are still to come.
(HRÇ and Sanders are far better than the alternatives.)
Admittedly, she has done well with African-American primary voters and it could be wishful thinking that Sanders will get a serious second look before the primaries end.
Huge states are still to come.
(HRÇ and Sanders are far better than the alternatives.)
3
Maybe I am missing something but I had watched several of GOP "debates" and heard several of the Cruz rally speeches but I don't see how he could practically bring the country to a higher standard of living. His vision for a better America is not inclusive enough and it does not address the major problems of income and job distribution. He is especially weak on how we are going to deal with the issue of global warming, which the military and the intelligence communities say is our greatest national security threat. You can't carpet bomb your way out of flooding or a food shortage. He is handicapped by denying global warming and is going against the majority of the American people in their call for action on this threat. Remember the Gulf of Mexico will be hard hit by rising sea levels and storms that are of greater intensity with the potential of storm surges that would inundate and destroy the Gulf cities of Texas as well as the coastal plain states of the south including our Navy bases like Norfolk,VA and many electric power plants in the coastal plain of Florida. Senator Cruz should be listening to the warnings of Republican elites like Michael Bloomberg, who has 40 Billion dollars and lots of executive experience in making urban areas work and George Schultz. Can you imagine how much weight would be given to their speeches at the convention? Senator Cruz would become awfully small, very fast. To become President he must show that he knows the needs of Americans.
The Bernie supporters on here sound a little silly when they say "Who cares if Hillary won Louisiana? It's red territory!" Um, what do you think Kansas and Nebraska are?
5
I don't support Sanders because I think his plans will make the middle class and working class even poorer. Free higher education and medicare for all is going to cost money, and we'll have to pay through much higher taxes while dealing with lower GDP levels, squeezing the disposable income from both top and bottom . Many more economic experts have warned against it than embraced these proposals. I am a millennial and I am unemployed too, yet I don't believe in throwing the baby out with the bath water. Its unnerving too when some Sanders supporters vow to not vote for Clinton if she gets nominated, which seems just childish hate. (There also seems to be higher percentage of Sanders supporters active on social media including the comments section here, than on the ground.) It might be due to the relative young age of the average Sanders supporter, but real life is not black and white. No one is out there to actually get you, Wall Street included, and demonizing them and waging war on them is not going to take us far. Bring more regulations, yes, by all means. And Hillary is not in any way the polar opposite of Sanders to be so untouchable. In fact, I think she'll strike the right balance and not veer too much to the left or right as to topple the whole thing.
218
People that will not vote for Clinton if she is the nominee are not practicing "childish hate", they simply will not vote for the lesser of what they see as two evils or for a candidate they don't honestly believe in. Frankly that gives me hope that this election cycle, regardless of it's outcomes will be a sea change for how Americans engage in politics for years to come.
It's also unfortunate to suggest that "no one is out there to... get you" when all it takes it corporations putting record profits over the basic value of middle-class workers to find the all too real boogie man in our midsts today. It's real.
It's also unfortunate to suggest that "no one is out there to... get you" when all it takes it corporations putting record profits over the basic value of middle-class workers to find the all too real boogie man in our midsts today. It's real.
2
" No one is out there to actually get you, Wall Street included, and demonizing them and waging war on them is not going to take us far." You are strikingly naive if you actually believe your above statement. Go see "The Big Short." That's the most recent Wall Street scam. A little "googling" will unveil a wealth of information for you to ponder.
2
As of now, you have 11 people who agree with you. Maybe you should try to find out why.
#Bernie2016
#Bernie2016
Mr. Sanders might do better if he didn't refer to people over 40 as "elderly". I'm a lot younger than he is. Still don't care for him.
3
"Decisive Win for Clinton in Louisiana" as the Pravda New York Times division continues its Jim-Jones-style cult worship at Hillary's Temple.
The New York Times needs a serious political and medical time-out.
Chronic Hillary Encephalopathy (CHE) is a very serious neurological condition.
If you can't Feel The Bern at all New York Times, you have already lost the feeling and thinking in your entire body.
Seek medical, journalistic and political help ASAP !
The New York Times needs a serious political and medical time-out.
Chronic Hillary Encephalopathy (CHE) is a very serious neurological condition.
If you can't Feel The Bern at all New York Times, you have already lost the feeling and thinking in your entire body.
Seek medical, journalistic and political help ASAP !
76
They've made their bed, and they seem to enjoy "lying" in it with Hillary.
In this instance, the word "lying", has two meanings, and two definitions.
I believe the media bias is having an opposite effect; reasonable people who see Trump and the republicans as the danger they are, they also recognize Hillary as a Republican wolf, hiding in Democrat clothing, saying and doing whatever it takes to go home to "her" White House, the same House Bernie referred to as "The Peoples House".
In this instance, the word "lying", has two meanings, and two definitions.
I believe the media bias is having an opposite effect; reasonable people who see Trump and the republicans as the danger they are, they also recognize Hillary as a Republican wolf, hiding in Democrat clothing, saying and doing whatever it takes to go home to "her" White House, the same House Bernie referred to as "The Peoples House".
2
Pravda New York? That's all I need to know.
I was not thrilled an inaccurate accusations of Naziism in the 1960s either.
I actually voted for Bernie, but only after I succeeded in shutting out the Bernie-splainers who were driving me nuts with their absolutism.
Please calm down. We're better off with an old fashioned Democrat than any of the Republican parasites. So VOTE, at every level vote.
Please stop with the hero worship, and get to work making things better.
I was not thrilled an inaccurate accusations of Naziism in the 1960s either.
I actually voted for Bernie, but only after I succeeded in shutting out the Bernie-splainers who were driving me nuts with their absolutism.
Please calm down. We're better off with an old fashioned Democrat than any of the Republican parasites. So VOTE, at every level vote.
Please stop with the hero worship, and get to work making things better.
1
My takeaway is that in Louisiana, a state that went Republican in the last two Presidential races, there were more Democrats in the primary than Republicans. Will this state go Democratic in the next election? Won't that be embarrasing for Bobby Jindal?
5