Home / General / Can this horrible primary finally be over?

Can this horrible primary finally be over?

Comments
/
/
/
309 Views

Results here. Let’s have an open thread celebrating the end of the damn primary, but for the hell of it, let’s try and experiment and refrain from saying mean things (even accurate ones!) about the horrible supporters of the other candidate.

Echoing 2008, Clinton may well pull off a surprise victory in South Dakota. The Dakota split is puzzling to me. The demographics of SD and ND are very similar, although if anything it would seem the SD demographic might be more Sanders-friendly, given the larger Native American population, which appears to be pretty pro-Sanders. It’s tempting to attribute this to caucus v. primary, and that’s obviously a big part of the gap, but as of now there’s a 42 point difference between the states (Sanders by 39, Clinton by 3) and the caucus boost for Sanders has typically been more like 10-15 points. What’s going on here?

CA prediction: Clinton by 4.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • Denverite

    It’s tempting to attribute this to caucus v. primary, and that’s obviously a big part of the gap, but as of now there’s a 42 point difference between the states (Sanders by 39, Clinton by 3)

    There was a 34 point gap in 2008. Whatever the reason, ND caucuses skew a lot more left (or at least less mainstream) than SD primaries.

    • N__B

      I blame Mount Rushmore.

      • Denverite

        I love the Black Hills.

        • los

          now the liberel race cardists ar naming the governmint lands!111

          “Sumday youll have brayins as me and Donnold Trump am.”
          Ernest T. Blogger

      • Thirtyish

        I blame the Badlands.

        • Denverite

          GODDAMMIT THAT’S STUCK IN MY HEAD NOW

          • Scott Lemieux

            Ain’t no sin to be glad you’re alive, even if your team is starting Mark Sanchez.

            • tsam

              Haha! You guys are cruel!

              • Denverite

                If they were really cruel they would point out that Aqib Talib is going to miss some time for shooting himself in a club in Dallas. Probably. He was actually too drunk to remember how he got shot in the back of his thigh. (TBF, been there.)

                Though it’s par for the course for a fucking Berkner High grad.

                • tsam

                  Been there? Ok I HAVE TO HEAR THIS STORY

                • Been there in approximately 18 Broncos games in the past year, no doubt.

                • Denverite

                  Which one did I miss?

                • Weren’t you flying during one game?

                • Denverite

                  Nah, I schedule flights around games (not even kidding). I was stuck at a kids’ basketball game until midway through the third quarter of the Bengals game, so I was only able to get moderately tipsy. You might be thinking of that.

      • sharculese

        Don’t forget generous readings of the Commerce Clause!

    • efgoldman

      What, did a couple of hundred people vote in the ND caucuses? Means absolutely nothing. I might as well have a caucus at the diner where we occasionally have breakfast.

      • los

        im goin to bring my neyboors too to the diner111!

        “Sumday youll have brayins as me and Donnold Trump am.”
        Ernest T. Blogger

      • Matt McIrvin

        I think those ND numbers are some sort of state-delegate-equivalent thing rather than actual caucus votes, aren’t they?

    • NeonTrotsky

      Well historically at least, North Dakota had some quite left wing politics. At one point the democratic party was displaced as a major party by what was effectively a socialist party and then then merged on terms favorable to said third party, leading to the creation of a public bank among other things.

      • tsam

        Spills over from the more populous parts of Minnesota, maybe?

        • weirdnoise

          I blame Canada.

        • Blame those godless Scandiwegian immigrants steelin our jobs and not even speaking English.

        • MAJeff

          Actually, more of a prairie populist movement in both states. The Democratic party merged with the Farmer-Labor Party in Minnesota, and with the Non-Partisan League in North Dakota. Both tended to be labor-oriented agricultural parties.

          North Dakota still has a state bank.

      • los

        way back then, those darn BernieBros

    • My guess would be something related to the North Dakota oil boom. I have several acquaintances around my age (prime Bernie material) who spent several years in ND during the Great Recession, and at least one has stayed there in the longer term.

      The impression I got is that there are a lot of young people there. A while back there was a Last Week Tonight bit on terrestrial oil spills, and they played a clip from local news in ND. The anchor looks like she just got her BA in Communications.

    • ND caucuses skew a lot more left (or at least less mainstream) than SD primaries.

  • UncleEbeneezer

    So much for Hillary not being able to give a great speech. She just hit a triple at least, maybe a HR. Mom taught her never to run from a bully. Bridges are better than walls. Etc. Was even very complimentary to Bernie.

    Onward.

    • djw

      Is Sanders planning to speak tonight?

      • dmsilev

        I saw a mention somewhere that he was planning on speaking around 10 Pacific. Which seems a little on the late side for the Eastern zone, but whatever.

        • Richard

          Plus the fact that there most likely won’t be a winner of the California primary declared by 10 pm

          • PhoenixRising

            Thursday 10pm, you meant? Maybe. Might be Friday at 10am.

          • EliHawk

            And the fact that, as is obvious now, the votes being reported by then were going to be the early votes, which is Clinton crushing it.

        • tsam

          you don’t want to stay up that late? I’m in the 5th inning of the Mariners game, M8.

      • keta

        According to TPM Sanders is scheduled to meet with Obama on Thursday.

        In addition, at Senator Sanders’ request, the President and Senator Sanders will meet at the White House on Thursday to continue their conversation about the significant issues at stake in this election that matter most to America’s working families. The President looks forward to continuing the conversation with Senator Sanders about how to build on the extraordinary work he has done to engage millions of Democratic voters, and to build on that enthusiasm in the weeks and months ahead.

    • bender

      It was more inspiring than her usual.

  • PLEASE LET THE HELL OF THE FIRST HALF OF 2016 BE OVER!

    • Philip

      We must get started on the hell of the second half!

      • Peterr

        Just save me from the hell of overtime, a la 2000.

        • bender

          Be careful what you ask for.

    • dmsilev

      Only 1200 or so days to go before the 2020 Iowa caucuses!

    • JonH

      What fresh six months of hell is this?

    • twbb

      I suspect the second half of 2016 will make us miss the first half.

      What really has me bummed out is that the GOP convention riot probably won’t devolve into a hilarious free-for-all. I’m hoping Ted has something up his sleeve.

    • kped

      “Remove the stone of Shame, attach the stone of Triumph!”

  • Pseudonym

    I’ll drink to that. Lately the supporters of Candidate X have really been going off the rails and have made the comments here almost unreadable. I don’t mind Candidate X themselves, though I wish they’d be a little more conciliatory towards Candidate Y, but some of the arguments that their supporters have been making are truly beyond the pale. Let’s hope now that Candidate X is mature enough to do the right thing for the party and the country by coming together to defeat Trump.

    • djw

      I always suspected you were a shill for Y.

    • Philip

      Candidate X is, of course, Teddy Roosevelt.

      • James Blaine

        • EliHawk

          I’ll be damned if I vote for the Continental Liar From the State of Maine! #GrantorBust

          • YOU WILL TOTALLY ACCEPT GARFIELD AS A COMPROMISE CANDIDATE!

            • tsam

              I don’t know how to tell you this, but he got shot and died.

              • cpinva

                that’s what they want you to believe!

    • Jackov

      How do you sleep at night after siding
      with the Boltons over the Starks?

      The North Unfortunately Remembers the Past Year

      • tsam

        On a bed, in my Batman Underoos. Why do you ask?

  • Richard

    I agree. Really fine speech – just the right tone. And the difference between South Dakota and North Dakota is solely due to caucus versus primary. In North Dakota, less than 400 people – that’s right, 400 people- voted in the Democratic caucus

    • djw

      “Vote totals are not actual votes cast, but are state convention delegates won.”

      When I caucused in Washington it seemed like the voter to delegate ratio was around 12:1.

      • Richard

        So how many people actually showed up? The results I’ve seen are showing 220 or so for Sanders and 100 or so for Clinton. Even if its twelve to one, we’re still talking less than 5000 actuall voters

        • djw

          I have no idea if the ratios are similar across states. I’m not sure who, if anyone, reports turnout estimates for caucuses?

          • Craigo

            Most caucus states do report total votes – only WA, NV, IA, and ME do not, if I recall.

            For any given state, the Green Papers should have both sets of numbers. It’s a good one stop shop site.

    • Bill Murray

      South Dakota Democratic leaders mostly position themselves as pro-business moderates these days, so not necessarily the best place for Sanders’ primary message. It’s not exactly Jim Abourezk and George McGovern anymore

  • Mike in DC

    Sanders has lost 4 out of 5 so far tonight. Even a narrow win in California is not going to sway a single superdelegate to switch. Congrats to Sen. Sanders for running a vigorous race, pushing the party’s Overton window left, and energizing the yutes. Congrats to Sec. Clinton for winning the nomination. Let us go go forward in unity to utterly crush the horrible horrible people on the other side of the ballot.

    • Karen24

      Yes!!

    • ChrisTS

      Well said.

    • You can see the presidential results from the California Secretary of State’s office here.

    • djw

      Sanders has lost 4 out of 5 so far tonight.

      Not that it matters, obviously, but is there any good reason to think he’s going to lose Montana once more votes come in?

      • efgoldman

        is there any good reason to think he’s going to lose Montana once more votes come in?

        Who cares?

        • N__B

          21 delegates, man. That could be the difference!

          • JonH

            They’re sooper-dooper delegates.

    • Matt McIrvin

      3 out of 5, but California was unexpectedly stark.

      • Shantanu Saha

        As long as Cali is not Lannister, that’s good enough for me.

      • Thom

        Winning is better than losing, even in North Dakota, but the vote totals there were 253 (Sanders) to 101 (Clinton).

        • Just a Rube

          Note that those are delegates selected to the state convention, not total numbers of votes.

          So, the numbers of caucus-goers is probably in the thousands rather than the hundreds. Not a huge turnout, but not quite as small as it appears.

          • Thom

            Ah, thanks. The Guardian and its animated cherry-picker misled me.

  • junker

    I just want to say that it feels great to be a member of a party here in the US that managed to elect the first black President in our history and now, with any luck, our first female President. Beyond that it feels like destiny, that she gets to run against the most openly misogynistic candidate in recent memory.

    My wife and I had our first and currently only child last year about three months before Clinton formally announced her candidacy, and it is amazing for her to grow up in a world like this. I know this is a common sentiment but it’s still true.

    • PhoenixRising

      Destiny is one way to put it. I liked Rebecca Traister’s take: Of course Hillary has to get past Donald Trump to get to the Oval Office, because it’s Indiana Jones territory: ‘…snakes!?!?! Why did it have to be…snakes?”

    • bender

      One thing this primary had in common with 2008 was that either way the Democratic nomination would be a first. We haven’t had a major party nominate a Jew for President yet.

      • John not McCain

        Or a Muslim, depending on who you talk to.

  • wjts

    Let’s have an open thread celebrating the end of the damn primary, but for the hell of it, let’s try and experiment and refrain from saying mean things (even accurate ones!) about the horrible supporters of the other candidate.

    In the spirit of comity, truth, and reconciliation, I’d like to apologize for the numerous times I called Clinton’s supporters, “A pack of hysterical murder-fetishist neo-liberal hyena-beasts who, for their temerity in opposing the One True Democratic God-King, the Progressive Prince That Was Promised, His Sacred Left-Most Eminence Bernie Sanders, should be condemned to labor without respite or relief in the foulest sulfur mines the Earth has to offer for the remainder of their barbaric and unnatural lives.” That may have been over the line.

    • ChrisTS

      Apology accepted.

      I apologize for the times I called Sanders supporters commie, pinko, authoritarian, misogynistic, pedophiles who resented the Rise of the Queen Of All That Is Good and Holy. On the other hand, I think I mostly told them to F-off and never thought to condemn them to sulfur mines.

      Naturally, after a certain number of glasses of wine, I might have forgotten any punishments I devised.

    • Karen24

      And I apologize for calling Sanders supporters “A bunch of Satanic cultists and would-be commissars who can’t spell their own names or tie their own shoes but are also traitors to the Cause and probably on Trump’s payroll.” Truce? Maybe we could work together to improve political insults?

      • N__B

        Maybe we could work together to improve political insults?

        From Arthur Rex: “‘Cut down the shit-eaters and carve their rotten bellies out and wind their stinking guts around their necks and drive stakes up their dirty arseholes. Rip off their ballocks and shove them down their muzzles,’ and so on in language of the greatest eloquence for its effect on the British warrior.”

        • cpinva

          let Mordred be an example of what can happen, if you neglect to use appropriate contraception while fooling around with someone not your wife!

      • Hogan

        As well you should. We are, in fact, entirely capable of tying our own shoes.

    • WE WOULD LIKE TO APOLOGIZE FOR THE WAY IN WHICH POLITICIANS ARE REPRESENTED IN THIS PROGRAMME. IT WAS NEVER OUR INTENTION TO IMPLY THAT POLITICIANS ARE WEAK-KNEED, POLITICAL TIME-SERVERS WHO ARE CONCERNED MORE WITH THEIR PERSONAL VENDETTAS AND PRIVATE POWER STRUGGLES THAN THE PROBLEMS OF GOVERNMENT, NOR TO SUGGEST AT ANY POINT THAT THEY SACRIFICE THEIR CREDIBILITY BY DENYING FREE DEBATE ON VITAL MATTERS IN THE MISTAKEN IMPRESSION THAT PARTY UNITY COMES BEFORE THE WELL-BEING OF THE PEOPLE THEY SUPPOSEDLY REPRESENT NOR TO IMPLY AT ANY STAGE THAT THEY ARE SQUABBLING LITTLE TOADIES WITHOUT AN OUNCE OF CONCERN FOR THE VITAL SOCIAL PROBLEMS OF TODAY. NOR INDEED DO WE INTEND THAT VIEWERS SHOULD CONSIDER THEM AS CRABBY ULCEROUS LITTLE SELF-SEEKING VERMIN WITH FURRY LEGS AND AN EXCESSIVE ADDICTION TO ALCOHOL AND CERTAIN EXPLICIT SEXUAL PRACTICES WHICH SOME PEOPLE MIGHT FIND OFFENSIVE. WE ARE SORRY IF THIS IMPRESSION HAS COME ACROSS.

    • Pseudonym

      I apologize for that time I called Webb’s supporter an unreconstructed Dixiecrat crypto-white-supremacist out-of-touch blowhard.

      • wjts

        I am emphatically not sorry that I pushed Martin O’Malley into a mud puddle and took his lunch money.

        • Pseudonym

          To be fair, O’Malley was by far the better of the two Littlefingers involved in this presidential campaign.

        • BubbaDave

          Pretty sure we all did that.

      • Are we doing this already? C’mon, I still haven’t even found a Lincoln Chaffee supporter to insult.

        • UserGoogol

          Lincoln Chaffee should have held out to get the metric system added to the party platform.

        • efgoldman

          I still haven’t even found a Lincoln Chaffee supporter

          Could, and should, have stopped there.

        • BigHank53

          Don’t feel bad. Mr. Chaffee couldn’t find one either.

    • tsam

      I apologize for NOTHING. Not even my crummy jokes or non sequiturs.

      • jim, some guy in iowa

        along that line, nobody owes me an apology

        (not that anyone was going to, but still)

        • tsam

          Yeah. This is politics, man. You should feel like taking a shower, but you don’t want to delude yourself into thinking anyone owes you an apology or anything else.

      • efgoldman

        Not even my crummy jokes or non sequiturs.

        Not even for tying Nell to the tracks? You are as subjectively evil as a Republiklown!

        • tsam

          Don’t be a Dudley dooright

    • Matt

      I’d like to apologize for the numerous times I called Clinton’s supporters, “…hyena-beasts…”

      Well, I am a hyena-beast, I have to admit, or at least say, but I’ll confess that it makes me feel a bit sad when people say it like it’s a bad thing. It’s just the way I am, after all.

      • wjts

        Go back to Sub-Saharan Africa and/or North Africa and West and South Asia depending on whether you are a spotted hyena-beast or a striped hyena-beast! We don’t want your kind!

      • I am a little surprised no one has broken out the zombie slander terms yet…

        • cpinva

          it’s early yet.

      • Hyena-beasts are the worst GENDERFRAUD ever, with the whole clitoral intromission thing.

    • JonH

      Okay, everyone. Knives down, hugs all around.

      I SAID KNIVES DOWN.

      • ColBatGuano

        This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let’s not bicker and argue about who killed who.

      • N__B

        The SAT has changed since 1981.

  • Spiny

    I need a stiff drink and a solid bout of rejoicing to gird myself for a general election season that promises to be filled with so much racism and misogyny even Strom Thurmond’s ghost will want to post a thinkpiece on Jezebel.

    • keta

      It’s going to be ugly beyond all comprehension. Some people are going to wish for the relative sanity of the primary season just passed.

      • Philip

        I keep telling everyone, the safest bet you can make these days is buying alcohol futures in all forms. Or just buying lots of alcohol.

        • Spiny

          Eight steps ahead of you.

          • Keaaukane

            Should be 12 steps.

            • Spiny

              How did I not anticipate this response. Curse you, alcohol.

              • Malaclypse

                Curse you, alcohol.

                YOU TAKE THAT BACK!!!

          • don’t you mean 12 steps?

            • Spiny

              Apparently at step 9 they ask you to not just get religion but actually make amends. TOO FAR.

              • tsam

                Which really gets in the way of drinking. Unacceptable.

    • PhoenixRising

      Well struck there. Strom Thurmond’s Ghost would also be an excellent name for a band. Dibs!

      • Spiny

        Oooh, call it Strom Thurmond and the Southern Strategy.

    • Karen24

      I’m afraid we’re going to see the truest horror America is capable of producing. Electing a black man was bad enough, but to a significant percentage of the country electing a woman is akin to electing a sofa or pair of shoes. It’s one thing for inferior humans to get uppity, but damned if we let the property start acting up!

      • Philip

        It’s one thing for inferior humans to get uppity, but damned if we let the property start acting up!

        Given the US’s racial history…”property acting up” pretty much still describes how a certain kind of Republican has seen Obama’s presidency, I think.

        • Karen24

          True. For a certain type of person everything since 2008 has been like living in a Twilight Zone episode where the chairs and clothing start objecting to being mistreated.

          • I have a friend on Facebook who is like that. He is completely convinced that Obama has been an irredeemable disaster, that Clinton is a criminal many times over, and although he ignores the fact that these things are both actually verifiably true about Trump, you can see him working his way around to justifying his Trumpian vote…

            • weirdnoise

              Send your friend here.

      • twbb

        The problem wasn’t that he was black, the problem was that he was a Fifth Column Kenyan Postcolonialist Socialist Tyrant Who Made Everything About Race. So we’re totally not racist, because it has nothing to do with him being black.

  • jim, some guy in iowa

    ‘this horrible primary’

    first of all, no matter who won, we were gonna come up with a better candidate, a better person, than the Republicans were

    secondly, whatever ugliness we had was because people *cared* who won- that’s a *good* thing

    • djw

      Yes, acknowledged. For people who follow politics a low to moderate amount, it’s been a fine and good primary. People who pay too much attention get exposed to/sucked into the awfulness.

  • Thirtyish

    Finally. And, IMO, the far better candidate prevailed.

    • wjts

      I disagree. Convene the Post-Primary Circular Firing Squad!

  • junker

    And let’s hear it for Donald Trump, who released a press notice claiming he wasn’t going to discuss his court troubles anymore, only to immediately go on Hannity to talk about how unfair Judge Curiel has been.

    • randy khan

      How many times will Trump remind us of the scorpion joke between now and November?

      • N__B

        the scorpion joke

        How many scorpion handlers does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

        None – they’re all dead!

    • IS

      The Republicans have made their bed, now let them shit in it.

  • Ernest Pikeman

    Let Hildebeast be Hildebeast!

    • tsam

      Eat shit and bark at the moon, friend.

      • PhoenixRising

        Well, that was a short truce, but I felt refreshed by it.

        Onward.

        • tsam

          I don’t like that hildebeast crap.

      • Ernest Pikeman

        Er, wha?

        My intention was to encourage Secretary Clinton to release her inner magnificent ass kicker. She has the perfect opponent in Trump and the rest of the remains of the GOP. And she’s got some righteous history with them. She did well tonight. Did even LBJ openly call Goldwater “temperamentally unfit”?

        She’s been name-called the Hildebeast, let her be the fucking Hildebeast and crush that pathetic small fingered vulgarian and his enablers.

        • tsam

          Oh. Well I heard that coming from local asshole white guys who were using every sexist insult in the book. Sorry, man. Mistook you for one of those guys.

          • Ernest Pikeman

            No worries, I’ve had my sarcastic deadpan blow up on my face before.

            (Not that I’m not an asshole white guy, just not that kind.)

            • cpinva

              you say “asshole white guy” like it’s a bad thing!

        • Karen24

          I kinda hope someone in the campaign can draw a cartoon tigress in a pantsuit and call it the Hildebeast. I would totally buy that T-shirt.

          • Ernest Pikeman

            “Calm the fuck down. I’ve got this!”?

            • Karen24

              Pretty much.

          • JonH

            Better symbol than a donkey.

          • D. C. Sessions

            She-Hulk in a pantsuit?

          • D. C. Sessions

            misdirected

          • rea

            draw a cartoon tigress in a pantsuit and call it the Hildebeast.

            surely it ought to look more like a gnu, aka wildebeest?

            (the candidate of gnu ideas!!)

  • Something potentially amusing in the California senate race. There’s a real possibility that both candidates on the November ballot will be Democrats: Kamala Harris and Loretta Sanchez.

    • It’s not really amusing. It’s a sign that the idiotic Top 2 primary laws need to end. They are designed to pull left-leaning elections to the right.

      • efgoldman

        They are designed to pull left-leaning elections to the right.

        Say what? So both CA senate candidates are less progressive/Democratic/whatever than who or what?

        • Philip

          It means in the general election, the more conservative democrat will sometimes win rather than the election being the more progressive democrat vs a republican, which in CA would be a foregone conclusion for the democrat

          • djw

            Exactly. But my objection is more fundamental: it’s mindless anti-partyism run amok. Republicans, Democrats, and everyone else should be permitted to choose a candidate to represent their party in the general election.

            • I noticed that it made the local crank Green party candidate give up after last time. (She’s not a crank because she’s a Green. She’s a crank because she’s a 9/11 troofer).

          • j_doc

            Yeah, I can imagine that appealing to R’s in the general would be an advantage and might bias towards conservadems.

            But against that, two Dems in the general probably means that at least one is progressive. It makes insurgent or non-establishment types far more likely to make it into the general, doesn’t it? It lowers the financial-organizational bar for making it through the primary. And it makes the ‘electability’ issue nonsense, further helping progressives in the primary. Altogether, I’m not convinced it hurts progressives.

            • Hob

              The most convincing argument I’ve seen against “jungle primaries” is from a different angle. The problem isn’t so much that you could end up with the more conservative of two generally OK candidates; it’s that you’re taking people who would otherwise be competing with each other within a similar ideological space and making them compete against the whole field, and that means each one is actually weaker in direct proportion to how active that space is.

              In other words, say that your state leans Democratic, and has such a healthy mix of strong contenders from that party that there are six plausible Dem candidates for the same office. And then on the other side, you have two crappy Republicans with nothing to recommend them but brand loyalty, and their supporters will vote arbitrarily for anyone who’s not a Democrat. If the R vote is split pretty evenly, and no single Democrat stands way ahead of their pack, the two R guys could end up with the top two spots even if there are many more D voters than R.

              So it’s not really a bias toward the right, or toward the center, so much as a bias away from whichever direction has the most diverse engagement and the least rigid party apparatus.

              • Hob

                For anyone who’s been following the Hugo Award slate-voting fiasco, it’s sort of the same deal: a relatively small group focusing on a handful of their wingnut crap favorites was able to push other stuff off the shortlist, even though no one else liked their picks at all, because everyone else was voting for a wide variety of good things so their votes were split among those. It isn’t that slate voting per se inherently favors wingnut crap; it’s that it favors any narrow category X where most people aren’t interested in X but a smaller group is fiercely devoted to X above all else, and in science fiction wingnut crap is one such category.

              • Morat

                That’s really the absolute worst. And it’s already started happening. Four Democrats contested a heavily Democratic district compared to only two Republicans, so both Republicans advanced to the general election.

          • efgoldman

            the more conservative democrat will sometimes win rather than the election being the more progressive democrat vs a republican, which in CA would be a foregone conclusion for the democrat

            Haven’t we just finished six months of “who is the right kind of Democrat”?
            I mean, sure, we’d all rather have Gillibrand or Warren than Feinstein or Boxer, but I’d rather have any of them than some RWNJ TeaHadi with (R) after their name.

            • Philip

              I don’t see your point? In this case, it actually provides a real, demonstrable, relatively-easy-to-explain bias against the left wing of the party (or, in a bizarro-California dominated by the GOP, the right wing of them) because in the general it favors the center.

            • Aexia

              “we’d all rather have Gillibrand or Warren”

              lmao, I’m old enough to remember the online left’s freakout about the governor appointing a conservative like Gillibrand.

              • Redwood Rhiadra

                Many leftists of my acquaintance *still* consider her Blue Dog scum.

      • I can think of one example in particular where you’re right on the money with this, it’s the election in California’s congressional district 17, where that asshole faux-Democrat Ro Khanna has been sliming Mike Honda for the last three years. He has tried to run in three different districts over the last 12 years, and I don’t mean reconfigured districts.

        • joel hanes

          This.

          Khanna has never been able to articulate how or why the Hon. Rep. Mike Honda (reliable liberal D, CA) is a problem, or how or why Ro Khanna is a solution to that particular problem.

          One is left to draw the inference that Khanna’s political goals are not such as will bear inspection by a liberal Democratic electorate.

          • The San Jose Mercury News have endorsed Khanna more than once. I suspect it’s because Khanna’s a Tech Dude, and Tech Dudes give the Merc boners. Fawning all over the tech industry seems to be their current raison d’être. It really has become a shitty newspaper.

      • Amanda in the South Bay

        Harris is only a liberal to people not from the Bay Area who think Newsom, Bown and Lee are liberals. She’s a crappy Willie Brown crony.

        • Well, she’s a hell of a lot better than Loretta Sanchez.

          • I find it funny that Harris is the one she attacked, when, as you said, she’s far better than Sanchez.

            • Amanda in the South Bay

              Harris is better, sure, but she’s no progressive saint, Bay Area bona fides notwithstanding.

              • Who said anything about “progressive saint”? You said she isn’t even a liberal, which is transparently laughable.

              • She will be a completely solid Democratic vote in the Senate. Sanchez has Lieberman written all over her. This is an easy call.

              • DrS

                I’m not exactly sure that someone who thinks that transit workers don’t have a right to strike has a ton of room to slag someone else for not being a ‘progressive saint’.

        • I am “from the Bay Area”, I have lived here my whole life, and she sure as hell is a liberal. She’s certainly more liberal than Gavin Newsom or Willie Brown.

          • Amanda in the South Bay

            I read a lot of Greg Dewar (@njudah) and my negative opinions of a lot of the Brown clique are formed from reading him. And he’s a native northern CAian as well. And when I lived there, I do remember Harris appealing the decision to allow trans prisoners SRS. So progressive!

        • I’m going to make a gratuitous comment right now, because I’m in a mood. Aren’t you from Oregon?

          • Amanda in the South Bay

            Yes, but see above comment, and I lived in the Bay Area for about 11 years.

            • Amanda in the South Bay

              Jesus christ fuck commenting here. Its fucking maoschism.

      • bender

        That’s a bad thing? Think of all the incumbents wedded to extreme positions in red states because the only thing they have to fear is being primaried from the right. Democrats in blue states are not immune to this, although perhaps the positions they would be wedded to would be silly or impractical rather than extreme.

        Some kind of pull toward the center is often the only way to prevent politicians from being totally captured by the agenda of a particular interest group that has influence in their coalition of support.

        IIRC, both the GOP and the Democratic Party opposed the initiative that passed top-two, but the voters passed it by an overwhelming margin.

      • There’s something else stupid about California’s “jungle” (I hate that term) primary. For instance, in my congressional district (CA-18), Anna Eshoo will get over 70% of the vote in the primary. She will have to run again in November against a nobody nitwit of a Republican. Her margin of victory in November will actually be higher, because there was another nitwit running as a Democrat, and I’m pretty damn sure those people will vote for Eshoo.

        I’m pretty confident in calling both of the challengers nitwits because I work at the local cable access station, and we produced a “debate” between the two challengers. Holy shit, were they stupid.

        • Another example of this stupidity. In my State Senate district, Jerry Hill has approximately 75% of the vote in the primary, and he’ll have to face off against the same dingbat Republican in November.

    • Richard

      That was pretty much a given going into the voting today. There are a whole bunch of Republican candidates, none of them with any name recognition. They were all polling under 10% so, barring all the undecideds choosing one candidate (which clearly isn’t happening), it was going to be Harris v. Sanchez in the general election. Harris is beating Sanchez by two to one so its pretty certain that Harris will be the next Senator from California.

      • The only Republican name I recognize is Duf Sundheim, and that’s only because he used to go to the same church as my mom.

  • Morbo
    • N__B

      Sometimes, the presidency.

    • Isn’t that award named for Freddie?

      • jim, some guy in iowa

        y’know, my life *was* better before I knew of him. you guys owe me

      • efgoldman

        Isn’t that award named for Freddie?

        Maybe the only good thing about Twitter: it limits Freddie’s verbosity.

        • kped

          Which i think allows the “true” Freddie to come out, he can’t couch his bullshit in so many words, so what you are left with is the entitled dickhead asshole (seriously, he is such an asshole on twitter).

      • Scott Lemieux

        Isn’t that award named for Freddie?

        It should be. Read this, and then read the rest of his timeline. Projection is a hell of a drug.

        • LOL, he certainly takes the prize. That is absolutely hilarious.

        • Warren Terra

          Tweet went down the memory hole. Any description?

          • Scott Lemieux

            It was something like “I’ve never hated anything as much as liberals hate people to their left.” The previous tweet attacked Rebecca Traister for an utterly innocuous argument, and then a little later he went on about Ezra Klein’s “childlike brain.” But, yes, it incredible how much “liberals” hate “the left” and if only “liberals” would show “the left” the consideration Freddie shows people he designates “liberals” not “the left.”

            If he’s deleting Tweets because they’re linked to in comment sections, that’s even more hilarious. I guess this is the “ENGAGE WITH ME DIRECTLY RATHER THAN SUBTWEETING ME” and not “WHY WOULD YOU ENGAGE MY ARGUMENT DIRECTLY I AM BUT A HUMBLE GRADUATE STUDENT” minute of the day.

            • The Temporary Name

              The only thing worse than being talked about is, uh, YOU ASSHOLES ARE HATERZ

    • sharculese

      “I don’t mind staying out of things.”

      Lol. Sure.

    • kped

      Given how he’s amplified his criticisms of women to get his followers to attack them…for months on end, seriously someone take his twitter away.

  • Keaaukane

    I hope that some of the Mighty Minds that gather here can relieve me of the horrible, almost Lovecraftian, fear that I cannot shake.

    And that is, given the strong negative passions she inspires in the wingnuts, Hillary is the only Democrat that could possibly lose to Trump. Is this wrong?

    • Ernest Pikeman

      Yes, it’s wrong.

      Science has proved that wingnuts are 27% of the population. I read in on the Internet!

    • efgoldman

      given the strong negative passions she inspires in the wingnuts, Hillary is the only Democrat that could possibly lose to Trump. Is this wrong?

      Their antipathy for her is no stronger than for Obama. That didn’t work out too well for them.

  • wengler

    If you thought the primary was horrible, just wait. And since both parties front-loaded their national conventions, we get even more time for the shitshow.

    • No. Because now I can spend all my energy attacking Republicans. It’s a whole new world starting tonight.

      • bobbyp

        Yes. The GOP is the target. But, wow, the CA results should give Sanders pause for sure, or he is just not paying attention.

        (PS: Sanders supporter here)

        • Yeah, I don’t know enough about the details of California voting patterns, but this sure looks like an evisceration.

          • Clinton easily won California in 2008, so it really doesn’t surprise me.

          • pianomover

            Mostly early voter ballots right now. Things should tighten up

            • Craigo

              Most CA primary ballots are early ballots. If they tie day-of voting, she wins by nearly 20.

            • Richard

              California makes it very easy to vote by absentee ballot. You just request a permanent absentee ballot and it gets sent to you every election. I haven’t voted in person in about 13 years. And the absentee ballot voters, being the regular steady voters, were always going to be for Hilary. That said, however, the margin of Hillary over Bernie here is huge and has been constant now for 20% of the vote. I think it will tighten once the non-absentee ballots are counted but I would be very surprised if she didnt win by 10% or more, far more than the last polls indicated.

            • djw

              The current rate of tightening would give Clinton a ~15 point win.

          • ForkyMcSpoon

            I kept hearing from certain people that Bernie was going to win in a landslide because California was so liberal.

            I tried explaining the difference between the number of Democrats and the ideological lean of those Democrats, to no avail.

            California is so reliably liberal because it has a large number of Democrats, but those Democrats are not particularly more left-wing than Democrats in general. This is also related to the nationalization of US politics. This has kept the CA GOP from moderating to stay competitive at the state level, which would’ve leeched some of the moderates out of the CA Democratic Party. It also works in the other direction – making moderation less effective since a CA Republican will inevitably be tied to the national party even if they’re relatively liberal (given the importance of control of House/Senate, it is correct for voters to evaluate them that way – caucusing with the GOP still significantly helps pass more conservative policies).

        • djw

          Yeah, my four point prediction is looking pretty bad.

          If there’s much of any truth to this, a big embarrassing loss in CA may be what Sanders needs to do the right thing here.

          • bobbyp

            Yup.

          • cpinva

            I’d like to think so, but I get the distinct impression, from both his words/actions, and that story, that he’s going to go down in flames first, and accuse everyone under the sun of being against him from the start, before he’ll ever admit that he isn’t the bestest, most progressive candidate in town.

      • wengler

        Honestly, why didn’t you just do that before?

      • Matt McIrvin

        Because now I can spend all my energy attacking Republicans.

        I suspect you are wrong there. The dead-end Busters will still be around, and they will get louder to compensate for their reduced numbers.

  • MDrew

    I don’t understand why it’s been horrible at all. It’s been substantive, exciting, and important. The broad Clinton world seeking to win by polarizing the electo ate around race and gender was unfortunate, but far from bad enough to make it horrible, or even bad, on net.

    • los

      by race?
      and i didn’t even see much of, “it’s a woman’s turn.”

      we must be witnessing different parts of the election.

    • ColBatGuano

      sigh

      • MDrew

        See the comment by Bredbaker in the most recent thread. It’s not like that viewpoint is some weird outlier. Probably the biggest point of discussion since the outset of voting is what it means about Sanders’ deficiency as a modern liberal candidate that a split against him developed in the non-young part of the minority voter demographic, and that there was a split along gender lines as he ran a spirited, substantive race against the most viable woman candidate for president ever. And this way of looking at the race was pushed by the Clinton campaign and allies since long before the beginning of the year.

        “Sigh.”

        Bite me.

      • Forget it, CoBatGuano, it’s MDrew.

        • MDrew

          I’d be curious to know in what ways you would say I am incorrectly describing the way the conversation around this election played out on the broad left and especially in the party.

          • jim, some guy in iowa

            you say “polarizing”, I say “run with an appeal toward two of the major working parts of the traditional democratic base”

            • MDrew

              I say polarizing; I say, once you successfully win with those groups, then insinuate that the opponent must in some way be alienating those groups in a way that reflects poorly on his social enlightenment etc etc etc.; seeking to establish early success with the groups as a means to press that negative message about the opponent’s deficiency along those lines in order to continue the cycle. Then pursuing that strategy iteratively.

              That’s seeking to polarize along race and gender, my friends.

              YMMV, and that’s perfectly fine.

              • jim, some guy in iowa

                what it is is politics- build on your strengths, chip at your opponent’s weaknesses. Sanders didn’t get where he is any other way. same as it’s ever been

                • MDrew

                  I’m certainly not arguing it’s not politics.

    • It’s been substantive, exciting, and important.

      And now there is no chance at all that media boofheads will be able to tell their audience that “Candidate Clinton has not been sufficiently scrutinised; we know very little about her true agenda.”
      Right?

  • bender

    1. Chuck Todd (regular staffer on MSNBC) pointed out that this is the first presidential primary in decades in which the respective winners of the two parties did not congratulate each other.

    One of the other people on the desk remarked that Clinton had just said in her speech that Trump was temperamentally unsuited for the post, while Trump had recently said that Clinton ought to be in jail, so they couldn’t very well observe the usual courtesies.

    2. A few minutes ago I took down my late mother’s photograph from the wall, lit a candle in front of it, and told my mother that Mrs. Clinton was about to receive the Democratic nomination for President. My mother had been an admirer of the First Lady and liked to think of her as co-President.

    • wjts

      I am… not exactly thrilled to bits that Clinton won the nomination, but my grandmother, who is recovering from a recent health scare, has been hoping for a Hillary Clinton presidency since 2001. So I’m pleased on her behalf, at least.

      • Cheerful

        My mother-in-law, 68, French, middle class, knowing very little English, and not much about American politics, is also highly pleased that Clinton is to be the nominee.

        It’s not like Hillary doesn’t have a constituency in the world.

        • My 80-year-old mom voted for Sanders in the CA primary, but I suspect she’ll end up feeling the same way.

        • wjts

          It’s not like Hillary doesn’t have a constituency in the world.

          Who would have thought that a popular, experienced political figure would be able to persuade people to vote for her? Not me!

  • CD

    Ahem.

    “Next Tuesday, we continue the fight. … We are going to fight hard to win the primary in Washington DC. And then we take our fight for social, economic, racial and environmental justice to Philadelphia.”

    • Charlie S

      Yes, that was not especially encouraging.

      • ForkyMcSpoon

        Even if he’s accepted it in his mind, he needs time. I wasn’t expecting him to concede last night. I put it better than even odds that he’ll concede before or on June 14 (he certainly won’t get any good press out of the results in DC, so I don’t see the benefit to him of staying any longer than that), but he might stay in a couple days after that even. If he’s not out by the end of next week, I expect some serious pressure from (certain of) his allies, maybe even a few superdelegates flip to get the point across.

    • Duvall

      Looks like spite carries the day for at least another week. Surely that 70-30 loss in DC will give a massive boost to the fight for social justice.

    • tsam

      Son of a bitch. Did I hear him right, that he’s fighting for DC?

      • Regulust

        That appears to be the plan.

        And Jill Stein is trying to get him to “collaborate” with her on an independent third party candidate run beyond the primary. I hope Bernie has the dignity to at the very least *NOT* do that. As Loomis states succinctly, collaboration with Stein is de facto collaboration with Trump:

        https://twitter.com/ErikLoomis/status/740394412920934402

        • cpinva

          honestly, it wasn’t until this primary, that I realized just exactly what a huge ego and sense of entitlement that Sen. Sanders possesses. never mind the fact that Ms. Clinton has the lead in the popular vote, pledged delegates and super delegates, he, by god, is the actual electable one! talk about hubris.

          • The Politico piece paints a very unflattering personal picture.

            I’d take it with a healthy dose of salt, but some things seem reasonably verifiable, including his tight control and how some decisions were driven by personal feelings.

            He’s needed to pivot for a while. He still can. If he’s going to have a larger influence, he really needs to start thinking beyond the nomination fight.

          • kped

            How do people not realize the obvious truth – every single candidate for public office has a huge ego. Every single candidate who runs for President has an even bigger ego. You wouldn’t run unless you thought you had the answers. It isn’t a shock that Bernie has one, he’s human.

        • MAJeff

          Stein is looking at LePage’s wins in Maine and saying, “Let’s take that national!”

      • CD

        Doesn’t seem likely to go well for him.

    • LOL, really? He actually said that? I feel even better about playing that LEGO video game instead of watching TV now.

    • wengler

      Good.

  • Regulust

    I have to say I am disappointed at Bernie’s apparent bid to keep his race going until the convention. His refusal to acknowledge the substantial majority of votes for Clinton, & his absurd “plan” to go for the super-delegates he once derided isn’t just futile, it actively undermines his campaign.

    • After tonight, Clinton may actually have enough where the super delegates won’t matter at all. She is clobbering Sanders in California.

      • cpinva

        yeah, I was noticing that as well. should she win in convincing fashion, is he going to try to convince bunches of the pledged delegates to switch to him instead?

        update: per TPM, with 49.99% of precincts reporting in CA, it’s 58.4% to 40.6% Clinton. absent some bizarre turnaround, she’s going to beat him by 15 points. I don’t know how he convinces himself it was close, or even a win?

        • N__B

          Obviously, the AP is responsible.

          • The SATs may have changed since 1981, but the AP never changes!!!

        • Redwood Rhiadra

          The CA election was rigged against Sanders due to something something provisional ballots something, according to emails from a Sanders surrogate I’ve been getting the last few days.

          This is only going to get worse.

    • JonH

      “I have to say I am disappointed at Bernie’s apparent bid to keep his race going until the convention”

      Like you say, it’s a race.

      There are two ways of looking at the race. One, the finish line is the nomination or presumptive-nominee status. The other: the finish line is the convention, win or lose, it’s an endurance race.

      You don’t drop out of Le Mans 24 hour race at the 23rd hour just because you can’t possibly win your class, if your car and drivers can make it through to the end. You just try not to make a dumb mistake and crash into the likely winners, because everyone one will hate you.

      There’s nothing wrong with Bernie going at some level until the convention, as long as he doesn’t crash into Clinton and take her out.

      • Regulust

        I just think there’s an obvious hypocrisy in his sudden hope for the super-delegates to change the outcome of an election he lost fairly.

        I mean it’s not a huge deal to me, I’m disappointed, not outraged and everyone is a hypocrite, and I don’t think he’s going to sink Clinton at the end of it all anyway. Just think that a guy who was such a strong advocate for the will of the voters should acknowledge their will even when it doesn’t go in his favor.

        • JonH

          “I just think there’s an obvious hypocrisy in his sudden hope for the super-delegates to change the outcome of an election he lost fairly.”

          This I agree with completely. His rhetoric on that point should change.

          I just have no problem with him continuing to wave his (and/or the left’s) banner through to the end of the parade route even if half the crowd has gone home already.

          • so-in-so

            Sure, but not complain loudly that the parade was held on the wrong day and picked the route specifically to prevent him coming in first.

            In others, POLICY, not burning down the party (which he borrowed for his run).

      • D. C. Sessions

        There’s nothing wrong with Bernie going at some level until the convention, as long as he doesn’t crash into Clinton and take her out.

        Please reassure me that that is not his plan.

      • Matt McIrvin

        The sun has gone down and the moon has come up
        And long ago somebody left with the cup
        But he’s driving and striving and hugging the turns
        Thinking of someone for whom he still Berns…

  • D. C. Sessions

    On a slightly positive note, someone observed that this November the daughter of the United States’ first black President will have a chance to vote for the first woman as his successor.

    There was a subdued, ladylike murmur of approval.

It is main inner container footer text