March 9, 2016

I cannot believe there is another debate.

Feel free to comment here. I don't have the spirit to live-blog, but somehow, as ever, my son John is carrying on the old live-blogging tradition....
9:11 — Hillary Clinton is asked how she "failed" last night, when she lost Michigan. She doesn't answer the question. Instead, she points out that she got more total votes and delegates last night — in Michigan and Mississippi combined. When pressed to answer the question, she just says it was "close."

56 comments:

rcocean said...

I can't believe biased the moderators are in favor of these two. Hillary was asked "Is Donald Trump a racist?"

Wow, tough question. The DNC should be paying their salaries.

AReasonableMan said...

I thought the original complaint was that the Dems were trying to hide Hillary.

Drago said...

Well, it WAS close.

As close as a snipers bullet...all the way from Bosnia...cuz those are "magic bullets" that only Hillary can see.

Drago said...

AReasonableMan: "I thought the original complaint was that the Dems were trying to hide Hillary"

That was the original complaint, founded on something called "reality".

However, as conditions on the ground change, tactics must shift. And there you have it. Not complicated.

Humperdink said...

ARM, I think the size of The Bern's crowds early on smoked her out. Otherwise she would be really transparent, as in invisible.

Drago said...

AReasonableMan: "I thought the original complaint was that the Dems were trying to hide Hillary."

Again, the dems were trying to hide Hillary. Under a cloth. Like the kind of cloth used to wipe down servers.

madAsHell said...

I've said it before, but......I'm not seeing many Hillary bumper stickers here in the land of scorned women. I have seen some Subaru's with Bernie stickers, but it ain't much.

Big Mike said...

I've got some ideas for questions:

"Mrs. Clinton, are you most corrupt person to run for the presidency since James Buchanan?"

"Mr. Sanders, considering that you were an utter failure as a handy man and carpenter despite having a college degree from a leading institution like the University of Chicago, what makes you think you'd be the first person to successfully implement socialism here?"

"Mrs. Clinton, was Mr. Obama lying when he said you were 'likeable enough'?"

Titus said...

Make it stop.

I just found out today that most the women at my company buy their dresses at Anthropologie.

I have to say I was so disappointed and utterly depressed.

I expected more from these thin, educated women.

So they are meeting clients in $200.00 dresses? Fucking sad.

Fabi said...

I've seen two Hillary stickers: one that looked new and one that's on a Volvo in my neighborhood, and it's a "Ready for Hillary!" sticker that is starting to fade. Lulz! Lots and lots of bedazzled Berniemobiles. He does enjoy the advantage of new energy, so it's not too surprising -- I don't read much into it.

Donald Douglas said...

It's good they're having a lot of debates, although for those of us political junkies, it's been a little much.

madAsHell said...

If I recall correctly, Hillary just wanted three debates. The desperation runs deep in the one.

iowan2 said...

Open thread? Debate overload?

How about our host blogging a bit about college campus culture today and how it's self immolation?

Mizzu in down 20% in enrollment and $35 million budget shortfall. Discuss please.
http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/mizzou-protests-lead-to-plunge-in-freshmen-massive-budget-deficits-030916

https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2016/03/08/black-students-protest-u-missouri?utm_content=buffere8f92&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=IHEbuffer

UPDATE: From the comments:
The Republican Party in Missouri will benefit more from these ridiculous tantrums than they would from a hundred thousand dollars spent on campaign ads, and this benefit is free.

The Trump Presidential campaign is probably helped, as well.

mccullough said...

This is the Hispandering debate.

I commend Sanders for voting against W's 2007 amnesty bill because it hurt low income Americans, another group of Americans the GOP doesn't give a shit about.

buwaya puti said...

Prudent and thrifty women make good wives, Titus.
Consider this advice from experience.
Find a good woman, have heirs, and you will have lived a worthy life.

Birkel said...

buwaya puti:

That is the most pearls you will ever throw in front of a homosexual man...

LMMFAO

Birkel said...

And with every comment, mccullough proves he is the only true Scotsman.

boycat said...

"Mrs. Clinton, are you most corrupt person to run for the presidency since James Buchanan?
That's unfair to Buchanan, who was ineffective as a president, but he wasn't anywhere near as corrupt as either of the Clintons.

The Cracker Emcee said...


"I commend Sanders for voting against W's 2007 amnesty bill because it hurt low income Americans, another group of Americans the GOP doesn't give a shit about."

And Democrats desperately need those Americans to remain low-income. The continued existence of the Democrat Party depends on it.

David Begley said...

Son John wrote, "Clinton is asked about her emails. She says her emails have been "retroactively classified"

Why was she not challenged on this with at least a follow-up? Patently false. Also a very, very poor question.

Better question, "Why did you order an aide to strip classified markings from classified material and transmit it on your non-secure email system?"

Owen said...

I think the debate moderators need to go to special training to learn how to ask such lame questions. Like a boxer who takes acting lessons so he can throw the fight convincingly.

Birkel said...

Hillary, people think you are a liar. Is there any way you can convince the majority of Americans that you are not lying at this very minute?

David Begley said...

Son John wrote, "Clinton reprises her attack on Sanders for voting against the auto bailout, from the last debate. Sanders it wasn't an "auto bailout" — it was a "Wall Street bailout."

Factually incorrect and dishonest. The bill Bernie voted against was a bank bailout that was later used for the auto financials (e.g. GMAC).

Again, why wasn't she called out on a repeated falsehood?

Birkel said...

David Begley:

It was NOT a bank bailout. It was a bank takeover.

The FOIA requests would be denied due to, I shit you not, banker's privilege. Look it up.

And that was under President Bush. It has only gotten worse.

David Begley said...

Birkel.

Whatever. She lies with impunity and repeats the same lies. One would think CNN would be prepared. Right?

Birkel said...

bank regulator's privilege

Educate yourself.

mccullough said...

Sanders voted against TARP and Amnesty. He should get the GOP nomination since this puts him to the right of the Senate Majority Leader and the Speaker of the House.

Fabi said...

"Retroactively" is also a weasel word. It could refer to, and as she would like people to believe, documents that were unclassified at the time she encountered them, only to be upgraded later to a classified status. The more accurate take is that they were classified all along, and retroactively marked with the appropriate classification for that time, had the markings not been somehow removed.

narciso said...

they were cut and pasted from classified documents into emails,

buwaya puti said...

Interesting news of the day

1: AG Lynch threatening litigation against "climate change deniers" akin to lawsuits vs tobacco companies. Obvious purpose of this is intimidation of energy companies, such as coal companies, frackers and others with disputes with the feds, from public advocacy or election finance.
This is blatant abuse of power.

2: the Feds will be charging the Oregon militia participants such that they will be subject to life in prison.

The revolutionary fuse is burning down.
Book reference - "Why Men Rebel", Gurr

Fabi said...

That's the way I see it, narciso. I think the data trail will support that.

David Begley said...

Birkel.

It was not a bank takeover. Management was not replaced. It was a bailout with loans for the most part. Some banks were merged.

Fannie and Fredie were placed into conservatorship and taxpayers now own most of the equity. The dividends are now in the billions and are paid to Treasury.

Birkel said...

You have no idea, David Begley.
Write the FOIA requests and see.

Birkel said...

buwaya puti:

Too interesting, by far.

Largo said...

I watched a bridge match with Chico Marx last night. His remark at the end was that it was close up until the first hand.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPSXGqWUVSE

Sammy Finkelman said...

Hillary Clinton ,must really be relying on the bandwagon effect.

It's maybe the only real argument she has.

chickelit said...

Althouse wrote: I Cannot believe there is another debate

What are you going to write tomorrow (Thursday) before the Republican debate in Miami?

The networks will schedule debates before every significant primary election from here on out. Get used to it. It won't end until the conventions. And by then, they will have gone into full-on Ferguson riot mode.

Sammy Finkelman said...

rcocean said...3/9/16, 8:30 PM

Hillary was asked "Is Donald Trump a racist?"

Wow, tough question.


It was a tough question. Or at least, the superficially easy answer is the wrong one, but avoiding it is a little bit tough.

The question is, is she willing to say that Donald trump is a racist, or is toying with racism, or will she deny that? In other words, will she answer the question: Does anything, or any anti-human thing, that Donald Trump said that you really condemn, amount to racism, and/or did he do it enough to justify the general label of racist?

Either option gives her some trouble with part of the electorate.

She didn't answer the question, now did she? She says she called him out, but would not say whether or whether not that made Donald Trump into a racist, or whether that fit into any particular category of evil.

You see, everyone knows that what Donald Trump engages in is not racism, it's countryism, and countryism is not one of the universally morally disapproved of isms these days. It can't be; it's something relatively new. But you can see the persistent attempts to make some of the things Donald Trump says fit into one of the generally recognized old categories of evil, usually racism, even though that's like fitting a round peg into a square hole.

Donald Trump's public position also has a dash of full-throated undiscriminating religious discrimination. But not racism, in spite of semi-waffling about the Ku Klux Klan or David Duke.

Sammy Finkelman said...

buwaya puti said...3/9/16, 10:45 PM

Interesting news of the day

2: the Feds will be charging the Oregon militia participants such that they will be subject to life in prison.


But the Justice Department's Inspector General is also investigating the FBI's killing of one of tghe protesters at a roadblock.

Sammy Finkelman said...

AReasonableMan said...3/9/16, 8:31 PM

I thought the original complaint was that the Dems were trying to hide Hillary.

But now she needs exposure. It's her best hope to counter Sanders. She even appeared on Fox News.

Fox News decided to hold a forum involving both Bernard Sanders and Donald Trump. Then donald Trump backed out. So Fox News decided they would go ahead just wth Bernie Sanders. Then the Clinton campaign called and said they would like to be there, too. This town hall was held on Monday, March 7. (A town hall is where both candidates are present for questions, but separately, one after the other)

Sammy Finkelman said...

Mr. Sanders, considering that you were an utter failure as a handy man and carpenter despite having a college degree from a leading institution like the University of Chicago,

He also ran a business making educational filmstrips about history, which was successful, at least for a time. When he saw there was nothing about Eugene V. Debs, he made one. But rents in Burlington went up, and he may have become homeless. (circa 1980)

Sammy Finkelman said...

mccullough said... 3/9/16, 9:29 PM

I commend Sanders for voting against W's 2007 amnesty bill because it hurt low income Americans,

Not really, because nobody from the United States was being hired for these jobs. Sanders was against the non-Americans being paid too low wages.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/09/transcript-the-post-univision-democratic-debate-annotated/

CLINTON: ... When you got to the Senate in 2007, one of the first things you did was vote against Ted Kennedy's immigration reform which he'd been working on for years before you ever arrived.

SALINAS: One last response.

(APPLAUSE)

SANDERS: Let me respond -- let me respond to that.

SALINAS: Go ahead.

SANDERS: You know, Ted Kennedy was a very close friend of mine, and I served on the committee he chaired, the Health, Education, Labor Committee. And Ted Kennedy was kind enough to allow me to hold a hearing in 2008, I believe, in Congress, dealing with the plight of undocumented tomato pickers in Immokalee, Florida.

(APPLAUSE)

And I went there on my own. Wasn't an issue really for the state of Vermont to expose the horrendous working conditions and the semi slavery, if you like, that those workers lived under. And the result of that hearing and the work that many, many people did was to significantly improve the wages and working conditions of those workers.


He later said:

And I worked very hard in improving the guest worker provisions so that in 2013 a bill I strongly supported, people who were in the guest worker program in America would not be treated like slaves.

Sammy Finkelman said...

Clinton and Sanders had a dispute about deporting children who are coming from a Hinduras, where there is probably more violence than almost any place in this country. Sanders said he was against that, and Hillary Clinton was for it.

Hillary Clinton she was concerned about little children making the trip, and also that they should get legal counsel ( not mentioning that danger from criminal gangs is not grounds for asylum! under current U.S. law - it has to be persecution from the government, for political reasons, or based upon membership in a protected group, or unconcern by the government when someone else does that.)

Sanders said he was for doing the right thing and granting undocumented people driver's licenses, which is what they do in Vermont, thanks, in part to his efforts, while Clinton prevailed upon the governor of New York, Elliot Spitzer, not to do it, and New York State still does not do it. Hillary Clinton countered that while Sanders was still in the House, and running for the Senate, in 2006, he voted with Republicans for for indefinite detention for undocumented immigrants, and "then he sided with those Republicans to stand with vigilantes known as Minute Men who were taking up outposts along the border to hunt down immigrants."

Clinton really attempted to mislead people about what her position was, both about what having legal counsel meant (delay, and grinding the system to a halt, providing the targeted people keep their court dates, but that's all) and in confusing people about what she wanted, as compared to what she would actually do, and when she finally said she would do something, what she really meant by that.

Clinton later on said And we do have to take a look at asylum laws.

But of course, if you are unfamilar with what the law is now, you won't understand this, and this (probably insincere) reference to possibly changing the laws (which would have strong opposition from Senator Jeff Sessions and others in Congress) just passed over many people's heads.

Probably insincere, because she only said "take a look at" the laws, which is not what you do when you propose changing them. Fleeing from a killer is not grounds for asylum, unless it can be shoved and pushed into some other category, as has been done with some battered women.


Sammy Finkelman said...

RAMOS: So you will stop those deportations.

CLINTON: I would stop...

RAMOS: The deportations for children...

CLINTON: Yes.

RAMOS: ... and those who don't have a criminal record. CLINTON: Of the people, the undocumented people living in our country, I do not want to see them deported. I want to see them on a path to citizenship. That is exactly what I will do.


She's saying she will get legislation passed. The "path to citizenship" can only be done by Congress. By linking the two, she's promising to gte alaw passed, not to stop deportations by executive order.

Sammy Finkelman said...

Regarding immigration, we are getting very close to where U.S. politics was on the slavery issue between 1844 and 1860. It, or aspects of it, will dominate all other issues.

Sammy Finkelman said...

The Cracker Emcee said...3/9/16, 9:52 PM

Democrats desperately need those Americans to remain low-income. The continued existence of the Democrat Party depends on it.

Having people need to have a Democrat in the White House in order (they believe) for people they know to stay in the United States, is even better, especially with the Republicans, far from denying they will hurt people, shouting it from the rooftops.

It doesn't even cost any money.

tim in vermont said...

I commend Sanders for voting against W's 2007 amnesty bill because it hurt low income Americans, another group of Americans the GOP doesn't give a shit about.

You are right about the GOP establishment. They want to bring in more and more wage competition at the low end, change the workforce, same as the Democrat establishment wants to bring in more and more voters to change the electorate.

Hence Trump and Sanders.

tim in vermont said...

Maybe I should have said "whence" instead of "hence"?

tim in vermont said...

‘‘Assad is a bad guy, but we have no idea who the so-called rebels [are],” he said during the Nov. 10 GOP debate. ‘‘They may be far worse than Assad. Look at Libya. Look at Iraq.”

Iraq: Hillary voted for that war "with conviction"
Assad: Hillary advocated for support for the rebels to overthrow him. A CIA supplied missile from Syria was used to bring down a US helicopter in Afghanistan.
Libya: Hillary advocated for the overthrow of the govt "We came, we saw, he died" - Hillary Clinton.

The first one to pick of the "light grenade" was maybe stupid. The second and third ones? I am not sure there are words to describe their idiocy.

damikesc said...

"It was close", except polls showed it'd be a blowout for weeks. The Dems need to worry. This whole "Hillary will kill this candidate" talk is insane. She is having serious difficulty beating a candidate who doesn't want to win in the first place.

And the emails wouldn't show the word "classified". It'd be "confidential". And, rest assured, she is parsing the words this closely.

tim in vermont said...

There was no "there there" with Patraeus either, or so said Obama. Yet a witness who previously took the fifth has been granted immunity. A grand jury is in session. The FBI may have "gone rogue" but how is it going to look if the FBI director resigns over being told to drop this investigation? Remember, this is the same guy who was a national hero over threatening to resign in the Bush administration over Bush's surveillance policies.

I think Hillary is in some real trouble, plus, outside of the billionaire donors who love her so much, she is a LOUSY candidate.

tim in vermont said...

A large portion of the 'superdelegates' are lobbyists. Whodathunkit?

tim maguire said...

One can, by squinting and cocking the head, understand the appeal of Donald Trump. One cannot, no matter the contortions, understand the appeal of Hillary Clinton. Why does anyone outside her immediate family support her?

tim maguire said...

Titus said...So they are meeting clients in $200.00 dresses? Fucking sad.

I have no idea what to make of this. Is $200 too much? Too little? Sounds right in the ballpark to me, but in some industries that could be seen as too much. In other industries, too little. I suppose. Though only a gay guy would notice.

What sort of clients? What sort of meeting?

Sammy Finkelman said...

If you think it is bad thing taht Saddam Hussein and Mohammer Quaddafi was overthrown, and that a rebellion started against assad, then maybe the alternative poloiicy should not have been, remaining neutral, but actively supporting those dictators - make sure they have facial recognition software so that can arrest, torture and kill dissidents, bombs to attack civilians and destroy enemy hospitals, and plenty of money.

Not to decide is to decide.

tim in vermont said...

Not to decide is to decide

We had a fucking vote on this. That point of view was soundly defeated. Hillary is Bush all over again.