Some trends are so deep and mysterious that only a Times reporter can write the story about them.
This is not that story:
As Hillary Clinton Sweeps States, One Group Resists: White Men
White men narrowly backed Hillary Clinton in her 2008 race for president, but they are resisting her candidacy this time around in major battleground states, rattling some Democrats about her general-election strategy.
While Mrs. Clinton swept the five major primaries on Tuesday, she lost white men in all of them, and by double-digit margins in Missouri, North Carolina and Ohio, exit polls showed — a sharp turnabout from 2008, when she won double-digit victories among white male voters in all three states.
She also performed poorly on Tuesday with independents, who have never been among her core supporters. But white men were, at least when Mrs. Clinton was running against a black opponent: She explicitly appealed to them in 2008, extolling the Second Amendment, mocking Barack Obama’s comment that working-class voters “cling to guns or religion” and even needling him at one point over his difficulties with “working, hard-working Americans, white Americans.”
She could not sound more different today, aggressively campaigning to toughen gun-control laws and especially courting black and Hispanic voters.
Hillary flip-flopped on guns? So what? True-blue progressives will bitterly cling to the obvious explanation that in addition to being racist haters who rejected Obama, these are sexist misogynist who favored Bernie over Hillary.
Patrick Healey of the Times resists temptation:
But what is striking is the change in attitudes about Mrs. Clinton among those voters, and her struggle to win them over again. In dozens of interviews in diners, offices and neighborhoods across the country, many white male Democrats expressed an array of misgivings, with some former supporters turning away from her now.
Many said they did not trust her to overhaul the economy because of her wealth and her ties to Wall Street. Some said her use of private email as secretary of state indicated she had something to hide. A few said they did not think a woman should be commander in chief. But most said they simply did not think Mrs. Clinton cared about people like them.
“She’s talking to minorities now, not really to white people, and that’s a mistake,” said Dennis Bertko, 66, a construction project manager in Youngstown, Ohio, as he sipped a draft beer at the Golden Dawn Restaurant in a downtrodden part of town. “She could have a broader message. We would have listened.”
“Instead, she’s talking a lot about continuing Obama’s policies,” he said. “I just don’t necessarily agree with all of the liberal ideas of Obama.”
And the plunge into the yawning abyss:The fading of white men as a Democratic bloc is hardly new: The last nominee to carry them was Lyndon Johnson in 1964, and many blue-collar “Reagan Democrats” now steadily vote Republican. But Democrats have won about 35 to 40 percent of white men in nearly every presidential election since 1988. And some Democratic leaders say the party needs white male voters to win the presidency, raise large sums of money and, like it or not, maintain credibility as a broad-based national coalition.
To win a general election, Mrs. Clinton would rely most heavily on strong turnout from blacks, Hispanics, women and older voters. Though she won among white men in Arkansas, Alabama and Tennessee, and tied in Texas, some Democratic officials and pollsters say they fear that without a stronger strategy, Mrs. Clinton could perform as poorly among white men as Walter Mondale, who drew just 32 percent in 1984, or even George McGovern, who took 31 percent in 1972.
Comparisons to Mondale and McGovern, who between them carried two whole states? Ouch.
But so what? This is a speed bump on the Democratic road to overthrowing the dreaded white patriarchy, with the working class the first ones overboard.
As I just said (on previous post)
If Kasich is the nominee, the GOP is dead.
Suicide.
But there is a long time til August, and if Anonymous keeps up it's good works--they released his SS number yesterday, cell phone overnight--they'll bring in another 10% of the voters for him.
I have to fall in behind JiB. I think Trump might be just what this country needs. Anybody the WaPo is so vociferously opposing has to be good, right??
The youTube porch posted yesterday of his interviews over the past thirty years gave me what I was missing--a feeling of where he's coming from. And it's not ego. He repeatedly said he did not want to do it, he hoped somebody else would.
He's Ben Carson, trained in hypnotherapy.
And I did watch that Dayton rally last Saturday, so I may be hypnotized.
Posted by: anonamom | March 18, 2016 at 08:07 AM
Shorter NYT: Psst, white men are racists, that's the only reason they went for Hillary in 2008.
Posted by: jimmyk | March 18, 2016 at 08:08 AM
Step 1: make white men your enemy via SJWs
Step 2: import non-white men and give them all the "jobs"
Step 3: claim white men are the reason you will lose an election.
genius.
Posted by: henry | March 18, 2016 at 08:08 AM
Oh!!
First Scott Adams post I read last fall said Hillary lost white men the minute she went all in on the "time for a woman " stuff.
Scott Adams, who said Trump will be nominee, and likely president.
My new guru. (He's doing this for us so we'll buy his book, he says.)
People vote identity, not reason.
Posted by: anonamom | March 18, 2016 at 08:10 AM
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/anti-trump-forces-contemplate-the-end-220953
I want to pull out one quote, because all I have heard from people like Rove is that Trump has high unfavorables:
"And even Trump’s famously high unfavorable numbers are turning around: Gallup’s tracking poll of Republicans and leaners shows that his net favorable numbers have surged 14 percentage points in the past two weeks, vaulting him past Cruz."
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | March 18, 2016 at 08:19 AM
Did that article fail to remember Operation Chaos? I was an Operation Chaos Hillary Voter. That's the only vote she'll ever get from me.
Posted by: iqvoice | March 18, 2016 at 08:20 AM
Step 4: Alienate the white men in the party who "feel the Bern" by mistreating their candidate.
Posted by: Buckeye | March 18, 2016 at 08:23 AM
Fiorina did damage to herself in December when she popped off with a Thatcher quote and said essentially "you want to talk about it, ask a man, you want it done, ask a woman."
Posted by: Threadkiller | March 18, 2016 at 08:25 AM
Reasons for Brexit #473:
Sky News Newsdesk Verified account
@SkyNewsBreak
David Cameron has secured support from all EU leaders to have greater flexibility on VAT to allow UK to remove the tax on sanitary products
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | March 18, 2016 at 08:26 AM
Not sure if I can ride this roller coaster for the next 8 months.
Posted by: -peter | March 18, 2016 at 08:27 AM
Rush brought up something earlier this week - my apologies if it's already been discussed.
He was talking about how GOPe types would rather see HRC win than Trump, which makes no sense to most of us. But his take is these folks have their position in life based on inclusion in the party - all the perks, money etc come from that. Winning is secondary. What's most important is maintaining the position in the hierarchy.
For us, we want to win, and with something who will accomplish things we want to see done. The perks, power, privileges the GOPe crave don't apply to us - we don't get any of that. Winning is all that matters to us - the GOPe, eh.
Sort of like being a MLB player to some extent. We think about winning and losing, but to those guys the most important point is being on a roster, any roster - it's from that the perks and money flow. They'd rather play for a loser than not play at all.
And with Trump there's the very real possibility they won't be on the roster any more. After all, who needs them if Trump wins?
Posted by: danoso | March 18, 2016 at 08:34 AM
David Cameron has secured support from all EU leaders to have greater flexibility on VAT to allow UK to remove the tax on sanitary products
He didn't push for birth control products???
Posted by: Buckeye | March 18, 2016 at 08:37 AM
danoso,
That's a good analogy, and I don't hear Rush unless I'm in the car when he's on, so thanks for bringing it up.
My first clue to this was the virulent hatred of Rick Wilson, GOP "media consultant" who right away was over the top.
I thought then and there his reaction was due to his livelihood being threatened.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | March 18, 2016 at 08:38 AM
Buckeye,
The fact that it's a news story at all is just depressing.
To go from "We shall never surrender" to "Please could we not tax tampons?" is just sad.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | March 18, 2016 at 08:40 AM
war on women, Wisconsin style. Yes, lefties plus press vs female candidate.
Posted by: henry | March 18, 2016 at 08:47 AM
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-17/gloves-are-trump-accuses-hillary-being-involved-corruption-most-her-professional-lif
Why is the word most in there? Shouldn't it be ALL?
Posted by: pagar a bacon, country ham and sausage supporter | March 18, 2016 at 08:49 AM
I love how the article describes it: "resisting her candidacy" as though she has a divine right to their votes.
It couldn't be that they like someone else better. No, they are resisting the natural order of things.
Bankruptcy of the NYT. Cat food diet for all the employees. The Sulzburgers living in a cardboard box. These are the things I hope for.
Posted by: Free James D! | March 18, 2016 at 08:50 AM
To go from "We shall never surrender" to "Please could we not tax tampons?" is just sad.
What's amazing (or maybe not) is how many news stories on this topic refer to a "tampon tax," as though there's some special tax that evil white men put on tampons. It's the same sales tax or VAT that applies to everything else. Yet again "non-discrimination" morphs into "special treatment."
Posted by: jimmyk | March 18, 2016 at 08:56 AM
It's just a matter of time until the EU offers free diapers to members.
These stats might explain Hillary's shrill victory speech..Just wait till Trump really starts up on her. Her main support seems to be Black women--What percentage of voters are they?
Posted by: clarice | March 18, 2016 at 09:09 AM
jimmyk,
That's a good point. In the US, I think tampons got lumped in with "medical devices" like crutches and such in Obamacare, and originally came under a tax. I do not know if it got changed or not.
Actually, I think crutches shouldn't be taxed either, so I am not asking for special treatment.
I do find it sad, though, that this has become an actual news story.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | March 18, 2016 at 09:10 AM
clarice,
Last night at the auction I saw a guy with a Trump 2016 sweatshirt. Knowing his background, I was surprised as he is in that demographic that is usually dem because of social issues.
Lots of weird political realignments this year.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | March 18, 2016 at 09:13 AM
Trump needs to talk up Sanders. Not his policies, but what a stand-up guy he is and how he fights for what he believes in etc. Frau posted comments from that NYT article that suggests there are votes there that are ripe for plucking.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 09:21 AM
It really is the Reagan '80 playbook, except Reagan never made a bid for black votes - I don't think it ever occurred to him to try. He focused on the white and "ethnic" blue collar vote, including union rank and file. Trump looks like he is going to make that bid, if Diamond and Silk are any evidence. Surely BLM will backfire among a subset of black voters who want safer communities and are sick and tired of seeing jobs taken away.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 09:26 AM
anonamom, glad you liked that video. I left a comment for you at the end of the last thread.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 09:27 AM
Actually free diapers might be a big selling point to Hillary's voters, if you get my drift.
Posted by: jimmyk | March 18, 2016 at 09:28 AM
Porchlight,
I am going to start actively looking for bumper stickers and other campaign stuff.
So far, the only bumper stickers I have seen for anyone are a couple for Bernie.
In my opinion, some of the disaffected college students could be won over with a hammer on the colleges for a "truth in employment possibilities" requirement, hitting the colleges for some of the kids' costs, and loan restructuring.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | March 18, 2016 at 09:33 AM
And with Trump there's the very real possibility they won't be on the roster any more. After all, who needs them if Trump wins?
It's a certainty. How much did it cost Trump to make and distribute that video via Instagram and Twitter?
Because of this, I expect Twitter will ban him at some point. And then we have real problems. Even if you don't like Trump, cutting out non-Dem candidates from social media platforms is a BFD.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 09:37 AM
I do get your drift, jimmy k and I think that's why Obama has suggested it. It's now a new right along with birth control pills, college education and medical care.
Posted by: clarice | March 18, 2016 at 09:42 AM
Trump has played the new media like a violin. Compare and contrast with Jeb and even Hillary.
Posted by: clarice | March 18, 2016 at 09:43 AM
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-03-17/good-times-not-anger-led-to-trump-s-rise
This man is insane.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | March 18, 2016 at 09:43 AM
Porchlight:
If Trump is getting a ton of free media through his twitter feed, why wouldn't twitter want to somehow get some money out of that? Twitter is not Donald's property.
The answer, of course, is there is always a competitor on the horizen, and another person can easily create another twitter.
Posted by: Appalled | March 18, 2016 at 09:44 AM
I haven't seen a "fun with numbers" comment in some time.
To fill the void:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/03/an_encouraging_look_at_missouris_primary_numbers.html
Posted by: Threadkiller | March 18, 2016 at 09:45 AM
Appalled, that's just it. Twitter doesn't make any money. So they might as well not make money without The Donald. If they ban him closer to the election there won't be time to find an alternative - there isn't time even now.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 09:48 AM
I meant of the Depends variety.
Posted by: jimmyk on iPhone | March 18, 2016 at 09:50 AM
And if I wasn't clear before, they're within their rights to ban him, just as the MSM would be within their rights not to cover him. In fact I would expect them to start ignoring him any minute.
But you see the problem for the country if there's an election going on and only one candidate is ever mentioned.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 09:52 AM
From TK's 9:45 link
"As Missourian Harry Truman proved true for the ages, elections are not won at polls. They are won at the ballot box."
Actually they are won at the ballot box in the general election not the primaries. This is why I discount all this turnout stuff in primaries. Sure it is a sign of enthusiasm but I want to see that same enthusiasm (and lack of it for the Dems) roll over in Novermber.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | March 18, 2016 at 09:55 AM
"I want to pull out one quote, because all I have heard from people like Rove is that Trump has high unfavorables"
Maybe people like Rove are talking about this?
Posted by: Odger Rover | March 18, 2016 at 10:05 AM
OK, it hit me as I was walking and listening to our local NPR station's new Friday "Week in Review" hour. Fortunately, not all the panelists are Marxists, as it's local, so they were not all Hair-on-fire about the racist, bigoted , violence-inciting Donald Trump, as he's most typically protrayed on that frequency.
That's when I got it--that cooler heads shall prevail:
The GOPe will fall in line because--MONEY. Perhaps a tad of power too.
The same reason they are RINOS, the same reason until this week they were OK with electing Hillary instead of the Donald. When it comes down to it, they'll vote their pocketbooks too, and they will take less of hit in the short run with Trump than HRC.
Posted by: anonamom | March 18, 2016 at 10:08 AM
MIT scientists find evidence that "lost memories" in Alzheimer patients may one day be recoverable
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/03/17/mit-scientists-find-evidence-that-alzheimers-lost-memories-may-one-day-be-recoverable/
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | March 18, 2016 at 10:14 AM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3498066/EPHRAIM-HARDCASTLE-Queen-refuses-return-London-meet-President-Obama.html?ito=social-twitter_dailymailUK
He's going to have to go to Windsor. A small victory for Her Majesty, who probably hasn't forgotten that iPod of his speeches.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | March 18, 2016 at 10:16 AM
Jane, our Chicago friend has found our island:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3498370/Irish-island-ultimate-away-stressed-city-living-comes-complete-old-airstrip-just-1-5-million.html
Posted by: clarice | March 18, 2016 at 10:16 AM
--mit-scientists-find-evidence-that-alzheimers-lost-memories-may-one-day-be-recoverable--
They're still ironing out a few kinks;
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | March 18, 2016 at 10:25 AM
--Not sure if I can ride this roller coaster for the next 8 months.--
Likewise, peter.
Sit here in the back with me so that if we do yak over the side at least it won't be hitting anyone behind us.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | March 18, 2016 at 10:28 AM
I was pointing out last night, that snarky injo piece is written by an admitted buzzardfeed plagiarist and friend of tetris, who the latter denied, despite social media evidence.
Posted by: narciso | March 18, 2016 at 10:28 AM
Without exception, my Dem/Lib friends have commented to me about the election and have made the assumption that I would support Kasich. Because in spite of my telling them repeatedly and clearly that I am a "right-wing nutcase" they think I am just kidding and that as a reasonably intelligent person I would obviously not be so insane as to support any of the other candidates. When I tell them I'm a Cruz guy who will support Trump they express bafflement.
Tells you all you need to know about Kasich.
Just like the complete absence of BLM/La Raza/Feminist/Radical complaints about Obama's Old White Guy from Harvard Garland nomination tells you all you need to know about how "centrist" the guy is.
Posted by: boatbuilder, Esq., Lord of All He Surveys | March 18, 2016 at 10:29 AM
Well one looks at turnout numbers re four and eight years numbers, the relation is almost an inverse correlation.
Posted by: narciso | March 18, 2016 at 10:33 AM
It's very odd how infrequently MOzo and BOzo travel together, except for their Dec. and Aug. vacays.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 18, 2016 at 10:37 AM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/yale-duke-march-madness_us_56eb3a0ae4b084c6721fda68
Some funny stuff.
Posted by: boatbuilder, Esq., Lord of All He Surveys | March 18, 2016 at 10:43 AM
I hesitated a bit before hitting your link, boatbuilder, but that's some funny stuff. Thanks.
Posted by: lyle | March 18, 2016 at 10:57 AM
The tuba duel was nice.
Posted by: henry | March 18, 2016 at 10:58 AM
I have only been wrong on two games
The Little Rock victory and And the Wichita State win over Arizona
Posted by: maryrose | March 18, 2016 at 11:00 AM
I think the thing that bothers me the most about the TDS, #Nevertrump thing is how much of it is dishonest.
People like Theo and Rick [where is he BTW?] or TC seem primarily concerned about electability, which is a legitimate concern as are concerns about the policies he might actually pursue and I don't have a problem with that even when I disagree.
However, many of the I'll-leave-the-party ultimatum themed criticisms about his lack of conservatism come from precisely the same people who told us we had to vote for Dole and McCain and Romney despite their lack of conservatism. Most of these start out with words like bully, crass, vulgar, bombastic, egotistical, etc.
They don't care about his policies anymore than they did Romneycare or McCain-Feingold.
What they care about is being lumped together with him and then only by a particular crowd. They don't mind the middlebrow fever swamps of the left not liking them. It's the spats and cravat swamps of Vanity Fair and Martha's Vineyard they're afraid of. They aspire to be the New Yorker's logo dandy only facing vaguely right. They're scared stiff of having a handle like short fingered vulgarian pinned to their back by the cool kids, like a Groton version of a kick me sign.
All of which is fine except they're too chicken to just come right out and admit it.
If they want to be well respected men about Georgetown they're going to have to come out of the closet and unleash their inner dedicated follower of fashion.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | March 18, 2016 at 11:07 AM
Who knows (or cares) whether I'm "sexist" or not. I would vote for Carly Fiorina in a heartbeat; and I would rather hit myself with a 16 pound sledgehammer than vote for the Hildebeest. So what does that make me?
Hint: an intelligent person.
Posted by: Comanche Voter | March 18, 2016 at 11:10 AM
It goes further than that, Iggy. Even peeps like Iowahawk who certainly aren't part of the Georgetown cocktail circuit are burnishing (and brandishing) their anti-Trump credentials.
Although Iowahawk is more part of that crowd than he likes to admit on Twitter, since he's done things like write the script for a Dick Cheney roast, and pals around with NRO types in real life as well as on social media.
It's a bore. They talk about the Uniparty and creative destruction and sticking it to the elite yet they won't support the one guy who's poised to creatively destroy the elite Uniparty, because he's uncouth or something.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 11:12 AM
CH was absolutely correct about the Ohio primaries. Although I have been "registered" as a Republican (whatever the hell that means)for decades, I was ask whether I wanted R or D ballot.
I suspect Kasich got a lot of crossover votes. Dems who can't quite stomach Shrillary or the Bern.
Kasich is squishy enough for the muddle.
Posted by: Buckeye | March 18, 2016 at 11:14 AM
New ceiling alert:
Latest NY Emerson poll has Trump at 64%, Clinton at 71%.
http://media.wix.com/ugd/3bebb2_e6ef41f2113347feaedca7d88762c6f3.pdf
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 11:14 AM
This is an update from Tuesday voting in SW Ohio. A terrible 12 vehicle wreck on a KY-OH bridge led to a judge's ordering the polls to remain open an extra hour in 4 counties.
There are some big problems with this:
1) The Federal judge received a call from her clerk who was stuck in the bridge traffic, and determined on her own that she was entitled to unilaterally extend voting hours.
2) Her aide called the SoS office to inform him of this decree at around 7:30 which was the time the polls were supposed to close.
3) The SoS said WHAT! Where is the written order? When did this happen? How can we communicate this to 1100 precincts which are closed/closing?
4) The SoS spoke to the Judge around 7:39, and she said it had been an oral order, not a written one, but then submitted a written version to the SoS around 8:00.
5) Presumably in the midst of this, some precincts stayed open and others closed; and apparently one of the Congressional districts includes residents in 2 counties -- one that was supposed to extend hours, and another that was not.
6) Now the SoS and his office are trying to figure out what to do about the voting irregularites that the Federal Judge created without a justiciable case or controversy, nor plaintiff, nor case number, etc.
7) Should I mention that the SoS is a little hacked off about this?
As bad as this is, the wreck itself was worse. A car flew off of the bridge and remains at the bottom of the Ohio River because conditions are to dangerous to attempt a recovery effort until Sunday or Monday. The know where the car is but do not know who/how many people perished.
Posted by: JeanD | March 18, 2016 at 11:17 AM
And new AZ poll has McCain only ahead of his Some Dude primary opponent by....drum roll....one point.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2016/MerillPollGeneralPR.pdf
But go ahead, GOPe, force a candidate on us. It's going to work out sooooo well for you.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 11:18 AM
BEN SHAPIRO: DONALD TRUMP IS A LIAR [VIDEO]
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yX5dBzxKNOw&ebc=ANyPxKpQ3skpeEP-12rlgdm0FfN2uGcenbYvvPG0K8VumqQ6p986cdO93F3dvE7JIpNpg2Rd4aCvpz2hqAT5TR2BuocX-ebAXw
Posted by: Truthbetold | March 18, 2016 at 11:19 AM
Oh he's off at #nevertrump, ie patterico going full macho Grande.
Posted by: narciso | March 18, 2016 at 11:20 AM
I told you they stole ahia, it's just classic.
Posted by: narciso | March 18, 2016 at 11:24 AM
What a sad mess, JeanD.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 11:25 AM
McCain will be 80 soon. He filled Barry Goldwater's vacant seat. He's been on the Senate Armed Svc Committee as long as I can remember, making him a Sunday shows regular for many years ... but he had no idea about the shameful treatment of vets by the VA, especially the worst of the worst in Phoenix until, like BOzo, he read it in the paper? He's a liar, incompetent, or both.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 18, 2016 at 11:30 AM
A liar, incontinent, or both, you say?
Posted by: lyle | March 18, 2016 at 11:39 AM
Anybody making book on how many riots will be required in Aug/Sept/Oct to turn out the Dem vote?
I will make a bet that NONE occur in that swath of Appalachia on the map MM posted yesterday.
Posted by: Buckeye | March 18, 2016 at 11:45 AM
Polls mean nobody has to, you know, discuss substance.
Posted by: sbw | March 18, 2016 at 11:51 AM
Can someone toss an o and a y into my prior post?
Thanks!
Porch, it is a sad mess. The SoS was on the radio this morning explaining the situation to the host (who also happens to be a lawyer).
The host suggested that the SoS should toss out any of the late votes, then let a voter sue to have the vote reinstated. That way, at least there would be a plaintiff and a case. Right now the SoS doesn't know how he can go to the Fed Appeals Court without any valid ruling in the lower court.
Host also suggested that the SoS file an Ethics charge against the Judge. We've moved from "legislating from the bench" to "legislating by a tweet from the bench."
narc, I don't know how many votes were actually cast during the extension. I imagine fairly few since many of the polling locations did not get the word or reopen.
Posted by: JeanD | March 18, 2016 at 11:54 AM
So far this week the WaPo has printed anti-trump pieces from Terris of their "Style" section, from Richards their "pop music critic", and now a dire anti-Trump piece from a Berniebot in their Wonkblog. Waiting to hear from the sports section how Trump's favorite teams reflect his elitism, the horoscope guru on how Trump's astrological sign is a warning from hell, the home-garden feature on the deadly insecticides used at Trump properties, etc. etc.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 18, 2016 at 11:54 AM
sbw,
At the moment I'm interested in countering the "polls show he can't win" argument.
If anyone would like to posit a "substantive" argument for another candidate, but cannot also give any indication of how that candidate could actually become the nominee, what is the point? We can all talk about pie in the sky, like Bernie Sanders does.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 11:55 AM
Diapers are a fundamental right. The only real question is landfill filling disposable or cloth. If you support Gaia there's only one right answer but what smart mom or dad wants to clean them. Another job American won't do. Hence a need to import Mas personas. A win-win for Democrats
Posted by: -peter | March 18, 2016 at 11:55 AM
Give it time, Deb at 11:54. We still have 8 months to go...
Posted by: lyle | March 18, 2016 at 11:58 AM
Re the poll linked by Porchlight at 11:14 AM: Trump is behind Clinton by 19 points, and is behind Sanders by 17 points, in his home state. If Trump can't shuffle the usual deck in his home state, he's not going to be able to shuffle it in any other state. Thus, we are back to North Carolina, Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Colorado, and perhaps one or two other states deciding the election, with the usual red/blue split in the remaining states.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | March 18, 2016 at 12:01 PM
One Million FB Likes on open letter against Trump. Wonder how nice this Stanton really is.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/humans-of-new-york-brandon-stanton-open-letter-donald-trump_us_56e6f9c2e4b0860f99d9c9ae
Posted by: Joan | March 18, 2016 at 12:05 PM
I think Cruz and Kasich have a relatively straightforward path to becoming the nominee, Porchlight: Trump doesn't reach 50% plus 1 rolling into Cleveland, and polls continue to be consistent in showing Kasich and Cruz doing better than Trump against Clinton. Sure, it's possible Trump could improve his percentage of collecting delegates and achieve the 50% plus one, or improve in the polls, or both. But this is far from a done deal.
What is especially troublesome to me is that we haven't seen MSM do it's body slams on Trump yet. MSM is milking Trump during the nomination season. If it's Trump vs. The Hill, MSM will be all in for The Hill.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | March 18, 2016 at 12:07 PM
I see riot potential in Baltimore in early May when the first "Freddie Gray" bike cop's trial begins. Barring a colossal travesty of justice, the white cop will be speedily acquitted on all charges. Rioting will either commence immediately or may be postponed until after the black van driver's trial, which follows soon after. White cop exonerated + black van driver found guilty or both acquitted = riots imo.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 18, 2016 at 12:08 PM
If it's Trump vs. The Hill, MSM will be all in for The Hill.
Well of course.
If the nominee is someone other than Trump, IMO we lose because that person will not get enough Trump/insurgent voters. Maaaybe Cruz has a shot. But Tuesday was not good for him.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 12:10 PM
MSM will be all in for Hilligula... Trump or not.
Posted by: henry | March 18, 2016 at 12:12 PM
Donald J. Trump
Salt Lake City Town Hall
Starting in a few minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpeWWFfd4Ns
Posted by: cheerleader | March 18, 2016 at 12:12 PM
Wouldn't Cruz and Kasich cancel each other out? One is GOPe and the other is supposedly anti-GOPe?
Posted by: cheerleader | March 18, 2016 at 12:14 PM
boatbuilder, thanks for the Yale/Duke link. Very entertaining!
Posted by: JeanD | March 18, 2016 at 12:14 PM
Porchlight and henry, MSM will be starting with higher candidate negatives as it goes against Trump. And if Trump is going to bring in insurgents that the GOP is not otherwise going to get, where are all those insurgents in Trump's home state?
Posted by: Thomas Collins | March 18, 2016 at 12:17 PM
Sorry, the event is early this evening not in a few minutes. :-)
Posted by: cheerleader | March 18, 2016 at 12:18 PM
Salt Lake Trib explains why most Mormon males today don't have beards. Makes it easier to notice bearded brigand performance artists like Tommy "I wanted to grab Trump's mic" Dimassino.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 18, 2016 at 12:20 PM
If Trump can't shuffle the usual deck in his home state, he's not going to be able to shuffle it in any other state.
Not so fast, TC.
So Clinton can only get to 55% in her deep blue home state of NY against Trump? I don't know about you but I'm liking how that translates into other lavender and light blue states.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 12:24 PM
So, Thomas Collins, you think CRUZ will win New York?
After that sneering "New York values" comment? After he paraded all over the country with that nut case Glenn Beck acting like Cruz was the Sceond Coming?
I don't think so.
New York is probably going to go for Hillary, as she and Bill still sort of live there, plus Wall Street. Trump would make it more competitive, though, which would cost the dems money to make sure it stays dem.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | March 18, 2016 at 12:25 PM
And if Trump is going to bring in insurgents that the GOP is not otherwise going to get, where are all those insurgents in Trump's home state?
I'm not being clear, I guess. I'm saying Trump and to some extent Cruz get the insurgent vote; add them together and that's about 60% of the GOP vote nationally.
Look at the NY head to head poll again. Trump polls 6 points higher than Cruz and holds Hill to 55% whereas Cruz can only hold her to 61%.
Trump and Cruz are the insurgent candidates. How does Hillary do against the non-insurgent Kasich? The summary doesn't say, but since he's only at 1 percent among Republicans, I'm guessing it's a much bigger rout than either Trump or Cruz.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 12:34 PM
Salah Abdeslam has been arrested.
shot as well.
Posted by: henry | March 18, 2016 at 12:35 PM
MSM will be all in for Hilligula
"Will"? What's with this future tense? They're already so deep in the tank for her NOW! Think this bothers Trump? I don't.
Posted by: lyle | March 18, 2016 at 12:36 PM
Anyways I was entertained by web griffith's entertaining picaresque tale set in the 40s.
Of course brooksie is all green eggs and ham, but that's a big.
Posted by: narciso | March 18, 2016 at 12:43 PM
https://www.rt.com/news/336137-brussels-police-raid-shots/
They caught Salah Abdelslam alive. The organizer of the Paris terror attacks, the guy with the face you want to punch.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | March 18, 2016 at 12:43 PM
Porch: "polls show he can't win"
That says nothing about the candidate, something about those answering polls, and everything about the media.
Posted by: sbw | March 18, 2016 at 12:44 PM
That's awesome. Europe may be a mess but their LEO agencies are still pretty good (after the fact at any rate).
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 12:45 PM
Nsa re judicial watch wondered how red queen had gamma clearance material.
Posted by: narciso | March 18, 2016 at 12:47 PM
That says nothing about the candidate, something about those answering polls, and everything about the media.
Sure. But people are asserting here in this forum "polls show he can't win" and I'm attempting, here in this forum, to discuss that assertion.
There's plenty of room for other discussion, if that is what is wished.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 18, 2016 at 12:47 PM
That says nothing about the candidate, something about those answering polls, and everything about the media.
^^This.
Also, who exactly are these pollsters, er...polling? Every damn phone in the world, land line or cell, has caller ID. Do YOU answer an unknown, out of area call? I don't.
Posted by: lyle | March 18, 2016 at 12:49 PM
Bernstein is one of the generally smarter journolisters, but that's like jumbo shrimp.
Posted by: narciso | March 18, 2016 at 12:50 PM
You mean TAMPONS aren't FREE.......yet.
Posted by: GUS | March 18, 2016 at 12:55 PM
The daily pundit has had a clearer perspective for a while, unlike other sites which have gone full body snatche.
Posted by: narciso | March 18, 2016 at 12:59 PM
Wait. Maybe I've been too harsh on the MFM being in the tank for Hilligula. In my defense, I hadn't seen this link about these wisened, jaundiced-eyed old press wretches hammering her on her record and "inflicting the comfortable," as the saying goes:
http://www.theamericanmirror.com/journalism-2016-hillary-quizzed-about-pizza-birthday-gifts-favorite-romantic-comedy/
Posted by: lyle | March 18, 2016 at 01:00 PM
--And new AZ poll has McCain only ahead of his Some Dude primary opponent by....drum roll....one point.--
I thought that was against his Dem opponent in the fall.
Posted by: Destiny Ignatz | March 18, 2016 at 01:01 PM