POLITICAL JUNKIES

Anonymous

I always felt sorry for HRC not to mention her daughter. The worst part was when she went on the Today Show and called the Monica Deal a right wing conspiracy? After all the cheating he did I think she believed him again. She's a smart lady, Trump is labeled for ego - I don't know what to label the HRC and hubby. CNN had a great special on last night regarding his campaign. I forgot he was another draft dodger. Today's MSM would be so relentless considering what they do to Donald. I saw clip on Twitter where Reagen told hecklers to Shut Up during a debate. Better than wanting to punch him in the face. But same point. BRW I laugh all the time when something politically is said negative and twisted. I think to myself I want to slap them. I'be never slapped anyone. I am like shoo fly shoo cannot even kill a fly.

nihahi

Divine....chuckling here! I try to wrap my head around Bill being the White House spouse!!!!! (not that I love everything about Hilary or Bill, or assume for a moment that the election is a "done deal"!!!). It would be such a radical departure from what the US has always known. What would he be "called".....First Gentleman doesn't really sound right!!!!

Anonymous

Nih- I plead the 5th on my choice!

DivineMrsM

I live in the Ohio Valley where a couple steel mills once reigned. They employed over 15,000 by the 60s and 70s. One is now closed, the other, which at one point had been employee owned, now has 1,000 employees and is owned by some mogul from the Netherlands.

My husband worked over 25 years in the steel mill. It was always volatile, never knowing how the national and global economy was going to swing and affect whether he would have a job or not. In the early 90s, my husband remembers Bill Clinton holding a large assembly comprised mostly of steelworkers and families in one of our steel towns, wearing a flannel shirt, (you know, showing he was a good ole boy, "I'm one of yins."), and saying he was gonna protect the American steelworkers and stand up to those trying to bring down the industry. Husband says he'll never forget it. Bill got elected into office, then offered absolutely no support at all and in fact opposed legislation that would have helped the industry. My husband ended up taking a buy out. The once booming economy of our area will never return.

Many along with my husband will never forget Clinton's empty promises: I live in an area that has always been overwhelmingly Democratic. Yet this year, during the primary elections in our county (Jefferson), more than 2,400 voters switched from Democrat to Republican to vote. (Fewer than 100 switched from Republican to Democrat). And Trump had 54% of Republican votes in the county.

I tell my husband that Hillary is not Bill. But he will never vote for her. Many presidential candidates swing by our area and make a stop, but I wonder if Hillary, should she be the nominee, would dare show her face here. Me, I have to move on.

nihahi

Maltese.....hugs and chuckles....(wish there was a "like" button).

Divine...those "empty promises" are so entrenched in politics.

I believe that many good people truly enter politics with the best of intentions, and wanting to bring about real change, then the reality of treaties, political deals, financial issues tie their hands so tightly that the "end" rarely resembles the "promise" of their terms in office. I also believe that even on outsider like Trump would find the same scenario should he ever become elected. Maybe he should have tried for Governor, first, to get a handle on things? I'm reading/hearing today that he is shuffling his "team", and bringing in people experienced in the political/convention process, so perhaps he is starting to accept he is also going to have to become part of the political world in order to get farther????

april485

Divine, I love, love, love the image! I am willing to bet that she would not use her hubby's desk due to knowing what she knows about what happened in that oval office when her hubby was POTUS. I especially love the "doe" reference. It is really exciting that a woman may finally fill that role in my lifetime! That alone draws me to her even though I wish BS and his lovely pie in the sky wishes for our country could really happen. He is such a wonderful idealist and like nihahi said, so many others enter that job with high expectations and idealistic notions of what they will do. It just shows how politics intervenes in that job and causes them to not accomplish their lofty goals. I wish they could...I really do.

Anonymous

Divine I am backing DT for all the reasons you have faced in Ohio. Praying that he is not our typical politician and can be the so called bully they say he is and get congress all on the same page. He still wants PP just against the abortions for an example. There is a reason GOP e wants to take him out. He's rewriting politics. I think I can find you a seat on the T Train. I have priority seating available to me. 😂

DivineMrsM

I'll pass on that ride on the Trump train, Maltese. I'm gonna join that slow, steadywalk with HRC to the White House.

Anonymous

Hyd I hear you loud and clear!! But I have to go look up Cruz with TPP. There was something there or my memory is jaded where Ir wasn't clear on his views

DivineMrsM

Today's headline

Two of Donald Trump's children miss deadline to register as Republicans in New York

Donald Trump's children Ivanka and Eric won't be voting for him in New York's April 19 primary, Trump revealed Monday, because they failed to register as Republicans by the deadline.

"They had a longtime register and they were, you know, unaware of the rules, and they didn't register in time. So they feel very, very guilty. They feel very guilty. But it's fine," the GOP presidential candidate told Fox News' "Fox and Friends" by phone.

Trump said he thinks they would have had to register a year in advance.

But according to New York State's Board of Elections, New Yorkers who aren't registered could have registered if they had postmarked an application by March 25 or submitted the application in person on that date. For New Yorkers who were previously registered and wanted to change political parties, the deadline was Oct. 9, 2015.

"So Eric and Ivanka, I guess, won't be voting," Trump said.

Asked if he will now cut off their allowance, he said, "Yes. No more allowance."

This comes just over a week before New York holds its primary, which people can only participate in if they are registered in a particular party. Independents cannot participate.

april485

You beat me to it Divine. I was going to post this as well! Oh well, 2 less votes for the Trump Train in NY I guess.

Here is an interesting piece from CNN writer Jay Parini (yes I know CNN is what most think of as liberal MSM) and I found some of the facts in the piece very interesting, particularly how close Sanders and Clinton are in votes on the Hill. 93% of the time they agreed with one another! The piece is entitled "Why do they hate Hillary Clinton so much?"

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/20/opinions/why-the-hate-for-hillary-clinton-opinion-parini/index.html

DivineMrsM

Nice article, April.

Anonymous

I watched him this am on Fox. He tweets out when he will be on for the most part. I get a special alert to my phone! LOL!

Here we are in a political thread and it has to pointed out which is fine it just cracks me up -- Ivanka and Eric miss the deadline- Does Bernie have children? I am clueless--- - I love how important he is to everyone. HRC just put out a new ad against him. I wonder why she doesn't go after TC?

The bound and unbound delegates is something I never paid attention too before. Obvious neither did Trump's people and that is why Bernie has no chance. Our vote doesn't really matter. Super delegates are all set for her unless handcuffs take them away. The good news is .. we can wine and dine to persuade the undecided delegates,, at least on the right side it's legal.. I sure hope they are all golfers.

He's an hour away from me today, how I wish I could have went. I could have watched the man who has changed politics and will rewrite political history. It would have meant a lot to me. . Local news is airing it all from the Times Union Center and you cannot even hear the broadcasters because they are chanting so loud in the back ground-- I could hear Build that Wall chant, but when people were interviewed it was ALL about jobs-

april485

Sanders has a son Levi born in 1969 to a woman Susan Mott that was not his wife. He has been married twice. First to his college sweetheart in 1963 and they divorced 18 months later and remained friends. He has been married to his present wife Jane O'meara Driscoll since 1988. With her he has three stepchildren—Dave Driscoll, Carina Driscoll, and Heather Titus (née Driscoll)—whom he considers to be his own children.He also has seven grandchildren(source Wikipedia)

Edited to add step children

Anonymous

Thanks April! You know your candidate! I know TC has children because they should be in bed at the hours I see them.. LOL!!

april485

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders Posting this so people who do not know much about Bernie can read about his political life and accomplishments as well as his personal life. Interesting stuff.

There is a lot of very interesting information on his WIKI page that I did not know about him. I am even more impressed with his accomplishments now than I was before reading this about a month ago. He has had a very interesting life and political career. His wins in elections have been MASSIVE in some instances as has been his popularity ratings. One of his races (2012) he won with 71% of the vote!

HomeMom

LovesMaltese - why can't we have OC and open up the state lines for insurance companies to compete for small companies or anyone else that wants to look into it? He SAYS they would have to offer insurance even with a pre existing condition, but will they really? Insurance companies are in the business to make money off of the healthy and ignore the sick. The sick costs $$$. If they all decide not to offer if there is a pre existing condition, then it's useless. There is no guarantee that your experience would have been different if companies could cross state lines. You don't have OC from what I read, so I'm a little confused as to how it hasn't helped you.

On the Bengahzi issue, did you watch the hearings? I didn't but I know someone who could not stand her before that and he watched every minute. He now understands that she did her job within her capabilities and will be voting for her in the Fall should she win the nomination.

Most Republicans do not like DT. The votes have been spread out because of the number of people running, but if Kasich were to back out now, Cruz wins. If Trump should win the nomination, I really believe it will be the "lesser of the two evils" and people will vote across the board for Hillary.

PS I always wanted a businessman to be president (Lee Iacoca) but now that I've had a Governor who is a businessman? - no thanks. You cannot govern like the state/country is your business.

DivineMrsM

I know there is great strategizing behind whatever political ads are put out, when they are put out and who to go after In the ads to get the biggest bang for the political campaign buck.

I think they're running this campaign like teams approach games in a football season. You gotta come prepared then take out your opponents one at a time. And it ain't over till it's over. A lot can happen after the two minute warning signaling the end of the game. Lots and lots of strategy is involved.

Anonymous

OC can't work for me. https://nystateofhealth.ny.gov I cannot go to a local cancer center where I live that is covered under a plan that is affordable unless I want less quality of care. I have posted why I have to go to out of care network in many previous posts. There is one plan available to me to do so. I am paying $$ to go to where I go. It is a disaster for me.

As for HRC- she isn't as popular as you think she is. BS is embarrassing her and take away her super delegates and they are close. I do believe she will win unless they handcuff her. Yes, I watched the hearings. I also watched the OJ Simpson Trial. Very similar in outcome. But OJ final got what was coming to him- eventually God has a say.. sometimes it is before you actually go before him.

You said, "The votes have been spread out because of the number of people running, but if Kasich were to back out now, Cruz wins" ???? Mr Trump leads in overall votes by close to 2 mil and that is with many in the race at one time? He has the most delegate% because of winning the states he has won. I PRAY that Kasich backs out he is hurting Trump more than Cruz.

"PS I always wanted a businessman to be president (Lee Iacoca) but now that I've had a Governor who is a businessman? - no thanks. You cannot govern like the state/country is your business" From your lips to Gods ears !!!

I agree the GOP-"E" does not like him- Geez I wonder why??

exbrnxgrl

" But OJ final got what was coming to him- eventually God has a say.. sometimes it is before you actually go before him."

Not that this has anything to do with politics, but Mr. Simpson is currently in jail for charges unrelated to the Goldman/Simpson murders. This what he deserves, for the crime he committed and was convicted of, but it wasn't murder. He is elible for parole in Oct. 2017 (total 33 year sentence)

Anonymous

Caryn, exactly-- but what goes around comes around in a different way-- I was asked if I watched the hearings... I compare the outcomes of both.

april485

I have to agree with Maltese on that one. What goes around did come around for OJ even if it came in a different way. At least some feel he is where he belongs. I know that I do. I don't think he will be granted parole next year. I think he will eventually though. I doubt he serves out his full sentence.

exbrnxgrl

Yes, but a drop in the bucket compared to the sentence for double murder

Anonymous

My family are die hard Bill's fans ( not me) and we spent many a Sunday's at Rich Stadium in Buffalo in the early 90's. OJ was always there and one time we were in line for the ladies room, and he cut through the line and put his hand on BFF shoulder. Guess what we remember about that? He had on leather gloves!!! When the story broke I wanted him to be innocent and followed it closely- Closely enough that I guaranteed everyone that the jury was going to find him innocent. It was so horribly wrong, so very wrong- and it was all in retribution to Rodney King. Ok not a political topic but again shows a country divided both ways.

ChiSandy

LovesMaltese, I too almost went to Woodstock. I was 18 but living at home while attending CUNY Brooklyn College (free back then, so that one of Bernie’s proposals Is based in historical fact). Friends were about to buy our Short Line bus tickets up there, but my parents found out and put their collective foot down. Back then, if you lived under your parents’ roof, you obeyed house rules. And so I had to wait for the movie.

ChiSandy

So DT is a “unifier" because he calls himself one? Over the years, I have learned to distrust any candidate who claims to be “bipartisan:" invariably, their definition of the term means “I expect you to cross the aisle and see things my way," with no intention of reciprocating. He is no more a “unifier” just because he says he is than Cruz employed “Gestapo” or “scorched-earth” delegate-recruiting “tactics” just because Trump’s hired shill, lobbyist Paul Manafort, says he did. Funny how when pressed to explain those catchphrase accusations, Manafort declined to give examples or even answer.

And to those who say that the person who goes into the convention with the most delegates wins? Sorry, but that's not how it works. In fact, that's never how it works--a plurality won't cut it, one needs a majority to prevent a second ballot. Reince Priebus (certainly not one of my favorite people) reiterated today that the RNC rules were set a year ago, before any of the candidates even filed. They knew the rules--and if they didn't, they shouldn't be allowed to benefit by their ignorance of them. On the Democratic side, both pundits and unnamed sources close to the Sanders campaign mentioned that Sanders, too, understood going in about the dichotomy between pledged & “super" delegates, as well as the fact that due to various formulae of some non-winner-take-all states awarding delegates proportionately statewide, some by winner-take-all congressional districts and others proportionately within districts. Therefore, he can fume about the fact that a 15-point primary or caucus margin of victory can result in an even split of delegates, but he cannot profess shock or outrage. Sanders probably hadn't expected his campaign to do any more than send a message or at the most influence the party platform and provide fodder for future reform. I wonder whether on the other side of the aisle, Trump felt the same way--that his candidacy would simply burnish his brand, raise his visibility, and make his businesses more successful. I wonder if either candidate expected at the outset that he'd get any further than Ron Paul did in 2008 and 2012. For both Sanders and Trump, there might be a heavy element of “be careful what you wish for" at play, but that they've passed the point of no return. OTOH, Clinton and Cruz have been masterful at using the “process" with increasing success. Sanders may have been unaware until too late of a need to understand and exploit the process; Trump projected his ability to make his own rules in business on to his political prospects, figuring that process would be as irrelevant to the latter as it was for him to the former. The object lesson here? Disdain and dismiss the process at your peril.

And I've said it before, but it bears repeating: the nominating process is neither a preliminary heat nor a semifinal. It is a process controlled by the political parties that decide who shall be their standard-bearers. This is especially so in “closed-primary" states such as NY that let only registered party members vote in a party primary. That the parties have thrown any part of the process open to the public via primaries and citizen-attendance caucuses is not only a relatively recent phenomenon but nothing short of remarkable in contrast to most other democracies. In parliamentary democracies (unlike our federal republic, they are the most common form of democracy), the parties choose the top-of-ticket candidates, and the public votes not for the candidate him or herself nor even for the party, but rather for the candidate who will represent their locality in the legislature. The party with the plurality of winning down-ticket candidates is declared the winner, and its standard-bearer becomes the country's leader (in most countries Prime Minister and in others President).

One more example of Trump's disdain for--or ignorance of--the process is that his two most visible campaign ambassadors (his son & daughter) won't be voting for him in their home-state primary, because they can't: they would have needed to declare a party affiliation by March 25, or to have switched their party affiliation by last Oct. 9. That thud you hear is the sound of Daddy and his advisors dropping a big honkin' ball.

Those who feel that party authorities have too much say in how candidates are chosen need to become active in their chosen parties in order to change the rules. And those outraged that independents don't get to choose the nominees of the parties they themselves have declined to join (or even that they disdain)? Not only do elections have consequences, but so do decisions to join or not join. Don't like that? Try to get laws changed--as those in many states have done over the years.

ChiSandy

Ceanna, there are millions of people who cannot afford to fly, own a car nor even to open a bank account (hence, the proliferation of predatory-check-cashing/currency-exchange services in inner-city neighborhoods). Though we take them for granted, air travel, driving and banking are not basic rights of citizenship enumerated in the Constitution. Therefore, many, many people too poor to own a car, open bank accounts, or travel by plane do not obtain drivers’ licenses or state-issued ID cards. These IDs cost money to purchase--as well as to travel to the offices that issue them.

Voting, however, is the most important right conferred by citizenship. It should not cost one red cent to cast a vote. Poll taxes and property-ownership requirements were outlawed for that very reason: those who could not afford to pay a poll tax or own property were overwhelmingly non-white, and it is clear that denying non-white non-Anglo citizens the right vote was the primary purpose of these obstacles. Fast-forward to today. In states with photo ID laws for registration & voting, forms of ID that used to be considered valid are no longer acceptable as either voter ID or to obtain a valid photo voter ID. For instance, in WI, college-issued photo IDs are not valid for registration or voting--but hunting and gun licenses (including concealed-carry permits) are. Three guesses how the Democrat/Republican proportion of college students vs. hunters and gun enthusiasts shakes out. Even where application fees for official state IDs are waived, the number of offices issued them--as well as the hours they issue them--have been cut back drastically, and often these offices are inaccessible by public transit, several hours distant, or both. (In NC, one such office was several miles’ walk over uncontrolled roads without sidewalks from the nearest bus stop--which bus ran infrequently).

It is no secret that those people most likely to lose their ability to vote because their IDs were arbitrarily declared invalid and who cannot afford new ones (or to afford to travel to get new ones) are the elderly, disabled, poor, students and people of color.....groups also least likely to vote Republican. Not coincidentally, neighborhoods that have had polling places eliminated or reduced, producing long lines likely to cause the poor and infirm to give up and go home (or decide to stay home after seeing footage of these lines) are also mostly heavily minority-group and/or student populated. And it is also proven that “voter fraud” is practically nonexistent, and dwarfed many times over by instances of voter-suppression. It is used as a pretext by the GOP (per guidelines written by the pro-corporate multi-state super-PAC “ALEC,” American Legislative Exchange Council, which specializes in writing identical fill-in-the-blanks legislation for numerous Republican-led state legislatures), which delights in invoking the ghost of Richard J. Daley (who died in 1976 and whose “machine” breathed its last in the late 1980s, despite his son’s attempts to revive it--minus the once-legendary “graveyard precincts”). Fact is, the problem of millions of dead voters isn’t a problem--dead people don’t vote and despite what the GOP would have you believe, live people don’t use those names to cast votes. Non-citizens are too afraid to call police or complain about slumlords lest INS find out and deport them--they’re certainly not going to attempt to vote, especially at polling places with cops in attendance. And millions of validly registered voters are turned away at the polls either because they have names similar to those of felons in jurisdictions where felons can’t vote, or because they just arbitrarily get expunged. It is not uncommon in Latino and black neighborhoods for official-looking flyers to be distributed either giving incorrect polling place addresses and times or warning citizens who attempt to vote that any of their undocumented relatives will be subject to deportation. In fact, these tactics are infinitely commoner than voter impersonation.

Those states with predominately Democratic legislatures who passed voter ID laws in the 1970s and 1980s were also those with the highest proportion of “Nixon” and later “Reagan” Democrats (and those nostalgic for the heyday of the Dixiecrats) who jumped the aisle to the GOP, inherently suspicious of minorities. They are by and large the same GOP-controlled states who used the ALEC templates in the 21st century. Different labels, but same ideology.

Photo ID laws (especially invalidating those previously valid forms of ID held by those likeliest to vote Democratic) to combat “voter fraud” is a solution in search of a problem.

ChiSandy

Bill Clinton a “draft dodger?” Yet another misstatement accepted as gospel by those who believe unflinchingly in catchphrases and speak fluent Bumper-Sticker.

Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, which subsidized two years of graduate study at Oxford. Even though by then the 2-S deferment no longer officially applied to grad students, Rhodes Scholars were still routinely not called for induction. After his first year at Oxford, he came home, to start law school and applied to and was accepted into U. of Arkansas’ ROTC program and was granted a 1-D status (reservist deferment). He then decided to delay law school and instead finish his stint at Oxford--a decision officially approved by the ROTC director, and was reclassified 1-A, called to take the Army physical (which he did and passed) but was never actually drafted. He also took and flunked the Air Force and Naval non-campus Reserves physicals (USAF for being too short and Navy for hearing impairment). Word had gotten out by then that Nixon was drawing down troops in ‘Nam, that only 19-yr-olds would be drafted and only volunteers would be deployed to combat, and that a lottery number system was in the works. He gambled that his 1-A status would never come to awful fruition--and he won that gamble. When the lottery was finally held, Clinton drew a 311 out of a possible 365.

A true “draft dodger” was someone who was classified eligible but either refused to register, failed to appear for the physical or faked a medical or psychiatric condition that would result in a bogus 4-F or 1-Y classification, or either refused to report when called up or fled the country (as a fugitive without official permission to study) rather than serve. Clinton did none of these things. He broke no laws and every step he took to avoid being sent into combat was legal. Some men avoided service by getting 2-S deferments to go to medical or law school (I was castigated for my decision to switch to pre-law because I was “taking a man’s place in law school and sending him to his doom in Vietnam”). That cohort doubtless included many of the doctors who are keeping us alive today. (My own husband was 349 in the lottery, BTW, drawn while still in college). How many of our own brothers, friends, cousins, etc. took advantage of 2-S and ROTC? And how many parents would have ordered their sons to skip law, medical or graduate school and allow themselves to be drafted into combat?

april485

"Yet another misstatement accepted as gospel by those who believe unflinchingly in catchphrases and speak fluent Bumper-Sticker."

ChiSandy, You wrote a lot of eloquent things in those posts, but my favorite line is above. Thanks for putting into words what many of us know to be true.

BlueHeron

ChiSandy I think I love you