HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » JackRiddler » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

JackRiddler

Profile Information

Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 24,979

Journal Archives

The dude abides - four states for Sanders & MA still in the air.

Okay, looking bad for a Sanders win in MA, but the gap keeps closing. 78% reporting, it's 50.7 to 48.1 and the western part of the state (Sanders territory) is still coming in. Only FOXNEWS has called the state (like they did in the 2000 presidential for Bush).

So what if there's a SOLID NORTH for Sanders? Note that he won OK as well as MN, CO and VT. What matters more for Democrats in November, North and West or South? Hello?

Google skews to the Republicans?!

Here is something we can all agree on and I hope is seen as GD material rather than GD : P, so don't attack Sanders or Clinton, okay?

Google any state name and "primary" or "caucus." What do you see? They set up a table with results. Which party is always shown as the default? For which party do you have to click again?

Is this just me from my machine? I don't think so!

Why?

The speech was not on a different subject. Here is the speech:

The quoted sentence was the thesis statement of the speech.



By the way, the author of the above video is not "youtube.com." I know some people seem to have (selective!) difficulties with the idea that the location of a web page does not always indicate the value or meaning of the content.

it has the potential to be the lowest turnout ever

but it could also be high.

Clinton alone will produce a low turnout. The difference would be Trump, who will also get a low turnout. The question becomes, just how great will the anti-Trump repugnance factor? That's what could bring out the biggest surge, against him. (I don't think Clinton inspires so much anti-Clinton outside the predictable Republican base.) Trump's been trying to dress himself more mainstream the last couple of weeks, in case you didn't notice. The bastard actually wants to win.

And why do you bother to post your predictions...

and why should I or anyone else?

Except of course in the belief that it affects how people will think and might vote. Or helps your argument on DU. Or wins you a bet of sorts if you happen to be right. Whatever.

Since obvioiusly all these predictions are retail and pretty worthless otherwise. March madness brackets.

The days of the actual votes are coming soon enough, and then the next vote, and then the next. Phone banking, canvassing, contributing cash or working those parts of the Internet that are not as decided as this one all seem like better activities. I'm even recommending them to you, not just to me.

Actually, no, it was about 24 years.

At least, since we both seem to be referring to the reign of Tweed. (There's still a Tammany today, actually.) That was from 1858 until 1871, or a period roughly corresponding to, say, 1992 until 2016.

Thanks for making my day!

EDIT: D'oh!!!

1,871 minus 1,858 equals 13 or 14. My mistake. I wanted it to be so, you got me. The Clintons and their Third Way are indeed doing much better than Tweed.

#whichhillary currently top search on twitter

It comes up first in the search bar.
https://twitter.com/search?q=%23WhichHillary&src=tyah&lang=en

Wonder what happens if this kind of thing gets around enough:
https://twitter.com/AbrantieMikeB/status/702940851970842624

GHW Bush not long for the world. It depresses me.

For so many years I've wished this truly exceptional individual good health, in the hope that we might one day see him standing in the dock for even a fraction of the enormities he and his network have committed against humanity and civilization. For justice, of course, but also for the essential historical knowledge that we might thus gained. I knew it was a dream, but it was one worth having.

Defense is easy.

Polls say election's over! Science! Math! Inevitable! Shut up! Submit! You're enabling Trump! Stop campaigning right now! Stop!!! Irresponsible! Dreamers! Egoists! McGovern! Hippies! Where's your revolution, huh?! Why aren't you in every state? Why aren't you spending more money than Hillary/PAC(tm)!? Cause you're losers! Ha ha ha! Berniebros! Free stuff! Sexists! (This one has been toned down due to certain obvious facts.) Racists! (This one is in heavy rotation, at least until a significant number of African Americans get to vote instead of being "counted" through "science" and "math." Commies! (This one is used sparingly, it's kind of the special sauce.)

Ha ha ha!

No. A majority of Americans will not back Trump.

But the corporate media will do him all the favors - continuous uncritical coverage of every piece of nonsense he forwards, while providing enough occasional "criticism" through the irrelevant punditry just enough to feed the liberal media myth.

And you can also rely on them to treat "terror" and the like as crises, and to continue playing everything in terms of a personal soap opera, while ignoring every issue that matters and is truly a threat to the people and the medium and long term survival of civilization and the human race.

I'm genuinely curious about how the big PAC money will go, but expect it to line up behind him as if he were any Republican.

So there are no guarantees. Obviously I think Sanders is the stronger candidate but no guarantees.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next »