On the front page, the comment counter says there are 31 comments for this article, but when I open it, there are only 28. I've refreshed a couple of times and it shows the same. Just FYI

Heh.

Yeah, I thought the same thing, but I definitely think that the article's content more than made up for the crappy title!

Russ

Yes, but aren't the same base voters who elevated Trump the same ones who actually DO want the GOP to stop everything in its tracks unless they get 100% of what they're asking for?

No, the base voters are not the ones that demand complete and total loyalty on every issue! The proof: both McCain and Romney beat out far more conservative candidates and won the nomination running as "moderates".

I used to have a sheet that showed all of the positions McCain held during the primaries that he flipped on once he had the nomination that I wish I could find. The most glaring attribute about each of the positions that he flip flopped on: they were similar to the position that Obama held on the same issue! The GOP's propaganda machine needed Obama's positions to always be contested and viewed negatively, and this sheet made that abundantly clear.

I guess another way to ask this is how much overlap do you think there is between Trump voters and Tea Party supporters?

I'm guessing that Tea-Party supporters make up 80-90% of Trump's die hard groupies.

I can't imagine an Obama administration without the guidance and expertise of Joe Biden ... more later ...

Thanks again!

Thanks for the heads up on the Biden piece ... I'll save it for the weekend when I can devote the time necessary to go through it!

And, I join with everyone here in wishing all the very best for Michale as he gets through the aftermath of Hurricane Matthew ... we miss ya, Michale ... take good care!

I just read this beautiful article on Joe Biden and wanted to share it with ya.

https://newrepublic.com/article/138078/obamas-big-gift-joe-biden

My writing is occasionally sloppy, so I double checked.

I'm not seeing a contradiction.

"My only fear with a Clinton nominee is that she'll pick someone with too much deference to corporations."

Just like Garland.

Am I unaware of something about him that makes him worse than your typical neoliberal establishmentarian?
Please share if you think so.

A

Thanks

A

Welcome back! I've missed your insight and glad you are OK.

Paula [16]

Thank you for the link to this great story. I sent it to Devon (my cop hubby) and told him it was required reading for him! Loved Magnus' attitude towards protesters!

Russ

Excellent definition, avoiding what the term has come to mean and giving us the original maneuver! 50 points to Gryffindor!

Heh. I think I learned the term either from reading "The Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers" comic, or from one of the Mad Max films (the one with the crazy flying contraption -- didn't he do an Immelmann in that movie? I forget).

altohone [13] -

I think Obama chose Garland in the hopes of actually getting someone confirmed -- he knew that ideologically the GOP couldn't muster an argument against the guy.

But you seem to contradict yourself. If Garland is really that bad, isn't it pretty much a given that anyone Clinton would nominate would be better?

My only fear with a Clinton nominee is that she'll pick someone with too much deference to corporations. She might make a mostly-liberal pick but a neo-liberal one (a "DLC" type pick). But then again, she's been promising to pick someone to overturn Citizens United, so it'd be pretty hard for her to do so politically, at least on her first pick.

Good point about the possible damage if the WH and Senate flips to GOP control, but since that's the way the country operated until the creation of the filibuster, I could live with it (wouldn't Scalia be pleased? A liberal arguing "original intent"! heh).

Paula [15] -

Excellent report from the grounds-eye view of how Ohio is going! Thanks!

I too wonder what the difference is going to be, since Clinton is obviously fielding a much better ground game than either Trump or the RNC. Pollsters say this sort of thing can have about a 1-3% impact on the race. In Ohio, that might be enough to claim victory. I too will be interested to see the post-election analysis on this score.

LizM [17] -- and to everyone else! --

LizM's commenting priveleges were automatically suspended by a filter error! Which took me far too long to fix, but seems to be better now.

Just didn't want anyone to think I had blocked LizM, since she is one of our favorite commenters here and has been for a very long time! It's hard for me to even imagine what it would take for me to actively ban her from commenting -- just to be crystal clear, everyone!

:-)

-CW

No, my commenting privileges were just suspended for a while, that's all... well, that and the fact that I've been stressed, exhausted and overwhelmed, lately. See, I can admit to that ... :)

And, thanks very much for the kind words so beautifully stated the other day in another comment thread. Actually, part of my stress came from the fact that I couldn't respond!

http://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/novemberdecember-2016/top-cop/

Our "boss" is a 22-year-old black woman who began working on political campaigns when she was 12. She's paid staff -- hails from Georgia. After the election she plans to get serious about choosing a school to obtain a graduate degree. She is organized, unflappable and amazing.

Last weekend, and for the next two, (plus election-day-eve and election-day) my husband and I are working as the "Greeter" (me) and "Tracker" (him) at one of the staging areas for GOTV for our county district.

Our "Staging Location Director" is a future Hillary Clinton -- she is a 17-year-old girl who, in her spare time, competes on Academic Challenge and the like. Just a brilliant and dedicated young woman.

Our Canvassing Captain is a 36-year-old Social Worker, and our "Comfort Captain" is an elderly black woman who does amazing phone-banking work.
Only our Boss is paid; the rest of us are volunteers.

It's been wonderful working with these people. The Staging Location manages and tracks Canvassing Volunteers who are given packets of materials, a map and lists of addresses to visit. I, personally, don't particularly enjoy canvassing, although I did some on Sunday. But these other women actually love canvassing, thank goodness. Volunteer canvassers have exhibited the range of age/gender/ethnicity you'd expect, and that's always cool to see.

There's also phone-banking going on -- we're working out of a Church gymnasium and we had a great group of people making calls last weekend.

Ohio will be a good barometer, I think, for determining the value of ground-games. Or good ground-games, at any rate. Not sure what the Republicans are doing here but I don't think they're doing nearly as much as we are.

We'll see.

I was beginning to worry.
Glad you're back.

A

It is interesting that Dems have been so uncritical of Obama's choice of Garland.

Obviously, he's better than Scalia, but with an opportunity to influence the direction of the court more profoundly, Obama choosing a "moderate" was a sell out to our neoliberal establishment.

I have zero faith in Hillary picking someone better though, so this discussion seems to really just be about scoring political points... not getting a choice that liberal Dems would be happier about.

The discussion, or rather lack thereof, of the serious implications of invoking the nuclear option is also troubling.

Hillary beating Trump is not in any way a good measure of her ability to beat anybody slightly better than Trump in four years.
Holding on to control of the Senate, assuming it flips to the Dems (which should have been a given this year but isn't because of Hillary's high disapproval numbers) is far from a certainty too.

So, not discussing the fact that the nuclear option may have severe consequences for Dems if Repubs gain the presidency and the Senate in 4 or 8 years or any time in the future is a disservice.
The filibuster may be a tool Dems will wish they still had if that happens.

A

It is fun to type out Immelmann turn, but I confess I just cut and pasted from this very column!

I commend you for using Immelmann turn, which is a steep climb to a near stall condition, quick kick of the rudder to reverse direction followed by a pull up to level flight. You reverse direction without changing altitude while maintaining airspeed. Dead on perfect analogy to the political version!

A plain old Immelmann (sans turn) has come to mean a half loop followed by a rollout at the top. Reverse direction, gain altitude, but lose airspeed. An airshow stunt, but generally not a clever combat move, aerial or political.

i hope you're doing okay down there, surviving all the circumstances. i may not have much time to comment, but i've been missing your twelve consecutive post rants. plus, who else here is going to convince people that donald still has a chance?

JL

agree completely on the nomination. more on obama and GOP hypocrisy:

https://newrepublic.com/article/138114/obama-right-republican-extremism-along

JL

Hah! The filter fix worked!

:-)

Glad to see you back... let me know if you have trouble posting in the future...

-CW

You're probably right, about Obama. When he was asked, he insisted he wouldn't pull the nomination (he was asked six months or so ago, from memory).

But, I think your second point is wrong. Either of two things could happen -- the Senate Dems could filibuster the vote in the lame duck (meaning Obama could keep his hands clean). This would tank Garland's nomination unless Hillary renominated him.

And I think the Dems might control the Senate and that Schumer will drop the nuke on the SCOTUS filibuster first day in office. That would make the GOP (if they're in the minority) powerless to stop Hillary's nominations. They'd certainly be justified in doing so, since McCain already let the cat out of the bag on what they plan to do.

apophis [2] -

Agree on the nuke. Also, that's a good point I hadn't considered -- Garland himself could withdraw. Would be an incredibly selfless act, if he did, but from all reports he's a totally stand-up kind of guy, so I could indeed see this happening. Hadn't considered that option...

TheStig [3] -

Isn't it fun to type out "Immelmann"?

Heh.

ListenWhenYouHear [4] -

Dunno why, but I always mistype your handle as "ListenWhileYouHear"...

Yes, but aren't the same base voters who elevated Trump the same ones who actually DO want the GOP to stop everything in its tracks unless they get 100% of what they're asking for?

I guess another way to ask this is how much overlap do you think there is between Trump voters and Tea Party supporters?

As for [5], now THAT was funny! Heard Trump is holding another brand name rollout tomorrow to open it. Bet the press gets snookered into covering it once again!

:-)

-CW

I think Mitch McConnell lost his upper plate sometime in 1917 executing one those Immelmann turns you mentioned. It drifted out of his mouth while he was grinning during the zero G part and got lost under the Fokker's seat.

1. He just isn't that guy - Garland has done nothing to deserve being used as a political pawn, and for the Democrats to use him as a pawn as well is below Obama

2. The Republicans would then force the new Senate to "go nuclear" on day one by filibustering every Hillary nomination, and I don't think Hillary wants to start her presidency by writing off any hope of being able to work with the Republicans