Sanders versus Clinton tonight once more, and the superdelegates

Tonight's debate, moderated by PBS NewsHour anchors Gwen Ifill and Judy Woodruff, will be simulcast on CNN and NPR and stream live on NPR.org.  [...] 

Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton meet Thursday night on a debate stage in Milwaukee. It will be their first face-to-face matchup since Tuesday's New Hampshire primary where Sanders beat Clinton by more than 20 points. 

[...] 

PBS is a non-commercial network that doesn't live and die by ratings quite the way CNN or NBC does. The NewsHour, anchored by Gwen Ifill and Judy Woodruff, is known for lengthy, thoughtful interviews and stories that dig deep. It seems quite likely that sensibility will change the types of questions that are asked. This could be good news for Democratic voters who haven't yet seen the candidates get beyond sound bite answers in debates on issues like criminal justice reform and immigration.

Lots of Clinton folks mocking out the Sanders people about their superdelegate quandary.  When I need the highest douchebaggery, I know that Ted will always be there.

"Not a Democrat".  (False.) "Party's rules don't change." (False.)  And so on like that.  It's all over my social media in the wake of their candidate's tie in Iowa and her crushing defeat in New Hampshire (in which she will still take away the most delegates).  There is no hint of irony in all of this, but a lot of sneering condescension.

Sanders has so far carried, by large majorities, young people -- who don't typically turn out -- and independents, whom a candidate must have in order to win a general election.  These voters have not been attracted to the Democratic Party in the past, and won't be in the future, particularly if these insults against them continue.  And the highest insult is going to be the conduct of the superdelegates.

Superdelegates only came into existence following the defeats of George McGovern in '72 and Jimmy Carter in '80, and not implemented until '84... and the blowout loss of Walter Mondale.  So it would seem that the elite Democrats do no better at selecting the nominee than they perceive the plebians to be.

By 1982, however, the sentiment was essentially that the cure (1972, "validated" by 1980) was worse than the disease (1968).

Since at least that time (I would assert the problem goes back to the selection of Harry Truman over Henry Wallace for vice-president in 1944), Democrats have cowered in fear at the thought of another standard-bearer who represents what the Democratic Party used to represent.  (This primer from almost exactly eight years ago is instructive.)  As more current evidence, simply look at Texas superdelegates, i.e. predominantly Democratic elected officials and donors -- aka the only moderate Republicans left on Earth -- lining up early to support the establishment candidate.  As a result, I won't be able to endorse any Democrat who is a superdelegate that has already come out in support of Hillary Clinton.  This failure to remain neutral while the people decide who they wish to represent them is no longer acceptable.  It's not democratic; those people were elected to serve us in their respective legislatures and executive officees, not to pick our president for us.  (That's another preview of my forthcoming post on how you should consider casting your ballot in the Texas primary.)  Martin Longman of Booman Tribune and Washington Monthly further details why the superdelegates will derail, and not cross over to, Sanders ... which I covered last June.

I get so tired of explaining to Democrats why they actually lose elections.

And with respect to the tussle over the votes of people of color, that is a very vigorous conversation being had as well.  It will determine the success or failure of the Sanders revolution.  The only two excerpts you need ...

"He's speaking our language," said Congressional Black Caucus Chairman G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.). Butterfield, who has endorsed Hillary Clinton, was on his way into the CBC's weekly meeting on Capitol Hill when he spoke with The Root. 

When asked whether he thought Sanders' critique was a broadside attack on President Obama's legacy, Butterfield emphatically said that he didn't think the criticism was directed at the president.  

"It's just political discourse," he said, smiling.

But there are clearly some feathers being ruffled. 

And ...

(Rep. Gregory) Meeks said that 90 percent of the 20-member board of the (Congressional Black Caucus)’s PAC voted to endorse Clinton, while none of the board members voted for Sen. Bernie Sanders and a few members abstained because they had not yet endorsed in the race. 

On the neutral list was Rep. James E. Clyburn (S.C.), the No. 3 House Democratic leader and  the most prominent South Carolina Democrat, who has since then said he is considering backing a candidate and that candidate, he suggested, is likely to be Clinton. 

“That was certainly my intention,” he said in an interview with The Washington Post of his initial plan to remain neutral. “But I am re-evaluating that. I really am having serious conversations with my family members.”

I'll be watching and Tweeting tonight with all of this as the backdrop.

More on New Hampshire and the primary races ahead

-- Gadfly reminds that Bernie and Hillary debate again tomorrow night, and the Republicans again on Saturday night.  Nevada Democrats caucus on February 20, the same day South Carolina Republicans vote in their primary.  Nevada Republicans caucus on Tuesday, February 23, and South Carolina Democrats vote on Saturday, February 27.  And Texas Democrats and Republicans begin voting next Tuesday, the first business day after Presidents Day, and finish early voting in the March 1 primary on Friday, February 26.

-- Also a reminder that it gets harder for Bernie from here on, and Transgriot explains why (a topic I first wrote about in June).

-- Trump crushed it in New Hampshire with every single Republican demographic.

According to exit polls, Trump, who won New Hampshire with 35 percent of the vote, carried nearly every group with double digits. He won older voters and younger voters. He won people who care about "the issues," 37 percent to 13 percent, and people who care about leadership, 31 percent to 20 percent.

Trump won rich voters and poor voters, conservative voters and moderate voters. He won evangelical Christians — Cruz's base. He won voters with a college degree — who voted for Marco Rubio in Iowa.

He won voters who made up their minds on Tuesday, and he won those who made up their minds months in advance.

And in most cases, when Trump won, he won by a crushing margin.

Since his feet are bulletproof, you can safely expect -- barring the most unforeseen of circumstances -- that he is going to be the GOP nominee.

-- If the same is true of Hillary Clinton (and I still believe it is) then there is no room for a Michael Bloomberg or a Jim Webb candidacy between those two.  Right, far right, and fascist is no way to motivate an electorate.  This is the promise of both Bernie Sanders' revolution, and once the superdelegates close him out (even if he can find his way to beating Clinton in Nevada, and holding her victory margin close in South Carolina) the opportunity rises for the Green Party to build itself a bigger, broader base.

Gadfly believes if Sanders shows enough momentum that the SDs will come over, as they are 'unbound'.  This demonstrates a lack of understanding about Democratic Party politics, and I'm going to reveal it when I finally get finished with my post about the Texas primary elections.

-- Ted gets it wrong again.

Right after Iowa, the first polls in New Hampshire showed Bernie Sanders leading Hillary Clinton by more than 20 points. These two polls suggest the race might be tightening in New Hampshire. One has Sanders leading by 7 points, and the other has him leading by 10 points.

If Clinton can make the primary outcome closer than predicted (say 7 points or less), that could be considered a victory for her, since Sanders has been leading big for some time now in New Hampshire. -- [sic] and it could bode well for hr [sic] as she enters friendlier states.

Blinded by the blue light.

-- A few last words about Fat Bastard, Lobster Hands, and Marco Ruboto.

(Christie) invested more hours than anyone in New Hampshire outside of Kasich. He’s performed very well during every debate. He’s come across as likable, almost Jackie Gleason-esque, during every interview. But the fear of another shoe dropping in Bridgegate combined with an good-news-bad-news record in New Jersey was always Christie’s problem… along with that whole we-can’t-nominate-another-Northeastern-Republican-sentiment among the base (See: Romney, Mitt). In the end, Christie will always be remembered as the Jack Ruby of this primary season, because he was the guy who took Rubio out during that last debate without gaining anything out of it for himself. From the beginning, Christie attempted to portray himself as the tough, candid guy who can get things done. Problem for him was Trump already captured the starring bully role in the eyes of voters. 

Which brings us back to Rubio, who is officially now a caricature more than a candidate. He’s mocked by people dressed as robots at every campaign stop he makes. The media can’t mention him without referencing the repetition tick. Call it unfair for a few bad moments, but that’s how politics works… particularly in an age of social media when brush fires become uncontrollable wildfires in mere minutes. If this were another time, another campaign season, maybe Rubio recovers. But the moment Rubio shows any sign of life again, rest assured Trump will never allow him — and the media that covers his every word — to forget his new nickname: Marco Roboto. 

As for Kasich, it’s hard to see where he goes from here outside as the undisputed favorite to be a VP selection. Brit Hume said it best when once observing that the Ohio Governor was running to be president of New Hampshire (thanks to practically living in the Granite State for months while holding an impressive 107 Town Hall meetings). It’s been stated in this space before that Kasich is the most prepared, most experienced, best candidate running on either side right now. His approval rating in Ohio — a state that went twice for Barack Obama — sits at an astounding 62 percent. His record in both Congress and as governor around budgeting, deficit reduction, job creation, and attention/resources allocated to mental illness and drug addiction is unmatched by anyone left seeking to be president. 

But money and organization are important things, and Kasich doesn’t have much of either. Perhaps the Rubio money will go to him as that campaign continues to crumble. Perhaps those clinging to the idea that the Bush brand is still viable will finally come to their senses. But for now, Kasich goes to South Carolina with only a breeze at his back, and not the kind of gust it would take to bring down the big, bad wolf in Donald Trump… who leads there by 16 points in the Real Clear Politics average.

-- And these two hot shots from Nancy LeTourneau at Washington Monthly.

This is an even worse characteristic in a president than being a Marcobot.

[T]o those who have known him longest, Rubio’s flustered performance Saturday night fit perfectly with an all-too-familiar strain of his personality, one that his handlers and image-makers have labored for years to keep out of public view. Though generally seen as cool-headed and quick on his feet, Rubio is known to friends, allies, and advisers for a kind of incurable anxiousness — and an occasional propensity to panic in moments of crisis, both real and imagined.

[...]

When someone writes “Why the Working Class is Choosing Trump and Sanders,” it is important to start reading that as: Why the White Working Class is Choosing Trump and Sanders.

The new normal

We'll see how the revolution plays out over the next couple of weeks. With Bernie's blowout holding up -- almost 61% to her 38% -- the focus turns to whether Nevada and South Carolina, where more orthodox Democrats do most of the voting -- can be Clinton's firewall.

There's at least a hint that some reshuffling is coming (my emphasis).

By ABC NEWS ANALYSIS DESK Feb 9, 2016, 9:46 PM ET 

Sanders won women by 53-46 percent, as well as prevailing far more widely among men, 65-34 percent. Sixty-nine percent of women under 45 backed Sanders (including 82 percent of those under 30 women), while Clinton won women 45 and older by 56-43 percent.

By ABC NEWS ANALYSIS DESK Feb 9, 2016, 9:46 PM ET

Nonwhites roughly divided, 52-48 percent, Clinton-Sanders.

The Clinton campaign response to the shellacking:

Asked about polling data showing that Sanders had won independent voters by an overwhelming margin in New Hampshire, Clinton communications director Jennifer Palmieri was quick with a comeback.

“Most of the states we’re going to now, Democrats vote in them,” she said. “Not independents.”

Palmieiri -- unwittingly, I can only presume -- revealed Hillary's precise general election weakness with that statement.  Democrats don't win in November without young people and independents.

Citing the exit polls, which showed Sanders winning 83 percent of voters under the age of 30 and 72 percent of independents, (Sanders’ New Hampshire communications director Karthik) Ganapathy said he had “two takeaways” from Sanders’ performance in the Granite State (where “undeclared” voters are allowed to cast ballots in either party’s primary). 

“Young people and the independent, undeclared voters — they came out and they made the crucial difference in this election,” Ganapathy said. “People think they’re sort of unreliable. But they’re here and they’re voting.”

There is still a long way to go with regard to Latino and African American Democrats.  Clinton holds big leads in both the Nevada caucuses and the South Carolina primary, but the latest polling there is quite old; the most recent conducted a week before before Iowa.  The news to anticipate in both states is whether there has been any movement.

As for the indies, they broke 42% Republican and 40% Democrat, with higher vote totals -- 216 K versus 242 K -- on the red side as well.  That worked out as well for Trump as it did for Sanders.  The Donald doubled up John Kasich, who placed second, with Bush, Cruz, and Rubio all bunched together in third, fourth, and fifth.

It's over for Fat Bastard.  His Saturday night beatdown of Marco Ruboto did not translate into any momentum; he ended the night with the sixth place ribbon at 7.5% and is going home to New Jersey to "take a deep breath".  Expect the JP to pronounce his campaign's death later this morning.

Trump and Cruz still look like the front-runners to me, with Rubio (or not) and Kasich and -- to a much lesser degree, Bush -- all fighting it out in Nevada and South Carolina.

Texas will have its early votes in the can -- historically about half the total -- before we know any results from the Palmetto State.  So trends and momentum are the thing to watch for in both primaries.

I swear I've got a Texas post coming.

Ted Cruz is NOT a pussy

Trust me on this, Donald.  He's just as big a bully as you are and he's got the mission-from-God stamp of approval to show for it.  Jeebus Christ on a Christmas tree crutch, what a pair of wads.

They're your co-leaders for the GOP nod after today, though, with the media piling back on the Trump bandwagon for ratings again, including those sad sacks at MSNBC.  That network's political coverage has been an absolute disgrace so far, and that's to say nothing of their shilling for Hillary.

John Kasich -- and not Chris Christie -- may pull an upset for second place, according to what I'm reading.  Even Jeb! may see a slight erection resurrection.  And when the Big Dog starts talking dirty, you know that the Clintons are mad at everybody again.

Marco Ruboto is toast.  Singed, but maybe not as Bernt as Hillary.  I've called it 55-42 for Sanders (lowering expectations a bit) and Trump 30, Kasich 15, Cruz 13, Bush 12, Rubio 11, and Christie 10. But you can shuffle those bottom four any way you like.

Update: read the Vox advance; they seem to be hitting the mark every time.

Here's your funny for today: the same two guys who heckled Jeb! are spotted in the camera shot behind Hilz wearing "Settle for Hillary" shirts.

Enjoy your Fat Tuesday.  I know that I am.

The Weekly Wrangle

In bringing you this week's blog post roundup, the Texas Progressive Alliance congratulates the Denver Broncos and Peyton Manning for their Super Bowl victory yesterday, and thought the Snickers 'Marilyn' commercial was the best of the advertising.

Off the Kuff published interviews with three of the candidates who hope to succeed Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner in the Legislature.

Libby Shaw, contributing to Daily Kos, can’'t decide whether the junior U.S. Senator from Texas, Ted Cruz, more closely resembles former Senator Joe McCarthy or President Tricky Dick Nixon in his campaign tactics. The Texas Blues: Everything is Bigger. Especially the Tricksters and Their Sleazy Tricks.

Socratic Gadfly, while liking many things about last Thursday's Democratic town hall forum, regretted the missing foreign policy questions that likely won't get asked in ANY "mainstream media" debate.

"What's the most you ever lost on a coin toss?" asked PDiddie at Brains and Eggs of a prominent national political blogger.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme wants everyone to know that South Texas people are waiting for clean water, too.

Nonsequiteuse has run away to join the circus. Or, gone to New Hampshire to meet the candidates.

Egberto Willies has the video of the presentation of Move to Amend's David Cobb at Kingwood College last week.  Cobb will be also appear in Houston this Friday evening.

Neil All People Have Value said we are not always best represented by people who resemble us in some superficial manner. APHV is part of NeilAquino.com.

================

And here are some posts of interest from other Texas blogs.

Scott Braddock reports on the latest attempt to move the Texas GOP even further to the right.

Glen Maxey dropped by Juanita Jean's to give an update on how the Democratic effort to get absentee ballots out to people is going.

Somervell County Salon has Hillary Clinton's Horrid Campaign Tactic O'Day: surrogates condemning women to Hell if they don't vote for her.

The Lunch Tray notes that Ted Cruz wants your kids to eat more French fries.

OutSmart salutes 10 black LGBT leaders in Houston.

Mary Flood calls for an end to judicial candidates spamming requests for favorable votes in the Houston Bar Association poll.

BOR implores us to support Rep. Jessica Farrar against her notoriously hateful non-Democrat primary opponent.

Grits for Breakfast makes an endorsement (of sorts): vote for the conservative judicial activist pro-Big Government vote if you're voting in the GOP primary.

Pages of Victory points out that failure is a right and not a privilege.

And Sharon Briggs writes an ode to Waco's Elite Cafe', which closed last week after nearly one hundred years of service.