The Daily Jackass: Misandry Angie

There's a lot of bile in her two-parter, but this is the only segment worth excerpting.

You may remember that the 2000 election between George W. Bush and Al Gore came down to Florida, where each major candidate took about 48.5% of the vote, and third party candidate Ralph Nader took around 3%. The closeness of the race, the suspected election fraud in Tampa, the hanging chads in Miami, and a conservative Supreme Court gave the win to Bush. If the 3% of voters who chose Nader (including me) hadn’t, they must [sic] likely would have picked Gore, for the entire country.

Regrettably, what we have here is someone who feels personally responsible for having elected W president, when nothing could be further from the truth (as has been pointed out time and time again). Jim Hightower, writing two weeks before Gore finally threw in the towel on the recount.

Now it gets really ugly for the Gore campaign, for there are two other Florida constituencies that cost them more votes than Nader did. First, Democrats. Yes, Democrats! Nader only drew 24,000 Democrats to his cause, yet 308,000 Democrats voted for Bush. Hello. If Gore had taken even 1 percent of these Democrats from Bush, Nader’s votes wouldn’t have mattered. Second, liberals. Sheesh. Gore lost 191,000 self-described liberals to Bush, compared to less than 34,000 who voted for Nader. 

Angie, bless her heart.

You don’t have to vote for Jill Stein just because you’re unhappy with the current situation. Based on the mechanics of electoral college voting, Clinton or Trump will be president, and a split left in contested races can deliver all of a state’s votes into his hands. You don’t have to actively make the situation worse, as I did when I voted from ignorance of electoral in Florida in 2000. [sic]

At least Angie's not advancing the debunked smear of Stein being "anti-vaxx".  (That's already produced plenty of fresh Jackass O'Day prospects for me.)

On the chance that it's simply new to her, I will hope this long-standing, widely-dispersed, easily-available factual data about Nader and Gore and Bush and the 2000 election can console Angie's guilt, but after 16 years of self-flagellation I have doubts as to whether the best of professional counseling will enable her to forgive herself.

Some people you just can't reach.

Jackasses on deck: local Democratic activists Kris Banks and Allan Brain, displaying their "kick-the-cat" responses to the Stein/anti-vaxx smear.

Sunday Funnies

There are other choices ...

The Daily Jackass: Chris Hooks

The Texas Observer's political writer/Democratic gun-for-hire has been putting extra bitters in his cocktails while on duty in Philadelphia.

"Cranks", "dead-enders", "messianic" (in a description of Jill Stein and a hilarious comparison with Bob Bavakian) is nothing more than excessive spleen-venting from the most Green-hostile of Democrats sixty days ahead of the first scheduled presidential debate.

Dude.  I know it was hot and wet in the City of Brotherly Love (scroll down to 'Phooey, Philly') but maybe you should wait until the Greens start to actually register a little in the polling before you twist your knickers that tight.

Oh.  Well.  Maybe now is a good time to shit yourself.

With the counterpoint, Dr. Mark Jones of Rice University's Baker Institute has an exceptionally respectful, direct, and thorough advance of next week's presidential nominating convention here in H-Town.  Bold emphasis is mine.

Last week, national attention was focused on Cleveland and the Republican Party’s National Convention. This week, national attention is focused on Philadelphia, where the Democratic Party’s National Convention is being held. Houstonians should not feel entirely left out, however, since Houston will host the Green Party National Convention next week (August 4-7) at the University of Houston campus.

The main order of business at the Green Party Convention will be to nominate the party’s presidential candidate, Dr. Jill Stein. In doing so, the party will symbolically launch its national campaign, which includes not only Stein’s presidential bid but hundreds of other campaigns throughout the country for offices ranging from U.S. senator to state representative to county commissioner.

At present, Stein has formally qualified to appear on the ballot in 23 states (including the District of Columbia) and is expected to qualify in between 20 and 25 additional states before filing closes in early September. In addition to retaining the support of individuals who voted for her during the 2012 presidential election, Stein and her fellow Greens hope to capture the votes of Bernie Sanders’ supporters and others who want to cast a protest vote against Hillary Clinton, signal to the Democratic Party that it needs to move to the left, or who believe that the future of the country’s progressive movement does not lie within the Democratic Party but rather via the creation of robust alternatives to what they consider to be a two-party duopoly.

Stein’s prospects for victory are nonexistent. However, an improved performance by Stein would be positive for the Green Party in two principal ways. First, it would demonstrate the existence of popular support for the Green Party and its type of progressive agenda while simultaneously improving the party’s name recognition and brand among the general public.  Second, in a host of states, a good showing by Stein could represent the difference between guaranteed access to the ballot in 2018 and (in some cases) 2020 and either spending scarce resources on costly signature gathering campaigns to obtain ballot access or not being able to run candidates for public office.

Texas is one of the states where an improved Stein performance could be invaluable to the Green Party in regard to ballot access. In recent election cycles, Texas Democrats did not run a complete statewide slate of candidates, and the Green Party was able to maintain its ballot status by surpassing the required 5 percent vote threshold in the contests lacking a Democratic candidate. In 2016, however, Texas Democrats are fielding candidates for every statewide office, and unless a statewide Green Party candidate wins at least 5 percent of the vote in one of the eight statewide races, the party would need to undertake a very difficult ballot access campaign in 2018. To qualify for ballot access in two years, the Green Party of Texas would have to obtain 47,183 valid signatures in less than three months from registered voters who did not vote in the 2018 Democratic or Republican primaries. Since many signatures end up being invalidated, the Greens would need to gather close to a 100,000 signatures to safely cross this threshold and qualify for ballot access, a Herculean task for a party with very limited resources.

This year, in addition to Stein, the Green Party is fielding six candidates for statewide office in Texas (one for railroad commissioner, three for the Supreme Court and two for the Court of Criminal Appeals), almost 20 congressional candidates and around two dozen candidates for other offices ranging from state representative to sheriff to county commissioner. If Stein or one of her fellow Greens does not win at least 5 percent of the statewide vote on Nov. 8, this year could mark the last year for some time that Texas voters are provided with so many options to “vote Green.”

That covers every single base.  Nothing to quibble with and nothing to add.

Jackass on deck: Misandry Angie (who probably isn't capable of receiving whatever I blog as anything but 'mansplaining', but I'll offer it anyway).

Clinton sticks the landing (mostly)

If you've ever watched figure-skating compulsories ... well, that's what last night was like.

Hillary Clinton gave the most important speech of her political career Thursday and did not blow it.

The speech itself will not go down in history as great oratory; it was more like a talented figure skater working through required elements. There was at the top a plea for the restive Bernie Sanders supporters to join with her. She noted that the convention had approved a heavily Sanders-influenced platform and she promised that as president she would implement it. “Your cause is our cause,” she said.

It mostly worked. There was a bit of booing, but no major disruptions as she skated through the rest of her program: The promises to raise up working families; the repeated calls for the country to come together; the pledges that the rich must pay more and the poor must get paid more.

And then she turned her guns on Trump, which is guaranteed safe territory at a Democratic convention. Her take on her opponent could be summed up by her description of his acceptance speech last week: “He spoke for 70-odd minutes — and I do mean odd.”

Clinton’s speech was far more predictable but not quite as memorable. But she executed all her required moves and will likely be scored well by the judges.

Another POV from across the pond, same take.

Mrs Clinton, in an acceptance speech that occasionally soared and sometimes trudged along, did her best to frame the upcoming general election race in her favour.

Donald Trump had his shot last week in Cleveland. Now it was her turn.

And, like her Republican opponent, she did it by trying to paint herself as five different personas.

Leader, optimist, progressive, doer, ground-breaker (aka glass-ceiling shatterer).  Four out of five ain't bad.  Democrats collectively went from horrified a week ago to consoled and content.  What were y'all so scared of?

In the audience, Clinton supporters were moved to tears, including 16-year-old Victoria Sanchez.

"This is more than I ever could have imagined," she said. "I know that I have just lived history and I can follow in her footsteps. This changes my entire life."

I'm happy for all those who took the moment as historic -- as if constantly seeing and hearing the word during television coverage was ever going to let us forget it -- and let's not discount the value of the grassroots army she mobilized, from women to Latino to LGBTQ.

But back to the speech.  It was a real tour de force for those who crafted it; pitch-perfect in some spots.  Every box checked: direct appeals to the Sanders caucus, Trump's balls severely busted, no mention of her recent legal troubles or DWS (who has truly been a complete disaster).  The GOP butt-hurt was strong.

Many of the conservatives who watched with dismay as the Republican Party nominated Donald Trump have now watched with amazement as Democrats co-opted some of Republicans' favorite themes at the Democratic National Convention.

Democrats' thinking was clear: We're the only political party left for grown-ups, so we'd better make sure we have something to offer voters on both sides of the aisle.

American exceptionalism and greatness, shining city on hill, founding documents, etc--they're trying to take all our stuff

— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) July 28, 2016

There was a clear choice about tone, especially on the last two days of the convention: Speakers would not mock conservatives for getting into bed with Donald Trump. They would mock Trump and make the case that conservatives should be embarrassed and ashamed that their party nominated him – and should look across the aisle at a party that shares more of their goals and values than they may have realized.

So the Democratic convention had retired military officers making the case for Hillary Clinton's steady hand as commander in chief, paeans to Ronald Reagan, and optimistic messages about the indispensability and exceptional nature of America.

Marco Rubio was specifically one who was shitting bricks.  My least favorite moment was the Screaming General, John Allen, and the "USA, USA" chanting and flag-waving.  Straight out of Republican central casting, and as bad as it sounds.  Even Clinton's own segue-way into bellicosity couldn't match it, perhaps by design.  I'll just give you the whole speech and let you decide.  (Skip to the two-minute mark if you'd rather not hear his introduction by Rep. Ted Lieu.)



And Little Marco was also one of the few who acknowledged the protests in the hall.  And the media had a lot to complain about.

With the exception of the disruptions mounted by the Bernie or Bust delegates, the Democrats’ convention ran pretty smoothly — inside the arena.

Outside the arena was a different story. Unlike Cleveland, the Philadelphia convention site is about 6 miles from downtown, where the bulk of delegates were sleeping and the bulk of parties and events were staged. That meant an enormous amount of vehicle traffic that created gridlock around the arena at peak hours. Making matters worse, the state police closed a lane on I-95 to enforce a ban on overweight trucks, creating massive backups for anyone coming in from outside the city.

Media were housed in giant tents that were steamy hot by midday and freezing cold when not in direct sun. Summer downpours pounded the cloth ceilings, making everything else inaudible, and when lightning approached, reporters were advised to run across an open parking lot in the rain to take shelter in a baseball stadium.

The broad consensus of attendees was we would rather be in Cleveland.

See you in Houston next week. folks.  Can't promise cooler weather, but the crowds will be thinner and we might even have a hurricane.

I'd say Madam Secretary is in for a yuuuge convention bounce, and this poll from swingy Pennsylvania showing her with a nine-point lead may or may not be an outlier.

Watch for a new series coming this weekend: the Daily Jackass.  It will feature somebody in the media ragging on Jill Stein or voting Green.  First up: Chris Hooks at the Texas Observer.

One (mostly) big happy family

I need not recap the speeches of the president and the vice-president, should I?  Everyone who checks in here on a regular basis watched or streamed or followed on social media or read the transcript, yes?  If you didn't then you can find those hot takes anywhere you look his morning.  I suppose I should write something anyway ...

-- Obama was, as D.L. Hughley said on Bill Maher's thirty-extra-minutes of Real Time immediately following the president last night, on his game; holding the audience carefully in his hands before releasing them like doves to go forth and fulfill their destinies.  The swooning was effusive everywhere; more than a few "four more years" and "third term" requests were shouted.

Alas, for those who are disquieted by the chicken or fish options this go-round, and seemingly unaware that there are other restaurants down the street serving steak and lobster -- and as Bernie Sanders and his disillusioned band know too well -- the farce of democracy offered by America's only sane major political party has rules that are unbreakable even for Obama.

Which is why Bernie changed his party registration back to independent this week.

-- Uncle Joe performed the role of Irish mauler from Scranton, now fighting out of Wilmington, DE.  The parodies are as good as the real thing.

If you look closely at the Photoshopped head above and the one that was on your teevee screen last night, it's obvious Vice President BFD has had some facial work done recently.  Good on the old boy, I say.  One more misstep by the nominee and he would be speaking tonight instead of last, a proposition many Democrats wouldn't seem to have been all that unhappy about.

-- The surprise of the evening was a display of bristling animosity by former NY mayor Michael Bloomberg toward Trump, which I surmise predates this year's events and likely involves their dealings when Bloomberg held office.  The mayor jumped off the GOP train a few years ago, started calling himself an indy, and is best remembered as a pro-gun safety, anti-Big Gulp administrator.  We could have almost forgotten that he pondered running for president himself when it appeared that the two major party nominees were going to be Trump and Sanders.

Bloomberg's attacks on the GOP nominee were harsh and personal.

The former mayor of New York's words on the third day of the Democratic National Convention - in which he unequivocally stated his support for Hillary Clinton -- prompted most cheers when he stated of her rival: "I know a con when I see one."

"Most of us who have created a business know that we're only as good as the way our employees, clients and partners view us. Most of us don't pretend that we're smart enough to make every decision by ourselves," he explained.

"And most of us who have our names on the door know we are only as good as our word. But not Donald Trump.

"Through his career, Donald Trump has left behind a well-documented record of bankruptcies and thousands of lawsuits, and angry stockholders, and contractors who feel cheated and disillusioned, customers who feel they've been ripped off.

"Truth be told, the richest thing about Donald Trump is his hypocrisy."

That is one vicious smackdown.

It was nice to see Gabby Giffords walk out, haltingly but without either an escort or a cane, and deliver a few remarks.  But the coming-out party for VP nominee Tim Kaine was what everybody was waiting for, and as the dad who might bake you a cheap frozen pizza if you came home late and drunk when you were sixteen, he didn't disappoint.

He did imitations of Trump ("Buhlieve me!"), he shadow-boxed, he riffed easily between Spanish and English, he was avuncular.  Not everyone was a fan, however.

Anti-TPP crowd keeps interrupting during Kaine's speech #DemsInPhilly pic.twitter.com/SS7J5twUtE

— Colleen Shalby (@CShalby) July 28, 2016

Once again, two completely different demonstrations of unity inside and outside.

Kaine's just as milquetoast as his preceding reputation, but two scoops of plain vanilla with some plutocracy sprinkles seems to be what the blue masses want to lick this time.

Day Four is Coronation Day, and we'll see if Clinton can raise her rhetoric to the level of the Obamas or even her husband's.  Those are tough acts to follow, but if she faceplants, I doubt anybody in the hall will even notice.

They are blissfully ignorant to anything negative that presents itself in rebuttal to their Queen.  The one consistent thing about the Hillbots throughout the past year is that they simply do not care about her foibles.  And against a gaffe machine like Trump, that ought to be just enough for her to be able to slide into the White House.

Dems can't even get their convention bounce before fear takes hold

Now that U.S. authorities are confident Russian intelligence agencies are behind the hack of Democratic Party emails, political operatives and cybersecurity experts tell NBC News they are bracing for an "October Surprise" -- a release of even more potentially damaging information timed to influence the outcome of the presidential election and the course of the next administration.

The big question isn't whether more information will be disclosed, they say, but how destructive it might be to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and to broader U.S. foreign policy efforts.

Democratic Party and Clinton campaign officials are now doing an urgent "damage assessment" to determine what kind of information might have been stolen and the impact its release might have on a tight presidential race.

"That is a nightmare scenario, and let's hope we don't see that as an October Surprise -- emails from Hillary Clinton's server that have either been in the press or worse, the classified ones that no one in the public has seen," said retired Adm. James Stavridis, who as the former Supreme Allied Commander for NATO is familiar with Russian information operations.

Admiral Stavridis, you may recall, was a finalist -- maybe more like semifinalist -- in the Clinton veepstakes.   Talk about bitter.

The cybersecurity firm hired by the Democratic National Committee to investigate the hacks says that two Russian security agencies had been accessing DNC servers and internal files for months, with at least one of them infiltrating the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other key U.S. agencies.

Russian hackers also accessed the private email accounts of some Clinton campaign staffers, and attacked and may have accessed internal files and email servers of the Clinton Foundation. Security officials also believe hackers accessed the private server Clinton used while Secretary of State. 

Isn't it a shame that these damaging reports are just coming out now, after she's been freshly nominated.  Oh wait ... FBI Director Comey said she didn't intend to do anything wrong.  Damn that pesky mens rea.  I suppose this Donald Trump joke -- you may interpret that phrase both ways -- shouldn't be taken too seriously.

"Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 [Clinton] emails that are missing," Trump said at a press conference. "I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let's see if that happens. That'll be nice."

Oh wait; it already is.

"This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent," senior policy adviser Jake Sullivan said in a statement. "That's not hyperbole, those are just the facts. This has gone from being a matter of curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security issue." 

Maybe the DNI could stop giving Il Douche daily foreign policy briefings.  You know, before he mishandles classified information.  Or Clinton's team has a collective stroke.  Or something.

Honestly, I expected the general election campaign to approach unprecedented levels of absurdity, just not before the kids went back to school.  One thing is certain: the media talking shitheads won't be able to say that 'nobody pays attention to the election until Labor Day'.

But doesn't it seem a little early for Democrats to be gripped with panic?

Big Dog and the Mothers

We got a tender love story to send us off to bed.

He was charming and steely-eyed, and owned the arena as he told his wife’s story in personal terms, from their courtship through to her time as secretary of State. As Hillary Clinton’s husband for the past 40 years, the popular ex-president was her ultimate character witness, portraying her as hard-working, persistent, and caring.

She is "the best darn change-maker I've ever met in my entire life,” he said.

*"Wave "change-maker" signs*

I suppose I'm just too jaded to be inspired any more by pep rallies.  Here's the least cynical POV I could find.

The bigger challenge for Mr. Clinton may in fact be his record as president – a record that Mrs. Clinton also owns to some degree, for better or worse. The Democratic Party no longer has the centrist cast that Mr. Clinton helped to shape in the 1980s and ‘90s, when balancing the budget and moving people off welfare were the name of the game. The party is no longer even Mr. Obama’s, in its new leftward tilt.

On issue after issue, Mr. Clinton has become “explainer in chief” for his own record. The North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, which Clinton implemented, is now under pressure from both Sanders and Donald Trump supporters.

Clinton has expressed regret for signing the 1994 crime bill, which led to mass incarcerations, particularly of minorities. He has also disavowed the Defense of Marriage Act, the 1996 law defining marriage as between a man and a woman, and the “don’t ask, don’t tell” compromise that kept gays in the military closeted.

The mere fact that the Clintons have to explain or refute old policies points to a deeper problem: that the Clintons are figures of the past in an election where voters are demanding change. Though Mr. Trump, the Republican nominee, is of the same vintage as the Clintons, he’s an outsider. The Clintons are the ultimate political insiders.

And they form the nucleus of a potential political dynasty. Daughter Chelsea, who will introduce her mother on Thursday before her big acceptance speech, says she too may run for office someday. The failure of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush in the Republican primaries signaled, in part, a rejection of dynastic politics in America.

Here in Philadelphia, alive with politically engaged voters on both sides of the Democratic divide, the idea of politics as a family business gets mixed reactions.

Did you laugh at "mixed reactions"?  Outside the hall there was pretty much one reaction -- the opposite of the one inside.  I'll let the pictures (and one cartoon) do the talking.

The Mothers of the Movement segment was very emotional, and an appropriate call for action.  But if Obama can't do anything about police abuse other than say "this has to stop", then I don't know why anyone would expect Hillary Clinton to be more effective.

During the roll call, Bernie cried when his brother Larry, a delegate, announced his states' votes.  It was an emotional moment, but Sanders managed to ruin that for his supporters, too.

So as MOMocrat Mike wrote: "We wanted a revolution, but all I got was this lousy sign."

Such is the nature of lost opportunities.  Some will take their clothespins and pinch their nostrils,  some will pick up the pieces and move on, some will go home and cry into their pillow.

The revolution will continue, but how far it goes and how hot it burns is a question we're still waiting to learn the answer to.

Day 3 sets up with Obama and Biden passing the torch, and Kaine taking the relay handoff.  I'll look for reports that demonstrate how well the Berners are receiving or rejecting that message.

I shouldn't have to look too hard.

Fear itself (again)

Ezra Klein at Vox has his fear explained to him by Morgana Visser at Medium.

The whole “vote for third parties will cause Trump to win” makes as much sense, and has as much validity, as saying: “A vote for Hillary is a vote for Trump because it takes votes away from Jill Stein.”

The idea that not voting Hillary causes Trump to win only makes sense if you believe she’s entitled to win. I’m as horrified of Hillary as I am of Trump because Hillary poses a direct danger to me, my family and other communities of marginalized people in America and around the globe.

And with y’all voting for Hillary because you put yourself above others, I’ll be worrying about my safety and protection. Stop pretending like you’re voting for Hillary because you care about other marginalized people — you fucking don’t. You’re voting for Hillary because the other proto-fascist, Trump, threatens you directly. You’re voting for Hillary because you’ll get yours and you don’t care about the other marginalized people that it will come at the expense of — that will be severely harmed and put in danger under a Clinton presidency.

I first got hit with the "privileged" rebuttal some months ago.  What I said at the time was that if people of color (I said specifically Latinos and poor people of any color who do not exercise their right to vote) couldn't be compelled to cast a ballot in favor of their own self-interest or otherwise, why should I be guilted into a LOTE vote solely on their behalf?

How far is my responsibility to my fellow man supposed to extend?  Farther than theirs to themselves?  That sounds like patriarchy to me.  Isn't the Lord supposed to help those who help themselves or something like that?

Hold your nose and vote for the lesser evil if you feel you must.  But acknowledge that your vote against your progressive principles has only a miniscule chance of producing a negative outcome in the Electoral College in about seven or so states.  And if you're being guilt-tripped to vote for Clinton in Texas -- or California, or New York, or about forty other states -- then understand that you're surrendering to fear yourself: fear of a potential undesirable future outcome as dictated by others, fear of ridicule by your so-called friends.  These phobias have clinical names: fear of the future (chronophobia) and fear of loss of approval by your social network (ostracization).

Here's the truth again, more bluntly.

If you’re going to vote for Hillary to stop Trump, at least be fucking honest and stop pretending like you’re some heroic person while you vote for somebody that is going to destroy marginalized communities, put marginalized people at risk and murder marginalized people around the globe.

I have some extra Bern creme if you need it, just let me know.

DNC Day 1: a rocky road smooths out

Passions in Philadelphia ran hot starting at breakfast with the Florida delegation, as DWS stubbornly continued to keep a prominent role in the Democrats' confab, and was repeatedly told  -- by both Berners and other DNC officials -- that it was time to hit the road.

Monday was supposed to be simple. After months of acrimony, the Democrats were ready to present a united front. The lineup spoke volumes: Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders were the headliners. Lions of the left, Warren and Sanders were there to set the tone for the convention. Booming endorsements from them was a smart way to symbolically undercut the intra-party bickering, to signal unity.

But then WikiLeaks released thousands of DNC emails and, well, everything changed.

Sanders has lamented the DNC’s pro-Clinton bias for months, and now there’s indisputable evidence that he was right. The DNC seems to have violated its own charter by clandestinely backing Clinton over Sanders before any votes were cast. There was plenty of writing on the wall before this story broke, but the hacked emails are damning. So damning, in fact, that DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was forced to resign hours before she was set to gavel in the convention.

To anyone on the fence about Clinton and the DNC, it won’t matter that Russia was behind the data-dump or that some of the emails were likely fabricated in order to maximize the damage – there’s enough truth in them to confirm the anti-establishment narratives.

Wasserman-Schultz was indeed finally muzzled, and there was some admonishment directed at the dissenters by her temp replacement, Marcia Fudge, about respect.  That also set a tone.

Scolding.

Yes, it was great to hear (Bernie) say, “Hillary Clinton must be our next president.” It was good for party unity that you publicly declared, “I am proud to stand with her.”

But you did not personally address your most ardent supporters. You know, those “Bernie or Bust” people who have vowed to sit out the election, vote for Trump or vote Jill Stein’s Green Party.

You needed to personally address your most militant revolutionaries: the ones who now think of you as a sell-out, a fake, and a fraud.

Your diehards needed a “come-to-Jesus” moment, something like this:

Let's not go there.  Sarah Silverman's spanking of the boobirds was received well by the Hillbots, and poorly by the spankees.

Silverman — a former Sanders supporter — is known as absurdist provocateur (she once jokingly accused sweet, avuncular, octogenarian New York talk show host Joe Franklin of raping her) and she made a serious miscalculation. When she called for the audience to back Clinton (“Hillary is our Democratic nominee, and I will proudly vote for her”), they responded with deafening, unifying applause. But then she taunted the vanquished, a rookie political mistake. “To the Bernie-or-Bust people, you are being ridiculous!” she said, standing next to a puckered 'Saturday Night Live' stalwart-turned-Minnesota Sen. Al Franken.

The upper tier erupted in a cascade of “Bernie!” — out came the signs — and the kumbaya narrative was momentarily shattered.

Demi Lovato and Paul Simon alternately rocked and soothed the savages in both camps to a degree ('Bridge Over Troubled Waters', indeed) and then Sen. Cory Booker summoned the image of a happy warrior -- perhaps symbolic of the one who is preparing to depart the White House.  His rollicking ten minutes made some delegates wish he had been tapped VP.

Why, you could almost forget that he's so deep in bed with Wall Street that he could massage Hillary Clinton's toes under the covers.

Then it was Elizabeth Warren's turn, and she got her own hero's welcome.  But her speech was lackluster in delivery and included some content that simply wasn't factual, like how hard Clinton had fought the big banks and opposed unfair trade deals, and suddenly the oxygen seem to go out of the room again.

With the crying and disgust mostly at ebb tide, Michelle Obama seized the moment.

But something happened on the way to the Democratic crack-up: Michelle Obama, something of an afterthought on the opening-night program, delivered the best speech of Hillary Clinton’s career.

[...]

Over the years, much has been made of the first lady’s supposed animosity toward both Clintons (mostly fiction, with a soupçon of truth), a vestige of the bitter 2008 campaign. But on Monday night, Michelle Obama delivered a more passionate and concise case for Clinton than the candidate has ever made for herself — and perhaps the single most effective political address delivered in 2016.

While reporters scanned the arena eaves for signs of discord, Obama offered a case for unifying around the first female major party nominee in the country’s 240-year history — voice breaking as she talked about Clinton’s role in teaching her daughters that a woman could be president. It was an appeal to the better angels of the electorate, a hybrid of her husband’s classic hope-and-change message and Clinton’s “Glass Ceiling” 2008 concession speech. “We insist that the hateful language that they hear from public figures on TV does not represent the true spirit of this country,” she said, clearly — if not explicitly — referring to Trump. “When someone is cruel and acts like a bully, you don’t stoop to their level. … When they go low, we go high.”

That's an accurate description.  The first lady absolutely mesmerized the hall.

She handed off to Bernie, who got a thundering one-minute standing ovation.  It took a few minutes for him to get to the point, but he too let the air out of the tires of the #NeverHillary faction.

It seemed, though, as if the #DemExit bunch quieted down on Twitter, and the rancor might indeed be dissipated, so I'll keep an eye peeled today to see if it returns and the intensity if it should.  With the roll call vote and the Big Dog on tap to speak tonight, things could just as easily go south again for party kinda-sorta unity.

This piece from Chris Cillizza about Bernie's revolution having passed him by is the most cogent thing I read yesterday.  Whatever number of Berners abandon ship on July 29, the election dynamic has surely changed.  To what degree is still to be determined.  We might have more evidence of that next week in two weeks, when the Greens and Jill Stein come to Houston for their convention.

The Weekly Wrangle

Off the Kuff looks at the effect of the voter ID ruling for this election and going forward.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme was appalled at the GOP hatefest of a convention. Chanting violence and fomenting hatred of others encourages recent bad actors in death. Looking forward to a sunny week in Philly.

SocraticGadfly takes a look at the #DNCLeaks, specifically the comment about Sanders' religious beliefs, and then wonders if this was related to a question for Sanders at a March town hall.

Texas Leftist thought the RNC convention was "historic".

Ted Cruz squandered another opportunity to repair his frayed relations with the GOP, as PDiddie at Brains and Eggs saw it. How many more chances do you think he'll get?

Teddy Wilson at Rewire writes about Klansman David Duke's inspiration for a Louisiana Senate bid, and it's Trump, of course. 

Texas Vox saw elements of dysfunction in the local emergency alert system in the wake of a recent Baytown Exxon pipeline leak.

Txsharon at Bluedaze advances the Texas Railroad Commission's Sunset Review town hall meeting in Grapevine.

Neil at All People Have Value continued his sidewalk blogging campaign to change society's tone in the East End with a bilingual sign.

Dos Centavos' latest concert review was Los Texmaniacs at West University's legendary dive bar, Under the Volcano.

And the World Tamale Eating Championship is now open for contestant registration, reports the Lewisville Texan Journal.

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

Here's a few more great blog posts from around the Great State!

Texas Election Law Blog saw the Fifth Circuit's decision on the voter ID law as a Pyrrhic victory.

Grits for Breakfast thinks Black Lives Matter is well-positioned to win some concessions from police if ... (it's a big 'if').

The Grimes County grand jury needs to investigate the Grimes County district attorney, according to Ty Clevenger at Lawflog.

TFN shows us who's behind that controversial Mexican-American studies textbook, and Better Texas Blog thinks that pre-K needs to be a part of the school finance debate.

Zachery Taylor posts Mark Twain's from-the-grave endorsement of either Bernie Sanders, Jill Stein, or Gary Johnson.

Andrea Grimes (no relation to the county mentioned above) at the Texas Observer takes note of the gaslighting of America by the GOP during last week's convention.

Somervell County Salon, like so many others, finds the leaked e-mails revealing the DNC's collusion with the Clinton campaign as the last straw for her and the Democratic Party.

A MOMocrat named Mike is headed to Philadelphia to cover the Democratic convention.

And Pages of Victory carefully explains to his "a vote for Clinton is a vote for Trump" friends why that is just not so.

PUMA

Despite a "win" on the superdelegates thing ...

On Saturday, after a lengthy debate during the Democratic Party’s rules committee — as Occupy protesters marched outside — the Sanders and Clinton delegates agreed to create a “unity” commission. The commission will be charged with developing rules that would reduce the number of superdelegates by two-thirds. It will also give Sanders, Clinton and the Democratic National Committee each the responsibility of picking members for the commission.

“This is a tremendous victory for Senator Sanders’ fight to democratize the Democratic Party and reform the Democratic nominating process,” Jeff Weaver, Sanders’ campaign manager, said in a statement. “We were pleased to work with the Clinton campaign to enact this historic commission.” 

 ... and DWS's head on a pike ...

“Going forward, the best way for me to accomplish those goals is to step down as Party Chair at the end of this convention,” she said. She also stated that she would still open and close the convention, and address the delegates, though that remains to be seen.

... the Sandernistas assembling in Philly continue to demand nothing less than their man as the party's nominee.  Let's splash some cold reality in their faces:

1. the 'unity commission' is not a win for Sanders;
2. Sanders is not going to be the nominee in any imaginable scenario;
3. Wasserman Schultz's falling on her sword does not resolve the inherent corruption exposed in the leaked emails of the DNC's management of this primary's debates, rules, the Sanders voters' disenfranchisement in states like Arizona, California, New York and Nevada, and other conduct revealing the organization to be exactly like -- and in some cases worse than -- the GOP.

Hundreds of thousands and perhaps a few million Democrats are threatening to exit the party following the convention as a result, a story yet to be reported in the corporate media.  Until the exodus starts to show up in the polling, however, it ain't really hap'nin.

Trump has shown no discernible convention bounce, although there should be a raft of polls Monday morning that may suggest otherwise.  I'll update here or in a new post, either way.

Update (Monday 7/25. 7 a.m.): Trump has a six-point lead over Clinton in CNN's post-RNC national horse race poll.  The Clinton sheep will be nervous.

The story to watch next week, however, is what the Berners do next.  Jim Hightower's opinion of what that is seems to missing something of the verde shade.

Sunday Funnies