Chuck Todd of MTP Daily on MSNBC announced a little while ago that the Washington Post

[politicaljunkie41910]

has moved the state of Utah, from Solidly Republican to Leaning Republican. For the record, Utah is one of THE MOST Reddest of the Red States. They are certainly the most Conservative of the Conservatives. They do not like Trump apparently because of some of the things he's said about Romney in the past. Yesterday on one of the evening shows on MSNBC a Utah Politician stated that he was voting for Hillary. I think it was on Rachel Maddow's Show. He was a Mormon politician and said he couldn't vote for Trump. I was trying to look up his name and couldn't find it, but found this article instead.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865650513/Poll-Utah-would-vote-for-a-Democrat-for-president-over-Trump.html?pg=all

Hillary, don't give in to Bernie. Trumps campaign is going to be over with before we get to the convention in July. Do not give in to blackmail. Even if you meet all the blackmailer's demands, there will always be more and even then you can't be sure that they would even show up on voting day. Stick with the party that brung you this far Hillary.

[arendt]

1. So asking for things 45% of the party voted for is "blackmail"

Keep up the great outreach.

[SirBrockington]

3. I doubt if anything she would do would ever be enough to satisfy Bernie

[arendt]

7. That's not the point. "blackmail" is a very negative word.

I do not see how any Bernie supporter is going to feel great about being called a blackmailer.

You are just lowering the debate right into the gutter. But that is nothing new.

Even under the new rules (not yet in effect), calling Bernie supporters blackmailers would be prohibited.

[eastwestdem]

34. What would you call it? nt

[floppyboo]

59. call it politics. Call it winning. The loosers have to win too

People have been complaining about this, but one could argue Europe would still be a recovering 3rd world if the Marshall plan didn't lend what is the equivalent of 14.3 billion dollars to Germany. Get over it and look beyond the 25th. A stronger together 25th.

[SirBrockington]

35. About your first post

I think a lot of Hillary supporters or just the Democratic majority in general are starting to move away from the outreach efforts and feel that Bernie is going to do what Bernie is going to do regardless. Some supporters will help the democratic nominee, others won't. If Superdelages were removed, open primaries provided in every state, poll workers were changed in every state, and DWS was fired tomorrow... do you believe that Sanders would endorse?, or would he say the revolution is just starting and then move on to his next issue or demand?

I think he'd take it as validation of success in moving the party "left" in his opinion and continue to bargain even if all of his demands by the party or Hillary were provided. Disagree?

[arendt]

45. You have eliminated the context.

When people voted for Bernie, the GE candidates were unknown (and, technically, still are). Nevertheless, the people who voted for Bernie are villified as outsiders.

Now that there are probable GE candidates, people who vote for HRC are great.

Of course, if the GOP ran anyone just this side of sane, those mormon ladies would vote GOP. So, their vote for HRC depends completely on the context of HRC vs Trump. Take away that context, and you have not grown the party at all.

It seems that we only want people from other parties voting during the GE. The fact that they are only choose the lesser of two evils does not bother you at all.

You don't want to grow the party. You want to steer epsilon to the left of the worst candidate in living memory and tell the base of the party to drop dead. The millenials will remember this, and the Democratic Party will decline as fast as the GOP.

[okasha]

50. The base of the party

consists of women, POC, LGBT's and union members. All those groups went for Hillary in significant, sometimes overwhelming, numbers.

[JonLeibowitz]

62. That's not the entire base, just the ones you cherry picked to prove your point.

[okasha]

66. Nope, that's the base.

"The base" of the party is the demographics that turn out reliably for Dems every time.

[arendt]

68. The base are the activists.

The people who do the legwork. Not everyone who votes is "the base".

Words used to have meanings.

[okasha]

73. And the activists in the Democratic party

are the women, people of color, LGTBs and union members. We're the ones with the most to lose under a Republican regime.

[arendt]

80. So, you are saying that white, straight non-union men cannot be activists?

I tried to make a distinction between the people who are involved all the time, who do the legwork year after year, and the people who show up on election day and vote.

You tried to erase the distinction. You have the chutzpah to lay claim to ALL activists in the party. Furthermore your list includes only the usual identity politics constituencies (except for union members, who have been sold out by the DNC for decades and are pretty disgruntled with the DNC). You clearly refuse to acknowledge that there are a lot of straight white male and female activists and voters in the Democratic Party who care about economic issues as well as identity politics issues.

Your grandiose, solipsistic pronouncement that only your side can be activists continues to make Bernie supporters ask themselves what happened to the party of FDR. Your claim sounds like a 1972 speech by a McGovernite.

Identity politics has become a twisted game of "who is more victimized". That is the card you are playing when you say

We're the ones with the most to lose under a Republican regime.

Everyone will suffer if the GOP or HRC hands the country over to multi-national neoliberal looting, ala Greece or Argentina. Playing the woman/black/POC/LGBT card might get you elected, it will do jack shit to stop the corporate takeover.

[okasha]

81. No.

The word "all" does not appear in my post.

"Identity politics."

You lost me right there with your dog-whistle.

[arendt]

83. Oh, you can say, women/POC/LGBT, but IdPol is a "dogwhistle". LOL n.t

[appalachiablue]

103. +10

"You clearly refuse to acknowledge that there are a lot of straight white male and female activists and voters in the Democratic Party who care about economic issues as well as identity politics issues.
Everyone will suffer if the GOP or HRC hands the country over to multi-national neoliberal looting, ala Greece or Argentina. Playing the woman/black/POC/LGBT card might get you elected, it will do jack shit to stop the corporate takeover."
______
*In Six Sates Super Delegate Reform Resolutions Have Been Passed by Democratic Parties: ME, MA, VT, MN, WI, WV.

"West Virginia Democrats Call for Resignation of DNC Chair" and End to Super Delegates, The Hill, June 11, 2016.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/283163-wv-dems-call-for-resignation-of-dnc-chair

West Virginia Democrats joined in on a call to end the role of unbound super delegates in the Democratic primary process and also showed support for the resignation of Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. According to reports from the state convention Saturday, delegates passed a resolution urging the DNC to eliminate the "un-democratic and un-American" role of super delegates or bind them to the results of states' primaries by 2020. A resolution from a group of Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders Delegates that calls for the resignation of Wasserman Schultz — arguing that she has harmed the party by creating distrust in the process and failing to turn out voters — also passed.

- WV Bernie Delegates Group Resolution for Resignation of DNC Chair. # 2. Near 100 yr. record losses since 1928.

[DLCWIdem]

90. the democratic base

You can't have it both ways. The reason you want open primaries is so independents can vote because apparently they are the ones voting for Bernie. So are independents the democratic base? You want to have your cake and eat it to. Your independents but your the democratic base. IN the exit polls democrats went for Hillary. The millennial are the young people who are NEW to the party are they the democratic base?

[okasha]

91. I think you misdirected this

because it doesn't seem to address anything I've ever said.

[DLCWIdem]

92. sorry my response was to post 62? I think.

[okasha]

93. No prob.

In any case, I agree with you.

[Kentonio]

95. If we want to continue to have a base

Then yes bringing in people who currently consider themselves indie is absolutely crucial.

It blows my mind the way so many people here act as if being allowed in the party is some privilege. It's the party who have to fight tooth and nail to get new members.

[1StrongBlackMan]

77. From the words of a now-gone "Pillar of DU" ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x478248

And I think it fair to substitute "Anti-war Left" with "economic primacy left", since there is some much over-lap in the membership.

[arendt]

82. Nothing like an 11 year old quote for relevance.

A lot has changed since then, including:

The worst economic disaster since the great depression.
Fifteen years of unremitting and useless warfare that has sucked the budget dry.
The legalization of anonymous corporate bribery, including massive overseas contributions.
The smashing of unions by SCOTUS ruling after SCOTUS ruling.
The imminent corporate coup d'etat that is the TPP,TISA, etc.

So, I don't think your quote has much relevance to today's situation.

----

Not to mention, this thread started because someone decided that ordinary political horsetrading was now "blackmail". That degenerated into "who is an activist". And now, you want to drag it down into "your just a dirty, anti-war hippie".

Not playing in this pig pen.

[1StrongBlackMan]

106. No, things haven't changed, at all ...

though the specific issues may have changed, we STILL have a narrow, loud and demographically homogenous segment of the left, claiming ownership of the Democratic Party as its base ... despite their constant partisan fickleness.

[arendt]

107. Of course there is no loud..etc segment of Identity Politicians claiming ownership.

Yes, in the context of okasha using women/POC/LGBT and then calling IP a "dogwhistle", I will continue to use the term. Fire away.

I love your pronouncements.

The crash of 2008 was nothing. The militarization of domestic policing is nothing. The upcoming TPP is nothing.
Right.

All you care about is scoring points against "leftists". Which shows up in your complete projection of your motives onto them.

[1StrongBlackMan]

109. If this ...

All you care about is scoring points against "leftists". Which shows up in your complete projection of your motives onto them.

Is what you wish to take from what I wrote ... so be it.

[arendt]

55. Moving away and giving nothing is an insult.

I think he'd take it as validation of success in moving the party "left" in his opinion and continue to bargain even if all of his demands by the party or Hillary were provided. Disagree?

That is a pure hypothetical. Let's see what concessions/deals are actually made before we decide that Bernie will never be satisfied. He has already said he would campaign for HRC if she is the nominee. Many lesser people would have said "no way" after the dirty, crooked campaign run against him.

If Superdelages were removed, open primaries provided in every state, poll workers were changed in every state, and DWS was fired tomorrow... do you believe that Sanders would endorse?, or would he say the revolution is just starting and then move on to his next issue or demand?

More hypothetical. So, here is a hypothetical answer. If all of that were actually offered, he would endorse HRC; and, in the background, continue to support his part of the party. That is how politics has always worked. No one ever gives away their rights. They just make a deal for a certain time.

[politicaljunkie41910]

4. That would mean then that these are things 55% did not ask for by my count.

Only in Democratic Fairy Land do losers win and get to make all the rules.

[arendt]

8. Politics is not supposed to be warfare. Inside a party, there is supposed to be compromise.

You want to make it winner-take-all, and you are encouraging the losers to take a walk.

So 45% of the party are supposed to get NOTHING? Supposed to suck up shit like Debbie WS?

Give Bernie SOMETHING. If you tell him he lost, therefore he gets NOTHING, a significant percentage of his supporters are not going to vote for HRC.

[politicaljunkie41910]

22. Gee for a moment I was starting to feel a little bad thinking perhaps you hadn't been around here

the past 12 months listening to all the ugly things said about the Clintons. And then you showed your true colors by talking the same trash the rest of the Bernie supporters have been saying for the past year. Yes I know what compromise is but compromise is a two way street. All I keep hearing from Bernie. who lost BTW, is more demands. His leverage grows less and less by each passing day. Besides, his supporters keep telling us that they won't vote for her anyway so how can he guarantee they will show up on election day. He then says that he can't make anyone do anything. That she has to convince his supporters to vote for her while he and his supporters demand increase by the day. Only in Bernieworld, does the loser win and get to make all the rules while guaranteeing nothing.

[arendt]

46. Winner take all. No compromise. Yada Yada. So sick of this hard line BS. n/t

[CrowCityDem]

56. When has Bernie been willing to compromise on anything?

[OnDoutside]

99. **** FANTASTIC POST ****^^^^^ It's his way or nothing.

[tex-wyo-dem]

11. If Bernie only got 10% of the vote, I would concede...

Your point. But 45% is a hearty margin by anyone''s measure, especially when your talking about voters in the same party. There is no black/white winners/losers in this case.

[Hortensis]

110. Good info about UT, thanks. I've read about

the problem many Mormons have with Trump, just hope they continue.

As for the rest, would have preferred passing on the gratuitous slaps at the sanderistas. Their preferred candidate lost. , and they have a few more lessons coming that most will of course refuse to learn from. Oh, well. What's new?

The idea that Hillary would cave to "blackmail" and needs to somehow hang on a bit longer strikes me as...surprising. Women who rise to power tend to be pretty tough and hard-nosed. As what point did we decide this one was a weakling? Is someone riding to her rescue?

[KingFlorez]

5. Many of those who voted are not a part of the party

I'd wager that a good percentage don't even vote for Democrats in general elections. The results out of West Virginia are a good indicator of that. And on top of that, Sanders doesn't even seem to want anything, he just doesn't want to say that he lost.

[arendt]

9. I see. People who vote in Democratic Primaries are NOT members of the party.

Excuse me, but what then is your litmus test for party membership?

[KingFlorez]

12. Reading is fundamental

Before you get hyper defensive, you should note that I mentioned that a lot of the people who voted in the DEMOCRATIC primary might not even be people who ever vote Democratic in the general election. Most Sanders voters in West Virginia said they would support Trump regardless of who the Democratic nominee was.

[arendt]

19. AGain, not the point. Give me a definition or its pure speculation. n/t

[KingFlorez]

25. You aren't comprehending, dear

People who voted in the Democratic primary, but only vote Republican in general elections are not by definition part of the party. In West Virginia, there are plenty of people who are still registered Democrats, but will never vote for a Democrat for any office. Those people don't care about the Democratic agenda, they are worried about the Republican agenda. There is such a thing a Democrat in Name Only.

[arendt]

31. I see. "by definition" is your answer.

Sorry, no.

As I said below. HRC supporters tout Mormon ladies who vote for HRC; but anyone who voted for Bernie is "still a Republican".

Complete double standard. Hypocrite.

[KingFlorez]

49. You asked for an answer and you got it

No double standard. There are a great deal of people who vote in the Democratic primary, but never vote Democratic in general elections. That's fact.

[arendt]

57. Its not an answer; its a tautology.

People who vote Democratic are Democrats.

The problem is that the election isn't til November; so your tautology is meaningless until then.

[Lucinda]

76. They define themselves when they say they would vote Trump if Bernie wasn't a GE candidate. n/t

[arendt]

86. Did they vote? Not yet. So we don't know.

A poll can generate any outcome the pollster wants. We are all sick to death of spun polls.

Get back to me at election time.

[arendt]

87. That is, vote in the GE for Trump. n/t

[appalachiablue]

85. That was mistated by the media and is incorrect. When West Virginians who

voted for Sanders in the primary were asked about the general election, some said they might vote for Trump but only if the Democratic candidate Sanders was Not in the race.

[arendt]

88. Thanks for explaining exactly how that poll result was spun. n't

[appalachiablue]

89. For sure.

[Renew Deal]

6. 42%

And Hillary and Bernie agree on most things

[arendt]

10. This is that bogus survey number again.

They certainly do not agree on the direction the party should take. If they did, Bernie would have endorsed Hillary.

[Doctor_J]

16. Bullshit

[politicaljunkie41910]

30. Then if this is his litmus test, he should have run as an Independent.

[JonLeibowitz]

63. Why? There are Democrats who support those items. Just not Hillary.

[okasha]

94. Hillary supports a good many of those points,

as you would know if you had bothered to listen to her or read her platform.

[JonLeibowitz]

98. I have read her platform, thank you very much.

I am neither impressed with it nor do I believe much of it.

[Ash_F]

102. Which ones? And how?

Seriously.

[Doctor_J]

13. They hate liberals as much as republicans do

An eye-opening campaign. Especially since a lot of them hated Hillary with a passion 8 years ago. Completely lacking in morals.

[arendt]

15. I can't follow this. Who is "they"? n/t

[Doctor_J]

17. Hillary's cult

[arendt]

20. Oh. OK. We are on the same page. n't

[arendt]

18. Because HRC is a neoliberal war-lover, not a liberal. n/t

[KittyWampus]

28. Not everyone who voted for Sanders is a party member or even on the political Left.

[arendt]

32. So what? And what does that have to do with "blackmail"? n'/t

[arcane1]

53. Asking for actual progressive principles is blackmail, it seems.

[arendt]

58. Well, actually, YES. n't

[notadmblnd]

70. Blackmail, coersion and buying support is the HRC campaign's method of operation

They automatically assume that because they do it, everyone does. It has always been the Republican way and I don't believe that the operatives currently working on her campaign have changed their ways. In fact, it's probably one of the main reasons she hired them.

Oh, and I think she's about to throw Wassermann Shultz under the bus

Clinton faces decision on Wasserman Schultz
MORE
has a decision to make: what to do with embattled Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Bernie Sanders has put ousting Wasserman Schultz at the top of his list of demands, putting pressure on Clinton to get rid of an ally accused by her rival’s supporters of tilting the race in her favor.

The demands are meaningful, coming at a point when Clinton wants to unify the party and win vociferous support from Sanders, who remains popular with progressives even as he nears the end of his presidential campaign.

But it’s far from clear where she is headed with the decision.

In an interview published Wednesday with USA Today, Clinton did not rule out replacing Wasserman Schultz but noted she had not picked her to chair the DNC and said she planned to move forward with a revitalized party.http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/283686-clinton-faces-decision-on-wasserman-schultz

[arendt]

71. I hadn't thought of the projection angle on the use of "blackmailer". n/t

[riversedge]

79. I would not say 'the party'--instead they are the primary voters

[sufrommich]

2. I think Romney's utter disgust with Trump probably cost him a ton

of votes. If there's a more prominent family among Mormons than the Romneys,I don't know who they are.

[TeamPooka]

97. Yeah, they're playing follow their leader. nt

[Duval]

14. Blackmail? Bernie?

[okasha]

21. A couple Mormon women I know are all in for Hill.

I do not know even one Mormon, woman or man, who doesn't loathe Trump.

[arendt]

27. Let me get this straight...

Republicans who vote for HRC are cool,

but non-Democrats who voted for Bernie don't count.

I see.

[okasha]

36. Please do get this straight.

There is a difference between primary and general elections. That's been explained to you.

The Mormons I know are not Republicans. Their political views run moderate to liberal. You made a false assumption.

[arendt]

48. This is "apochryphal".

You say "the Mormons I know" the way some people say "some of my best friends are X".

It is your opinion. It is not a fact. It does not make my assumption false.

[okasha]

54. Uh, yeah, it is fact.

And it jibes pretty well with the information coming out of Utah.

It may not fit your stereotypes, but I suspect very little does.

[arendt]

60. Missing the point.

In this case (Trump v Hillary), Mormon women may vote for Hillary. That is probably true.

That does not make Mormon women "liberal".

You confuse one action in an anomalous situation (the GOP nominee is batshit crazy and a fascist to boot) with deeply-held beliefs.

[okasha]

65. I made no general statement about Mormon women.

I was speaking specifically about Mormon women I know.

I assume there are others like them, not all of them public enough about their liberalism to be excommunicated, but I make no assumptions about their numbers.

[arendt]

67. Then it really was anecdotal (sorry I said apochryphal).

Perhaps this is all down to my brain burp of substituting apochryphal for anecdotal. (Both four syllables, begin with a , end in "al".)

[okasha]

72. Sure,

but eventually anecdotes and personal observations accumulate and start to become points on a trend line.

[arendt]

84. And you will decide which trends are "real". n/t

[politicaljunkie41910]

37. Those Republicans she mentioned aren't trying to tear her down at the present moment.

Bernie's peeps are. Say what you want bit it's not like those non-Democrats you are referring to have not been trying to tear her down for the past year or more. Or I guess you missed that part.

[arendt]

51. Bernie's peeps are legitimately asking what they get for 45% of the vote.

Your answer is they get NOTHING. Why would that possiblly piss off people who worked for a year and accomplished a miracle.

We aren't trying to tear HRC down. We are tearing down fanatical posts like yours.

Whatever happened to the kind of political deal-making that made HRC SoS? Gee, how did you forget that?

[Demsrule86]

101. Nothing. It does not work that way.

We all get a Democratic president. Bernie looks increasingly bad about the non-concession thing...and the fact that is the first woman nominee ...makes it worse.

[arendt]

108. Wow. What an gobsmacking dictatorial attitude.

Your version of politics belongs in a tinpot dictatorship.

[Demsrule86]

112. This is not horsehoes

He lost. He gets the right to concede and endorse, to have nice speech if he does the first thing and platform say if he does the first thing.

[oasis]

23. Former South Dakota Senator, Larry Pressler. He was the one

on Rachel's show. Yes he's a Mormon and will be voting for Hillary.

[politicaljunkie41910]

39. Thanks, I was trying to remember his name.

[Warren Stupidity]

24. Yes by all means don't seize an historic opportunity to move the country away from

rightwing economic policies. Hold true to the neoliberal course. Be strong Hillary! What would Thatcher do?

This is why I am yet another sensible centrist for Clinton.

[Peachhead22]

26. What does Utah have to do with Bernie and...

...what do either of them have to do with "blackmail"?

Blackmail is when you demand someone do something or you'll reveal some dark secret or past misdeed. Are you implying Bernie has some info Hillary doesn't want him to release?

I swear, some of you folks see Bernie behind every tree, in every dream and every nightmare. I can't recall a single bad thing he's said about Hillary since before the California primary, maybe earlier than that. The only one he's targeting is DWS and the nominating process. And before Bernie called for DWS's job many of you Hillary supporters agreed about DWS's ineptitude.

Lay off Bernie. He isn't hurting Hillary in the slightest. Bringing him up in articles and posts that have zero to do with him (and I've seen this a lot on DU lately) is just making Hillary supporters look desperate and silly. It's counterproductive for you folks and unnecessarily spiteful to a large part of DUers.

[arendt]

29. Thanks for the sanity. Don't expect to be heard. n/t

[WolverineDG]

38. It's just further proof

that the Hillary camp thinks they can win without Bernie or his supporters.

[Fuddnik]

61. They can try without me.

[rjsquirrel]

104. Because she can

It's become obvious.

[politicaljunkie41910]

64. FTR, there is more than one definition of blackmail

Try this definition on for size.

Blackmail: to force or coerce into a particular action, statement, etc.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/blackmail

ex. 1 The strikers claimed they were blackmailed into signing the new contract.

ex. 2 Bernie Sanders is trying to blackmail Hillary into putting his people on the DNC Platform committee and accepting his campaign issues as part of her campaign promises in exchange for his consideration to not create too much chaos at the DNC Convention in July while allowing her to grovel and beg his supporters for their vote in November if they feel like it without any guarantee they will bother to show up at the polls because he can't make them according to his previous statements.

[arendt]

69. What utter pettifoggery.Making up example definitions. n/t

[Peachhead22]

75. OK, even using your definition

What does Utah turning less red (you know the story in the original post) have to do with Bernie or "blackmail"? Even your definition of blackmail. Are you thinking his position vis-a-vis the DNC is helping or... hurting Hillary's chances in Utah? I'm not sure what the OP was getting at. Or are you alleging Bernie is affecting the political landscape in Utah at all? ON edit: I'll give you a hint. The guy affecting Hillary's chances in Utah is the guy who looks like he uses Cheetos dust as makeup.

Why would the most conservative state in country give a flying crap about Bernie and 45% of the primary voters wanting a say in the direction of the party? Or was the original story just a thinly veiled excuse to take something out of thin air and take shots at fellow Democrats?

[jillan]

33. Blackmail? The blackmailer WON Utah by 59% They chose Him not HER.

omg - posts such as yours are the exact reason why we are never going to unite.

[rjsquirrel]

105. All 79 democrats in Utah voted for Bernie? Eom lol

[Schema Thing]

40. don't be progressive? Be your true, republican light self? Get that shit outa here.

[Doctor_J]

42. There is nothing "lite" about HRC or her followers.

They are Reagan Republicans

[Doctor_J]

41. Would have been a good year to nominate someone who wants to fix the problems instead

of an entrenched conservative who will probably spend 4 years under investigation.

[SFnomad]

47. What a load of crap. Secretary Clinton is NOT an "entrenched conservative" ... and if BS wanted to

win the nomination, maybe he should have run a better campaign. Also, you really think that if BS were to win the Presidency he'd be immune to 4 years of investigation? Man are you naïve.

[senz]

43. What?? Would you call Obama's SOS deal with Hillary that? Sheesh!

[CanadaexPat]

44. "forget the Dems Hillary you've got the Reps!"

Nice.

[.99center]

52. Hillary should move even more to the right?

Abandon your liberal policies Hillary, let's make this country right again! Their with you, no matter how much you charge the party's platform! Distance yourself from Obama, publicly thank Bush a few more times, and make equality a dirty word in our party! Make America right again! Feels good being able to discuss how great Bush was during 9/11 around Democrats once again, Obama and those liberals were wrong, thank you Hillary for putting them in there place!

[Triana]

74. Asking the Dem party to get back to representing PEOPLE rather than MONEY

is "blackmail".

Very. Interesting.

[GeorgeGist]

78. and the bitterness continues.

[Maru Kitteh]

96. Holy mother of AWESOME. This is getting better every day!

So proud of DEMOCRATS this season! Kicking sprayed-orange, pro-simian, knuckle-dragging ass!

[auntpurl]

100. I imagine Mormons don't take kindly to Trump's multiple marriages

and the fact he's never been exactly religious and never consistently conservative either.

At the end of the day, Mormons might vote for Hillary because she stood by her man and stayed married, and because she's a Christian.

Which is one of the stupidest reasons ever for supporting Hillary, but...I'll take it!

[Orsino]

111. When did the Establisment begin emitting the "blackmail" talking point?

When did they decide that negotiation is beneath the dignity of the nation's former top diplomat, who ran in part on that very qualification?

I don't need to ask, though, why they sent Chuck Todd to inform us of same.