2016 Postmortem

Algernon Moncrieff

(5,961 posts)

45. The Evangelicals will show up to vote for anyone but the Democrat

Mon May 2, 2016, 08:40 AM

May 2016

...but your point about the GOP is spot-on. The Evangelicals know they've been had and that they aren't getting anything substantive; meanwhile, whether they'll admit it or not, the supply siders and tax hawks know that the party positions on abortion and marriage equality are dragging down their message. If they lose this election, I think the Tea Party splits off.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

83 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

3,154,991 [View all] Algernon Moncrieff May 2016 OP

K & R, good post. Over three million more and we still have some primaries to go. You Thinkingabout May 2016 #1

She went after Trump big time today in her NAACP speech. nt BootinUp May 2016 #2

bernie is in the top 2 or 3%. he IS an oligarch and here is the definition of the word... msongs May 2016 #3

I still can't believe, with a 26-year Congressional resume, he tried running as "an outsider." IamMab May 2016 #39

Lol and moan. Please. Don't degrade an important Hortensis May 2016 #49

No need for more debates. It's time to wrap this thing up and oasis May 2016 #4

Excellent post! NanceGreggs May 2016 #5

Thanks! Algernon Moncrieff May 2016 #6

Democratic voting independents were given placebo ballots to vote on in Clinton's last 5 wins. w4rma May 2016 #7

I live in a caucus state Algernon Moncrieff May 2016 #8

Closed primaries prevent Rethugligan ratfucking. moriah May 2016 #19

The Evangelicals will show up to vote for anyone but the Democrat Algernon Moncrieff May 2016 #45

Because DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #29

If Arizona, New York and the entire South are your examples of fair elections, I don't want any part w4rma May 2016 #61

We have the rule of law and not the rule of the jungle. DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #68

If you want to pick the Dem nominee, become a Dem. JoePhilly May 2016 #36

It's not rocket science, is it? Algernon Moncrieff May 2016 #46

And in the general, should we limit the voting for the Dem candidate to the Dems as well? Matt_in_STL May 2016 #47

If Sanders' voters are concentrated in caucus states.... anigbrowl May 2016 #69

They don't report voter totals in caucus States. Ed Suspicious May 2016 #76

Tell the poster above that anigbrowl May 2016 #83

Bernie was somewhere around 3% in the national polls when he declared his candidacy. liberal_at_heart May 2016 #9

We don't pick the nominee based on polls. JoePhilly May 2016 #37

To see democrats salivating at the mouth waiting for an La Lioness Priyanka May 2016 #10

As if Sanders would ever do something dishonest like that, like Clinton did? w4rma May 2016 #11

She didn't do anything dishonest. La Lioness Priyanka May 2016 #12

Ignoring the actual potential crime, she set up her server to bypass the Freedom of Information Act. w4rma May 2016 #13

She didnt? SwampG8r May 2016 #28

Obama did not ban Clinton from getting advice wherever she wanted. randome May 2016 #40

We were discussing honesty not criminality SwampG8r May 2016 #50

The more they hide the taxes the more I think its possible they did do something dishonest uponit7771 May 2016 #22

..."kind of" nauseating? It makes me gag and retch. Surya Gayatri May 2016 #17

My...gag and retch. Perhaps a teaspoon of baking soda would help. libdem4life May 2016 #56

K&R DesertRat May 2016 #14

"It's not undemocratic" - Wrong, even if Sanders didn't run it would have been undemocratic. That Guy 888 May 2016 #15

well said! liberal_at_heart May 2016 #16

More sophistry and half truth. 1. She lobbied the SDs last time and lost, 2. she's been around so... uponit7771 May 2016 #21

Any voter can decide to be a Democrat Algernon Moncrieff May 2016 #27

People were removed from the rolls in New York. Right before the primary. That Guy 888 May 2016 #52

Were more than 3100000 voters removed? Algernon Moncrieff May 2016 #54

Is Mother Jones now a RW source? That Guy 888 May 2016 #57

I never said MJ was a RW source Algernon Moncrieff May 2016 #59

That is the title, read the post. It contains an excerpt from Mother Jones. That Guy 888 May 2016 #72

I've seen nothing that would cause me a "severe level of doubt" Algernon Moncrieff May 2016 #75

Yet, not everyone is you. That Guy 888 May 2016 #81

Don't try change the subject anigbrowl May 2016 #70

If you're going to get involved, follow along. That Guy 888 May 2016 #71

Once again was Clinton's strategy designed to knock out ALL competition before a vote was cast? That Guy 888 May 2016 #58

You don't seem to admit that Hillary Clinton has more votes, states, and delegates. Algernon Moncrieff May 2016 #60

You don't seem to admit that Hillary Clinton gamed the system to the detriment of democracy. That Guy 888 May 2016 #62

She got those votes and delegates by people going to polling places and caucuses Algernon Moncrieff May 2016 #63

She had tremendous help before the primaries started. A thumb was on the DNC scale in her favor. That Guy 888 May 2016 #73

Wish I could rec this a 100 times. Excellent OP. Surya Gayatri May 2016 #18

+1, Actual quote " Ride this wave of democratic energy to overwhelm right-wing opposition ". Weaver uponit7771 May 2016 #20

And Brock sings in the choir? n/t libdem4life May 2016 #55

Compared to the "Sanders as a chance give us your money" squad? hell yeah uponit7771 May 2016 #66

Give us your money squad...what the heck does that mean. libdem4life May 2016 #67

It's not only Democratic, but this primary is consistent with party tradition (almost). Sancho May 2016 #23

Excellent reply ... thank you! NurseJackie May 2016 #24

+ 1 Algernon Moncrieff May 2016 #44

The independent investigation showed that Bernie did not steal data. When you say he stole data you djean111 May 2016 #26

Spin it however you want - the actual investigation report is published. Sancho May 2016 #30

For me, and many others, the DNC will be a footnote. djean111 May 2016 #33

What are you talking about Demsrule86 May 2016 #31

It showed that his campaign searched through proprietary data belonging to Hillary AND pnwmom May 2016 #32

+ 1 JoePhilly May 2016 #38

I don't disagree that Hillary will be the nominee... TCJ70 May 2016 #25

I would agree with you Demsrule86 May 2016 #43

Let's not forget that most of Sanders wins came in Cacauses. aaaaaa5a May 2016 #34

I just went to the 3rd meeting of the WA caucus yesterday artislife May 2016 #51

Excellent post. Thank you for providing some information aaaaaa5a May 2016 #64

There is still one more step in Olympia artislife May 2016 #65

Thank you. Great Post. Justice May 2016 #35

Well said... SidDithers May 2016 #41

K & R. nt kstewart33 May 2016 #42

"Hillary Clinton has 3,154,991 more voters than Bernie Sanders." workinclasszero May 2016 #48

Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded nt jcgoldie May 2016 #53

Hillary has received more votes than any candidate running in 2016. aaaaaa5a May 2016 #79

And thats why she will be our next President workinclasszero May 2016 #82

Nothing IN THE WORLD could explain the shrieking bullshit about emails littering this forum Number23 May 2016 #74

Could I just point out, snot May 2016 #77

And the number is only going to get bigger as we will soon see. nt BootinUp May 2016 #78

Essentially 12 to 9....yes it's winning, but that 9 is hardly an insignificant total Armstead May 2016 #80