Berning question 4 today: will Nevada feel the Bern?

Meanwhile, in other states--

http://www.dankaufman.name/bernie-sa...-3-more-states

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

I see Webb as a Sec Def for Bernie, but probably not for Hillary. She has too many supporters to appoint before she picks an outsider.

Sanders picking Webb will be like Clinton picking Rubin, Summers, etc. A sell-out. He won't do it.

Originally Posted by marypoza

Berning question 4 today: will Nevada feel the Bern?

Meanwhile, in other states--

http://www.dankaufman.name/bernie-sa...-3-more-states

-- well the good news is the Latinos were feeling the Bern today.

But other than that......

I have seen reports on my fb feed from caucus goers that some of the precincts were putting the fix in for Hillary. Caucus workers were taking Hillary supporters right away making Bernie supporters wait,- sometimes up to 3 hrs- so that they would get tired & eventually leave (some did) & as they registered voters they tried to sign them up automatically for Hillary. One dude said he had to tell the worker 3x he was caucussing for Bernie, & got a vacant stare in return. Supposedly the State of NV is investigating the caucusses, but I have yet to find a news account of that, including in the alterate media ( US Uncut did have a story about the caucusses being a fiasco) some caucus goers said that the state should revert back to primary elections since the caucusses are so easy to fix. Many said they won't be voting for Hillary in Nov. The DNC needs to stop this shit & get impartial ASAP. Already ppl think the IA caucusses were fixed due to those coin tosses. Even if the NV shit doesn't make national news, the voters in that state know what happened, & many now say they won't vote for the DNC's gold(water)en girl. Do they want a state by state repeat of this? Do they want to lose in Nov?


Updates:
http://www.nationofchange.org/news/2...fusing-caucus/


http://dailyheadlines.net/2016/02/th...-been-caught/#


http://usuncut.com/politics/the-neva...mplete-fiasco/


http://theamericanmirror.com/video-h...-after-voting/

These are 4 u Rags:



http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3239/1084/original.jpg


http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/media...0/original.jpg

Remember how Ayn Rand became a political football in the 2012 election?

Well another author of the past - Houston Stewart Chamberlain - will play that role if Bernie Sanders is the Democratic nominee in 2016.

This quote, from Chamberlain's The Foundations Of The Nineteenth Century, says it all:

"Our whole civilization and culture of today is the work of one definite race of men - the Teutonic."

The smears that will be hurled at Sanders - especially in the Midwest, where Jewishness is seen as a "racial" rather than a religious trait - will be epic, and done under the cowardly cover of "independent" PACs, so that they cannot be directly traced to the Republican Party.

And I wouldn't rule out Hillary's campaign resorting to this if it looks like she's in imminent danger of losing the Democratic nomination to Sanders.

Originally Posted by '58 Flat

Remember how Ayn Rand became a political football in the 2012 election?

Well another author of the past - Houston Stewart Chamberlain - will play that role if Bernie Sanders is the Democratic nominee in 2016.

This quote, from Chamberlain's The Foundations Of The Nineteenth Century, says it all:

"Our whole civilization and culture of today is the work of one definite race of men - the Teutonic."

The smears that will be hurled at Sanders - especially in the Midwest, where Jewishness is seen as a "racial" rather than a religious trait - will be epic, and done under the cowardly cover of "independent" PACs, so that they cannot be directly traced to the Republican Party.

And I wouldn't rule out Hillary's campaign resorting to this if it looks like she's in imminent danger of losing the Democratic nomination to Sanders.

--oh the antisemitism has already begun:

http://www.snopes.com/donald-trump-b...s-gas-chamber/

Ps the image is not false, it's out there. But the Donald didn't put it out there, that's what's false

Just wait till you see what will happen in Michigan, with its large Arab-American bloc.

Well todays the day we find out which states are feeling the Bern, & which states are, well ..... losers, I guess

I am hoping that apolitical anti Establishment types feel the Bern instead of being conned by Trump.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

I am hoping that apolitical anti Establishment types feel the Bern instead of being conned by Trump.

That can only happen if Bernie captures the Democratic nomination--or both parties split in two, which is becoming an outside possibility. Republicans walking out and forming their own conservative party because they cannot abide Trump will give Sanders permission to form a progressive party. A three party system is not stable but a four party system well might be.

Originally Posted by MordecaiK

That can only happen if Bernie captures the Democratic nomination--or both parties split in two, which is becoming an outside possibility. Republicans walking out and forming their own conservative party because they cannot abide Trump will give Sanders permission to form a progressive party. A three party system is not stable but a four party system well might be.

Many States are open primaries. When I walked into my polling place in Northern Virginia this morning, the clerk asked me whether I wanted a Democratic or Republican ballot. what XYMOX is hoping is that the anti Establishment types vote today, and when possible, choose the Democratic ballot and feel the Bern.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

Many States are open primaries. When I walked into my polling place in Northern Virginia this morning, the clerk asked me whether I wanted a Democratic or Republican ballot. what XYMOX is hoping is that the anti Establishment types vote today, and when possible, choose the Democratic ballot and feel the Bern.

Must be nice to have that choice. In the deep red state of Arizona where I live, the Democratic primary is CLOSED to registered independents. So I can't cast my vote for Sanders, as I'm so inclined, even though I've never voted for a Democrat at the top of the ticket in a general election. And haven't voted for any Republican since 1988. Have pulled the lever for third party candidates ever since then, and will in all likelihood cast my ballot for Dr. Jill Stein (again) if Hillary emerges as the nominee.

Originally Posted by '58 Flat

Remember how Ayn Rand became a political football in the 2012 election?

Well another author of the past - Houston Stewart Chamberlain - will play that role if Bernie Sanders is the Democratic nominee in 2016.

This quote, from Chamberlain's The Foundations Of The Nineteenth Century, says it all:

"Our whole civilization and culture of today is the work of one definite race of men - the Teutonic."

The Ashkenazic Jews were in every way but religion a Teutonic people. As a German-American I have often been confused with Jews for my intellectualism, cultural values, and liberal tendencies. When someone faults me as a Jew for such, all I can say is "Better a Jew than what you are!" That before 1933 Jews assimilated into German cultural and economic life (if not religion) suggests that Yiddish-speaking Jews were for all practical purposes Germans.

Houston Stewart Chamberlain was of course a racist crank whose scribbling contributed to Nazi racism. He failed to recognize the achievements of the Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese who were by no means Teutonic or of South Asians who have at most slight Aryan admixture. In view of the disproportionate achievements of Jews in American life, one can hit him from one of two directions: that either the Jews are Teutonized Semites or that the supremacy of Teutons over non-Teutons is pure nonsense.

The smears that will be hurled at Sanders - especially in the Midwest, where Jewishness is seen as a "racial" rather than a religious trait - will be epic, and done under the cowardly cover of "independent" PACs, so that they cannot be directly traced to the Republican Party.

Chelsea Clinton married a Jewish man. So antisemitic bilge attributed with the Clinton campaign will be suspect. Such would be black propaganda, material fraudulently attributed to the Other Side. If it is mailed, then someone is likely to complain. The Postal Inspectors have good resources for tracing objectionable material. Most printing is still done by unions, so if there is a fake union label... the union whose logo is forged might demand investigation for violation of trademarks.

And I wouldn't rule out Hillary's campaign resorting to this if it looks like she's in imminent danger of losing the Democratic nomination to Sanders.

She may not be the most moral person around -- but she is not that immoral.

Originally Posted by Teacher in Exile

Must be nice to have that choice. In the deep red state of Arizona where I live, the Democratic primary is CLOSED to registered independents. So I can't cast my vote for Sanders, as I'm so inclined, even though I've never voted for a Democrat at the top of the ticket in a general election. And haven't voted for any Republican since 1988. Have pulled the lever for third party candidates ever since then, and will in all likelihood cast my ballot for Dr. Jill Stein (again) if Hillary emerges as the nominee.

Arizona strikes me as one of the most tense and conflicted states in the country, perpetually on the edge of tipping Democratic the way California did. Latinos and Native Americans vs Mormons, whites, elderly and Republican refugees from Pete Wilson's California. Which is why Maricopa keeps re-electing Joe Arpaio Sheriff and why Arizona has pushed the envelope on immigrant restriction even when it means having a weaker economy.
I think this goes all the way back to 1912. My hunch is that there was a reason why Arizona split off from New Mexico Territory at statehood and it wasn't just administrative convenience. It probably had a lot to do with NM being majority Hispanic and Catholic at that time and that Arizona was much less that way. Am I right?

Originally Posted by MordecaiK

Arizona strikes me as one of the most tense and conflicted states in the country, perpetually on the edge of tipping Democratic the way California did. Latinos and Native Americans vs Mormons, whites, elderly and Republican refugees from Pete Wilson's California. Which is why Maricopa keeps re-electing Joe Arpaio Sheriff and why Arizona has pushed the envelope on immigrant restriction even when it means having a weaker economy.
I think this goes all the way back to 1912. My hunch is that there was a reason why Arizona split off from New Mexico Territory at statehood and it wasn't just administrative convenience. It probably had a lot to do with NM being majority Hispanic and Catholic at that time and that Arizona was much less that way. Am I right?

You've pretty much hit the nail on the head.

[QUOTE=pbrower2a;550986]

The Ashkenazic Jews were in every way but religion a Teutonic people.

DNA evidence suggests that you are half right. Nuclear DNA shows Ashkenazic Jews with similarities to Palestinian Arabs (Jews who became Muslims) and Kurds (of the 10 lost tribes). Mitochondrial DNA suggests that a great many male Jews settled in Germany and took German wives and converted them. Apparently this happened a lot for Jews in exile in the West in Roman and Dark Ages times.

As a German-American I have often been confused with Jews for my intellectualism, cultural values, and liberal tendencies. When someone faults me as a Jew for such, all I can say is "Better a Jew than what you are!" That before 1933 Jews assimilated into German cultural and economic life (if not religion) suggests that Yiddish-speaking Jews were for all practical purposes Germans.

Well Yiddish does mean Yid-Deutsch. Jewish German.

Houston Stewart Chamberlain was of course a racist crank whose scribbling contributed to Nazi racism. He failed to recognize the achievements of the Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese who were by no means Teutonic or of South Asians who have at most slight Aryan admixture. In view of the disproportionate achievements of Jews in American life, one can hit him from one of two directions: that either the Jews are Teutonized Semites or that the supremacy of Teutons over non-Teutons is pure nonsense.

Or there is a third, more controversial possibility. That by restricting Jewish economic activity to pursuits such as moneylending, Christian society during the Middle Ages inadvertently created a natural selection process that inadvertently selected for verbal and especially mathematical aptitude as far as ability to marry and procreate. See http://web.mit.edu/fustflum/document...jbiosocsci.pdf

Chelsea Clinton married a Jewish man. So antisemitic bilge attributed with the Clinton campaign will be suspect.

Anti-semitic is one thing. Anti-zionist is quite another. Hillary has long treasured advice from Sidney Blumenthal (see http://nypost.com/2015/10/31/hillary...nthal-matters/ ) and his anti-Zionist son Max Blumenthal see http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/07/20...e-association/ . And of course Hillary's Muslim Pakistani personal assistant and possibly Chief of Staff Huma Abedin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huma_Abedin
This is the sort of thing that sets Jews, particularly Orthodox Jews teeth on edge about Hillary and makes them VERY inclined to vote for a Republican opponent. Even if that opponent turns out to be Donald Trump. Yes, this may hurt Hillary in Florida and Ohio and perhaps even in New York and New Jersey. And this is not black propaganda and not something Hillary can easily repudiate either.

[QUOTE=MordecaiK;550991]

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

DNA evidence suggests that you are half right. Nuclear DNA shows Ashkenazic Jews with similarities to Palestinian Arabs (Jews who became Muslims) and Kurds (of the 10 lost tribes). Mitochondrial DNA suggests that a great many male Jews settled in Germany and took German wives and converted them. Apparently this happened a lot for Jews in exile in the West in Roman and Dark Ages times.

That would have some cultural consequences. The house language would be a German dialect while the language of the Synagogue would be Hebrew.

Or there is a third, more controversial possibility. That by restricting Jewish economic activity to pursuits such as moneylending, Christian society during the Middle Ages inadvertently created a natural selection process that inadvertently selected for verbal and especially mathematical aptitude as far as ability to marry and procreate. See http://web.mit.edu/fustflum/document...jbiosocsci.pdf

Persecuted as they often were, Jews avoided the one activity that would have made them most vulnerable: farming. If a people believes that it can be uprooted with little notice, then the least suitable investment would be in a farm. One can take smithy equipment, musical instruments (but not pipe organs), jewels, coins, or cash with one. Skills and learning? Those are inalienable. One can't take land with one. The Grapes of Wrath experience is not new to humanity; Jews experienced it often, but for reasons other than crop failure. So take the Holy Books, the violins and flutes, the blacksmith equipment, the jewelry and cutting tools, some food (one might pardon a debt of a grocer in exchange for some groceries), and some wares for sale elsewhere... hop onto the cart and take off for a place safe for the time.

Of course money-lending is great for building high-level mathematical skills. Farming needed far fewer such skills. For learning in general the knowledge of multiple languages and study texts tends to augment intellectual skills. Judaism has always promoted literacy -- and did so when the surrounding Gentiles were grossly unlearned. Literacy is a huge advantage around the illiterate.

Anti-semitic is one thing. Anti-zionist is quite another. Hillary has long treasured advice from Sidney Blumenthal (see http://nypost.com/2015/10/31/hillary...nthal-matters/ ) and his anti-Zionist son Max Blumenthal see http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/07/20...e-association/ . And of course Hillary's Muslim Pakistani personal assistant and possibly Chief of Staff Huma Abedin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huma_Abedin

Antisemitism has no valid cause. Zionism might have been the ideal solution to the mistreatment of Jews at one time. It is unfortunate that there was no "Jewish Entity" to offer coherent rebuttals to Nazi contentions that Jews were a menace to humanity.

Israel, no more than any country, does not merit unqualified and unaccountable support. Should Israel do wrong, then gentiles have the right to fault Israel. All people must judge the misbehavior of those within their communities however defined. I have seen allegations that Israel appeases ISIS from Shi'ites in Iraq; such would be wrong if it were so. Any nation can go terribly wrong, something possible in the November 2016 elections in the USA.

This is the sort of thing that sets Jews, particularly Orthodox Jews teeth on edge about Hillary and makes them VERY inclined to vote for a Republican opponent. Even if that opponent turns out to be Donald Trump. Yes, this may hurt Hillary in Florida and Ohio and perhaps even in New York and New Jersey. And this is not black propaganda and not something Hillary can easily repudiate either.

Originally Posted by MordecaiK

Arizona strikes me as one of the most tense and conflicted states in the country, perpetually on the edge of tipping Democratic the way California did. Latinos and Native Americans vs Mormons, whites, elderly and Republican refugees from Pete Wilson's California. Which is why Maricopa keeps re-electing Joe Arpaio Sheriff and why Arizona has pushed the envelope on immigrant restriction even when it means having a weaker economy.
I think this goes all the way back to 1912. My hunch is that there was a reason why Arizona split off from New Mexico Territory at statehood and it wasn't just administrative convenience. It probably had a lot to do with NM being majority Hispanic and Catholic at that time and that Arizona was much less that way. Am I right?

What Teach said

Originally Posted by MordecaiK

Arizona strikes me as one of the most tense and conflicted states in the country, perpetually on the edge of tipping Democratic the way California did. Latinos and Native Americans vs Mormons, whites, elderly and Republican refugees from Pete Wilson's California. Which is why Maricopa keeps re-electing Joe Arpaio Sheriff and why Arizona has pushed the envelope on immigrant restriction even when it means having a weaker economy.

For such a Right-leaning state, Arizona has a nearly even split of its House delegation (5R, 4D), which is more D-friendly than Michigan, Ohio, or Pennsylvania. Sheriff Arpaio demonstrates the harsh authoritarianism of the Right -- criminal justice largely as a deterrent as degradation of what the Right considers the dregs of society. But look at how Colorado and New Mexico recently went. Arizona may be drifting Democratic. The Anglo-Hispanic divide is weakening in part due to commonplace intermarriages.

I think this goes all the way back to 1912. My hunch is that there was a reason why Arizona split off from New Mexico Territory at statehood and it wasn't just administrative convenience. It probably had a lot to do with NM being majority Hispanic and Catholic at that time and that Arizona was much less that way. Am I right?

Paradoxically, Arizona and New Mexico had an even harsher split when America was most polarized -- but the boundary between the Union-supporting Territory of New Mexico and the Confederate Territory of Arizona at 34° N instead of at the meridian of 109°  03′ W that has existed since soon after the Civil War. Pro-slavery politicians took over the southern part of the territory and seceded from the United States. The timing of the admission of Arizona as a state was political in nature:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

In 1912, Arizona almost entered the Union as part of New Mexico in a Republican plan to keep control of the U.S. Senate. The plan, while accepted by most in New Mexico, was rejected by most Arizonans. Progressives in Arizona favored inclusion in the state constitution of initiative, referendum, recall, direct election of senators, woman suffrage, and other reforms. Most of these proposals were included in the constitution that was submitted to Congress in 1912. Taft signed the statehood bill on February 14, 1912, and state residents promptly put the provision back in. Hispanics had little voice or power. Only one of the 53 delegates at the constitutional convention was Hispanic, and he refused to sign. In 1912 women gained suffrage (the vote) in the state, eight years before the country as a whole.

Ironically, Arizona's first Congressional representative was a liberal Democrat. New Mexico was then more conservative. Go figure. History can be very complicated.

Originally Posted by marypoza

Well todays the day we find out which states are feeling the Bern, & which states are, well ..... losers, I guess

-- well, looks like only 4 1/2 states felt the Bern. But they were all blue to purple states plus OK (Rags!), so that is a good thing. There are more blue primaries down the road so we'll have to see how this all shakes out. Meanwhile in Mass (the 1/2 state) voters are pissed bcuz Mr Bill apparently showed up @ some precincts with a bullhorn & closed them down so folx couldn't vote. WTF??!!!?? Seriously?? They need to stop this bullshit. They are not endearing themselves to anybody that way.

& FINALLY! I saw 2 Hillary yard signs on my way home from work this AM. This is after seeing all kinds of Bernie stuff all over the city for over.., well since last yr.Those yard signs looked pretty pathetic blowing in the wind too. But hopefully Ohio will be feelng the Bern in another 2 wks

New Mexico is now a blue state, but it needs to get more blue and stay there for a while to get the benefits, like other blue states get. As long as it continues to elect Republican governors, that will be a slow process. Even CA was electing Republican governors for a while after it turned blue in 1992. It still has some scars from its heritage as a borderline red state and the days of Ronald Reagan.

Originally Posted by marypoza

-- well, looks like only 4 1/2 states felt the Bern. But they were all blue to purple states plus OK (Rags!), so that is a good thing. There are more blue primaries down the road so we'll have to see how this all shakes out. Meanwhile in Mass (the 1/2 state) voters are pissed bcuz Mr Bill apparently showed up @ some precincts with a bullhorn & closed them down so folx couldn't vote. WTF??!!!?? Seriously?? They need to stop this bullshit. They are not endearing themselves to anybody that way.

& FINALLY! I saw 2 Hillary yard signs on my way home from work this AM. This is after seeing all kinds of Bernie stuff all over the city for over.., well since last yr.Those yard signs looked pretty pathetic blowing in the wind too. But hopefully Ohio will be feeling the Bern in another 2 wks

Bernie and his supporters will need to fan the flames. He'll need to overcome deficits in the polls in the states he needs, and he'll need to win them not just almost win them.

Originally Posted by marypoza

These are 4 u Rags:



http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3239/1084/original.jpg


http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/media...0/original.jpg

Ty. Oklahoma felt the bern.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Bernie and his supporters will need to fan the flames. He'll need to overcome deficits in the polls in the states he needs, and he'll need to win them not just almost win them.

-- I meant to point out in my analysis that in the states Bernie has won (not merely tied) he has pulled around 60% of the vote give or take, which is around what I was looking for when I asked in my OP if he can turn his crowds into votes, as well as online votes into real votes. Keep in mind that underage kids can vote in online polls & that in some of those polls you can vote more than once, so I'm not expecting 80+% landslides @ the ballot box. But if he can keep averaging a 60% pull in the right states ( tho we'll take the red states too!) then yeah, he should be able to pull this off

Yeah Rags I saw Oklahoma felt the Bern !!

Originally Posted by marypoza

-- I meant to point out in my analysis that in the states Bernie has won (not merely tied) he has pulled around 60% of the vote give or take, which is around what I was looking for when I asked in my OP if he can turn his crowds into votes, as well as online votes into real votes. Keep in mind that underage kids can vote in online polls & that in some of those polls you can vote more than once, so I'm not expecting 80+% landslides @ the ballot box. But if he can keep averaging a 60% pull in the right states ( tho we'll take the red states too!) then yeah, he should be able to pull this off

Yeah Rags I saw Oklahoma felt the Bern !!

Here in CA it might be interesting. Anecdotally I am seeing a good amount of support for Sanders. In many ways California's leftist segment of polity mimics certain states in the NE especially the ones that have a substantial population of well educated leftists who earn higher-than-median.