SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Fine print: The following are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Journal by fustakrakich
You know who is the only person on the list that has a chance, right? This has nothing to do with opinion, mine or yours.
But we do know now that Hillary doesn't need to run, so no need to bring her up anymore. Even a bunch (over 20%) of Bernie supporters will go for it
It's probably the only peaceable way out of this
We have to face facts, put all the bullshit aside
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 67 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
(1)
Dying is one of the few things that can be done as easily lying down.
-- Woody Allen
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 22 2020, @08:14PM (1 child)
No thanks.
Funny how you rail against the establishment and then promote bought and paid for propaganda. #SAD
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 22 2020, @08:46PM
Really, man! Damn Russkies! [moonofalabama.org]
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 22 2020, @09:03PM (23 children)
If so, he's not getting a good deal. Your trolling is weak.
The article doesn't say what you think it says. Bloomberg is very far from a sure thing to win the nomination, despite the DNC changing the debate rules. And, as the article noted, he's a bigger threat to more moderate candidates. The nomination may well come down to a centrist (Sanders) versus a Republican (Bloomberg).
Stop meddling in our election, Ivan.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Saturday February 22 2020, @10:19PM (6 children)
Bloomberg would have had more of a chance if he had stayed out of the debates entirely. You can play "Who Said It" for the following quotes: Trump or Bloomberg:
All Bloomberg.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 22 2020, @10:32PM (2 children)
Looks qualified to run against Trump. I will be supporting Bloomberg now.
(Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @02:25AM (1 child)
I know! Some of those are funny!
Sports without balls...
Fuckin' great!
I'm missing the old days when Good Time Charlie Wilson from Texas said about the beautiful girls he'd hire, "You can teach 'em to type, but you can't teach 'em to grow tits."
Of course now, with modern surgery, you can do anything, right, barb?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @04:17AM
Transgender History: Trans Expression in Ancient Times [lgbtqnation.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 22 2020, @10:56PM (2 children)
Wait, Warren's entire diatribe this week about H-FL was about an irreverant joke about Princess Anne and Duchess Sarah?
Heaven forbid a yank tell a joke about the royals.
C'mon, are women really triggered by Warren's call to arms? Her baiting of Bernie and Bloomie would be enough to make me vote Klobuchar ahead of her.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @12:04AM
Not only that, but the only evidence he said it was the author of the booklet that contains the quote claims he said it. But whether or not he actually did say it, I'll leave it to the reader to determine if said quote about a member of the royal family makes him "a billionaire who calls women [...] ‘horse-faced lesbians," in the sense she was implying and her audience would have understood it.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @03:19PM
Warren was neck to neck with Bernie and even pulling ahead in many polls. Then she went full identity politics and mudslinging. Now she's, at best, a sideshow act.
Moral of the story - what idiots in DC think works and what actually work are not the same thing. Identity politics and political correctness is cheap and easy. It's also god damned annoying.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday February 23 2020, @05:57AM (15 children)
:-) None of you understand. No matter what happens at the DNC convention, Bloomberg will be on the ballot [npr.org]. The race will be between Trump and Bloomberg. There is only one choice for the never-trumpers.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @06:35AM (1 child)
What the hell are you on about? Your link is to a 2006 NPR article about Joe Lieberman.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday February 23 2020, @07:27AM
Yes, that campaign is how the DNC will play this one if Sanders wins the nomination. They will help Bloomberg on an "independent" ticket to actually win it like Lieberman won his race, or just let Trump have it, win-win for the DNC/GOP.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday February 23 2020, @06:48AM (10 children)
And I don't think Bloomberg is going to weather the storm that well either. As Mayor of New York, he was responsible for some pretty blatantly racist law enforcement policies. That's going to turn off a significant fraction of black or Hispanic voters. Sanders may be just another old, white guy, but his odds are better with those ethnic groups. Bloomberg's negatives are only starting to get well-known outside of New York City. Right now, he's running on not being part of the crowd. Once he is part of the crowd, he loses that mystique.
And he's another obnoxious New Yorker. We already have enough of those running for president.
My stab at a prediction is that Sanders has about a third chance to get a majority outright and render this entire discussion irrelevant. There's a somewhat lesser chance that Sander flops big in some way, say his past catches up with him or he inserts his foot into his mouth in an epic way. I put that much smaller, say 10%, given that he's managed to survive a presidential run before without the wheels coming off. The remainder is that he goes in with the plurality vote and just needs a few defectors from the superdelegates to secure the win. At that point, do Bloomberg and the elites have enough political capital to sell to swing the vote? Would the elites even try? Seriously, if Bloomberg goes into the convention with a huge string of second place finishes, then he's demonstrated that he's not the answer to Trump. It's not that big a deal to them, if Sanders runs against Trump. Sanders wins, they probably can get him to play ball. Sanders loses and they're setting up well for the 2024 election.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday February 23 2020, @07:35AM (9 children)
Bloomberg's negatives will not stop him from running third party. Winning outright is not the aim here. He just wants to stop Sanders, and he will. And he might have sufficient pull on both sides to pull off a total win. I can see a lot of republicans running his way in the general. Bloomberg has the democrat party by the balls. It's pretty much over.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday February 23 2020, @03:52PM (8 children)
So what? It's all fun and games till the money runs out.
Unless, of course, he fails in that alleged intent.
Which both sides would that be? He already is running low among Democrats. And I think things like his war on the Big Gulp won't endear him to Republicans either.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday February 23 2020, @06:25PM (7 children)
Money runs out? Bloomberg? How clueless can you be?! There's not even a response for the rest of your post.
money runs out... Oh brother! Do you get a volume discount on all the bridges you buy?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @09:17PM (6 children)
Bloomberg's net worth is around $62 billion. [wikipedia.org] He has already spent more than $450 million on advertising for his Presidential campaign. [npr.org] So, yeah, his money supply while quite considerable is not infinite.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday February 24 2020, @12:14AM (5 children)
*sigh* It won't take 62 billion dollars to keep Sanders from winning the presidency.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 24 2020, @12:20AM (1 child)
Says you. But remember that there around 90 million of us who also have a say in this.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 24 2020, @01:01AM
History is not on your side. 95% of you will just keep voting for the same old shit, and there will be another four years of Presidente
Booosh, er, Troompa(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday February 24 2020, @02:29AM (2 children)
But is Bloomberg willing to spend what it will take?
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday February 24 2020, @02:35AM (1 child)
Of course. Why not? It won't take nearly what you think it will. It's in the bag. Sanders is done for. That's all he cares about.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday February 24 2020, @04:59AM
We'll see.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @07:27AM (1 child)
With the primary case being the fustulicrack his own ignoramous self. You are not even wrong, since you are not even in the ballpark. . . . . .. . .
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @07:51AM
*sigh* Yes, Ari...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 22 2020, @10:13PM (1 child)
It's pretty obvious that the election would be divisive. We should cancel it so that the nation can heal. Trump needs more time anyway.
Since an election costs about $2 billion, we will probably save about $10 billion this way.
Pence can take over after Trump goes to Heaven, and then we can think about starting elections again.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 22 2020, @10:26PM
A certain virus could get the election cancelled.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday February 22 2020, @10:40PM (8 children)
I have enough evidence to the contrary to keep you busy viewing it for the rest of your life.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Saturday February 22 2020, @10:56PM (7 children)
You think somebody else can win?
Don't hold out on me, man!
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday February 23 2020, @12:54AM (6 children)
No, I think human beings are amazingly adept at ignoring facts and clinging to bullshit, even in the face of overwhelming pressure to the contrary.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @01:01AM (5 children)
And if anyone is an expert at ignoring facts and clinging to bullshit (even in the face of overwhelming pressure to the contrary), it's the Buzzard.
(Score: 2, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday February 23 2020, @03:13AM (4 children)
Nobody ever tell you that when you point a finger at someone you're pointing three back at yourself?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @03:17AM (1 child)
Not to my face, no. Why do you ask?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday February 23 2020, @02:58PM
Valuable information I thought I'd share since you might have missed out on it.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @07:05PM (1 child)
You just might go down in history as the wisest moron ever. Would make for a good coffee table book, the tales of Buzzard, wise advice paired with examples of not following said advice. Needs a snappier title though, The Irony of Avian Wisdom? Do As I Say Not As I Do: Advice from a Hypocrite? The Lying Bird Becomes The Worm? Invertebrate Irony and You?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday February 24 2020, @12:29PM
I want a 20% cut of the net or it's getting denounced and debunked.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 22 2020, @11:15PM (3 children)
Germany: After the massacre in Hanau
Stop the right-wing terror in Germany! [wsws.org]
Tens of thousands protest all over Germany against right-wing terror [wsws.org]
Why did Princeton University provide funding for the German right-wing extremist Jörg Baberowski? [wsws.org]
Canada:
Two hundred thousand Canadian teachers strike, as global worker counter-offensive continues [wsws.org]
Canadian PM proclaims indigenous “barricades must now come down” [wsws.org]
USA:
Demonstrations throughout California in support of wildcat strike by UC-Santa Cruz graduate teaching assistants [wsws.org]
UC Santa Cruz graduate students defy administration ultimatum, vote to continue strike [wsws.org]
UK:
UCU strikes: solidarity with striking lecturers [socialist.net]
Tens of thousands of UK university staff begin 14 days of strikes [wsws.org]
World:
Workers Struggles: Asia and Australia [wsws.org]
Workers Struggles: Europe, Middle East & Africa [wsws.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 22 2020, @11:41PM (2 children)
You forgot Poland, marking the beginning of World War 2, and of the downfall of the "Evil Empire". Look at what happened to them, becoming a right wing shit-hole country. They kinda started the precedent on the Continent. Why does Poland have so much influence? Why are we still fighting that war? When did world war ever end?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @01:03AM (1 child)
Poland is a democracy of 40 million people. The people voted to have the government they wanted; many of them remember the leftist dictatorship by the grace of Russia. Having a choice is something they value, and they could care less what the influenced mainstream media in Western Europe thinks of them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @02:59AM
Workers Party Needed to Fight for Socialist Feminism [internationalsocialist.net]
The resurgence of the class struggle in Poland [wsws.org]
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @12:26AM (18 children)
Considering that the link is to an article about Bloomberg, I gather that you think he is the only one with a chance to win. Frankly, I find it a bit odd that you would claim him as your presumptive champion, considering that (A) he got rather severely drubbed by Sen. Warren (and really just about everyone else, actually) in his first debate the other night and (B) he has yet to appear on a ballot in any primary election. Yes, it's true. Not in Iowa. Not in New Hampshire. Not even in today's caucus in Nevada. He has yet to be tested in an actual primary election. Given that, it seems rather presumptuous to declare him as the only viable candidate for the general election until he is actually tested in an election.
Well, the opinions that actually count are those of us who are registered voters here in the USA. Which leads me to my first set of questions. I have seen some suggestions that you aren't a voter here in the USA. Could you please clarify? Are you a registered voter here in the USA? Are you even a citizen of the USA? If not, what country are you a citizen of? Also, if you are not a US citizen, what is your interest in our Presidential election?
Quite. So why are you bringing her into the discussion? What is your point?
Peaceable. Interesting. What exactly are you suggesting here? Do you not believe in the democratic process? You know, everybody gets to vote and then we try, as best as we can, to close ranks around those who win the election? Please clarify.
Now, please don't mod me as "Funny" but lately I have noticed you giving off all the signs of being a foreign operative. Which leads to my next set of questions, and I hope you will give us serious answers to them.
(1) Are you now, or have you ever in the past, or do you ever in the future anticipate getting compensation (financial or otherwise) from a foreign government for participating in discussions here on SN or any other online forum?
(2) Are you now, or have you ever been in the past, a member of or affiliated with a foreign political entity?
(3) Are you now, or have you ever been in the past, in the employ of a foreign government? If so, which one(s)?
I hope you take my questions seriously, as they deserve. Don't get me wrong. You are welcome to have an opinion on our elections. Lots of people do. In fact, I see at least one or two participating in the discussions about US politics on SN who are foreign nationals but they have typically been quite transparent about their foreign citizenship and their motives; you, by contrast, have been far more ambiguous. And for someone who apparently is not a voter in the USA you seem to have an inordinate interest in the outcome of our elections. The amount of energy you exert in trying to influence this election seems out of proportion to your personal stake in it. So, what is your angle on this election? The reason why I am asking is to judge whether your comments should be taken as propaganda or as the comments of an interested foreign observer. Whichever way you answer will dictate how I should respond (or not) to your comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @01:27AM (8 children)
Because that is who you are going to be voting for in 9 months. If she keeps feeling the "urge" that is. Literally the only thing that would stop you from voting for her is if she decides not to run.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @02:01AM
*Smirk* Dream on. While I did vote for her in 2016, I have no intention of doing so again in 2020. I will go third party before I choose her on the ballot this time around..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @04:44AM (6 children)
You're buggin'!
I hate to break it to you, but it's *way* too late for new folks to get into the Democratic primaries. Filing deadlines for state primaries/caucuses have all passed except for those in Montana (9 March 2020), Nebraska (12 March 2020), New Mexico (30 March 2020) and Oregon (10 March 2020) (Source: https://ballotpedia.org/Ballot_access_for_presidential_candidates). [ballotpedia.org]
The four states where the deadline for inclusion on the primary ballot has not already passed have a total of 178 delegates combined, out of a total of 4,750 delegates. As such, if *anyone* attempted to file in those four states, the most delegates they could receive (assuming they *win* all the delegates in all four states) is 178+all 771 "superdelegates" (source: https://ballotpedia.org/Democratic_delegate_rules,_2020). [ballotpedia.org] Which would be absurd in the extreme.
But just for giggles let's posit that a candidate could sweep Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico and Oregon *and* get support from all 771 "superdelegates." That's a total of 949 delegates, or ~20% of the total delegates. Which wouldn't be nearly enough to get the nomination.
And, since sweeping all four states *and* getting *all* the superdelegates is an outcome so unlikely as to be absurd, there's no way that anyone could enter the campaign for Democratic presidential nominee at this late date and have *any* chance to succeed.
So. You're talking out of your ass and it smells that way too. Damn, that stinks!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @06:45AM (5 children)
To be fair to fustakrakich, I think what he is suggesting is that she might win a brokered deal in a contested convention. The big problem with that analysis is that Hillary lost to Trump in 2016; she has the putrid smell of loser all over her. I doubt there would be all that many delegates who want to see a repeat of 2016.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday February 23 2020, @07:58AM (4 children)
The DNC prefers Trump to Sanders. Hillary remains in the background. Bloomberg is handling it. All the arrangements have been made.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @08:32AM (2 children)
"Bloomberg is handling it."
The last I saw of Bloomberg, he face-planted at the debate in Nevada. You're delusional.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday February 23 2020, @06:33PM (1 child)
Yes, yes, we all enjoy the theater... but, please... watch what happens at the convention. This act has been done before with great success. It already is a Trump/Bloomberg race with a lot of background noise from the cheap seats. One of those two will win.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @09:24PM
OK, folks! You saw it here first! I'm sure it will be fun to force feed fustakrakich crow (or would that be buzzard?) come July. Right, guys?
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @05:46PM
Is it painful to talk out of your ass so much? Or are you just so used to it now that it doesn't bother you at all?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @04:49AM
I'm sorry other AC, but you're way to concerned about Fusty.
It doesn't really matter where he is, as he's shown himself to have the political ideas of a nine year-old time and again.
If someone is actually paying him to sway *anyone*, they're wasting their money.
He's either an idiot or a (low quality) shill/troll. Which is crystal clear to anyone who has read the blather he spews.
That you take him seriously in any respect is unfortunate.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday February 23 2020, @06:09AM (4 children)
I just posted above that Bloomberg will be on the ballot no matter what. Read the link, or anything else about Ned Lamont's 2006 senate campaign to understand how it will work out here. Only Bloomberg has the bipartisan draw to replace Trump. Loosen up on the pearls, it's just math.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @07:01AM
"Only Bloomberg has the bipartisan draw to replace Trump."
Considering that he has yet to appear on a primary ballot, much less actually win *anything*, don't you think your claim is a bit premature?
"it's just math."
Actually, at this point it's just (your) speculation. Just sayin'.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @07:36AM (2 children)
Because you are an idiot. An asshole racist misogynist billionaire, because that is what the Republican Party has become? Bloomy is not even a Reality TV Show SuperStar like the Donald! He only has some Guiliani type "arrest all the minorities" stuff going on. What about Steyer? Or Gates? Or the Hathaway-Berkshire guy? We really need more billionaires, except for that one question: "If you are so rich, why are you not smart?". Bloomberg will not be on the ballot, rich enough, but not smart enough. These are Democrats we are talking about here, not uneducated redneck hillbilly junkers like Runaway, or VLM, or TMB.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @07:34PM
Hey! None of those mental slurs, "differently educated" please.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday February 24 2020, @01:23AM
Bloomberg will not be on the ballot
:-) If Sanders, or Warren even, wins the nomination, he most certainly will be on the ballot, just not as a democrat.
Why do you people have such difficultly understanding this?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday February 24 2020, @03:34AM (2 children)
He's long been a big booster of the Russian machine.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday February 24 2020, @03:56AM (1 child)
:-) You forgot your sarcasm tag
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday February 24 2020, @04:57AM
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Sunday February 23 2020, @12:04PM (6 children)
My opinion goes like this (i'm guessing this is what you also are saying?):
From the article in your spoiler: "Bloomberg entered the race much later than other candidates, and there's a widespread belief he did so to prevent Sanders, who is currently the frontrunner, from winning the 2020 Democratic nomination. "
They could not run Hillary again...too much stink on her, and their guy Biden is going down like a prostitute, so they brought in someone who could buy the election (out-spend opponents on EVERYTHING) because they CAN'T LET SANDERS WIN (or Hillary doesn't want it anyways and it seems she owns the DNC).
BUT, if Sanders does win because WE THE PEOPLE want it, then run Bloomberg independently and let him win THIS way.
If i were Sanders, i'd be wearing a bullet proof vest, because 2nd Amendmenting him is the easy way out and easy way to get Bloomberg on top.
I don't think Bloomberg can win against Sanders, so.... pull a "Johnson does Dallas" against him?
(The 'take out Sanders' part is mine).
It'll be interesting that if Sanders should win, how fast will Hillary's DNC run to support HIM?
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday February 23 2020, @04:05PM
As fast as they can waddle, no doubt.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @04:19PM (2 children)
I find it chilling that you are contemplating assassinating Sanders to get your way in an election. Has FBI or Secret Service contacted you yet?
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Sunday February 23 2020, @09:15PM (1 child)
Hmmmm...I pushed Sanders over Hillary in the last election; why would I try to assassinate him now?
I'm worried someone WILL try it.
Hillary and the DNC do NOT want Sanders and are pushing Bloomberg to try and stop him now that Biden has failed...I'm worried that when Bloomberg fails to stop him they will resort to OTHER means.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 23 2020, @10:08PM
Not sure that'll happen. Is sooo 1960s (RIP MLK and Malcolm X too). We'll just get to see the MSM go "Trump! Trump! Trump!"
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday February 24 2020, @12:49AM (1 child)
Yes, it's extremely simple, Bloomberg is only there to prevent a possible Sanders presidency, whether it's on his own or as a favor to a friend is unimportant, doesn't matter to him or the DNC if Trump wins again. If Sanders does win the nomination, Bloomberg will go "third party". It's a *never Sanders* thing. With Bloomberg to cover the bases, Hillary can slip back into the background for the most part. She doesn't need to run now. The intended spoiler is in place. There will be no "President Sanders".
This act played itself out in 2006 when Ned Lamont defeated Joe Lieberman in the democratic primary for the US senate seat. Lieberman went "indie", and with bipartisan support from the leadership, won the election. Bloomberg is the only one with similar support that could possibly beat Trump. There are a lot of republicans that will vote for him.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday February 24 2020, @01:00AM
Interesting!....
...so, who cares what WE THE PEOPLE may want so long as WE THE RICH can get it their way. Hmmm.... they're not interested in beating Trump with ANYONE, only #NeverSanders.
Sad, really. If it happens, here's hoping that enough people are smart enough to go for Sanders anyways...or Sanders breaks off and goes 'Indie-rogue'...
Hmmm.... not gonna make any popcorn yet, but twill get velly intelesting in time.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---