SHARE
Get off our TV.

Jill Stein is this nutbag lady who ran for president in 2016 as an uber-liberal Green Party person who knew Hillary Clinton would be just as bad as Donald Trump, because of how they were the EXACT SAME. In Michigan and Wisconsin, two of the Rust Belt states where Trump surprisingly beat Hillary and thus sealed his weak “win,” Jill Stein got more votes than the difference between Trump and Hillary, so go fuck yourself, Dr. Stein. Also, the Senate Judiciary Committee wants to see documents about Trump campaign communications regarding Stein as part of the Russia investigation, because ?????????

We don’t know if she committed Trump-Russia conspiracy crimes, but we wouldn’t be surprised. Hey remember that time Stein eated dinner with Vladimir Putin and Michael Flynn in Moscow, because #NoReason?

Based on all this, obviously we need to hear Stein’s very important opinion on the matters of the day. Did you see how North Korea tested that missile? Did you see how Congress shoved some Russian sanctions up Dear Leader Trump’s ass? Jill Stein knows what is up with these things.

So it was that on Sunday, as yr Wonkette was putzing around the house, we suddenly almost threw a brick through our very nice TV screen when we saw that MSNBC had brought Stein on for Sharing Time. How many stupid things did she say in two minutes? Oh, it’s breathtaking:

Weep for the North Korean government, for they are frightened and forlorn!

 

[South Korea has] lived under the threat of war for decades now, they’re really tired of it. They would like to move ahead by negotiating a peace treaty, and, you know, the demonization of North Korea is part of the run-up to regime change. We saw it in Iraq, we saw it in Libya, it’s part of demonizing a government that we then want to exercise regime change on, and then what do we get? You know, look at our track record here, it’s not so good.

So we’re supporting the South Korean people who are actually living with this problem, and they are very committed to a solution.

MSNBC lady helpfully pointed out that while that might be the case, North Korea is the one testing nuclear missiles right now. Stein replied:

But remember where that came from! Long before they began their missile tests, the U.S. was conducting nuclear bombing runs against North Korea. We actually had nuclear weapons until the end of the Cold War, we actually had nuclear weapons stationed in South Korea. So this is very frightening to them! They’ve been basically cornered into feeling like they have to develop a nuclear weapon.

POOR NORTH KOREA.

Weep for Russia, because sanctions are SO UNFAIR BRO and besides, prove to Jill Stein that her pals in Moscow meddled in the election, SPOILER YOU CAN’T, even though you are 17 United States intelligence agencies who all agree with each other, whereas Jill Stein is some asshole who ain’t know shit.

Does Stein think Trump should sign that sanctions bill that 948% of Congress voted for, minus Bernie Sanders, Rand Paul and a handful of twats in the House? OF COURSE NOT:

Uh, no I don’t? And I don’t think Congress should have passed it, because the sanctions basically play right into Russia’s hand. We know that sanctions only strengthen a leader and, like Putin, and, um, make him sort of the protector against the evil United States? And when you look at what’s actually going on here, you know, sanctions are not the solution to protecting our election system!

First of all the evidence is not definitive, it’s circumstantial that it’s the Russians …

YUM YUM DINNER

… but in any case, we know that lots of people are waiting to walk through the very open door of the U.S. election system.

Like Trump’s 400-pound hacker in New Jersey?

We need to start protecting our elections through proper cyber security practices, and by using paper ballots that can’t be hacked.

Cosign on the paper ballots and the cyber security.

Otherwise, get bent, Jill Stein.

Wonkette salaries are fully funded by lovely folks like you! If you love us, click below to pay our salaries!

$
Donate with CCDonate with CC
  • Skwerl the Taco Hunter
    • Old Man Yells at Cloud

      Has an MD degree from Harvard.
      Sides with Anti-Vaxer morons.

    • MynameisBlarney

      Well, and here I thought they called it The Green Party for other reasons.

    • (((fka_donnie_d)))

      Sounds like a certain Men’s Rights Guru named Elam.

  • Skwerl the Taco Hunter
    • armed_bears

      Sentiment is right on target. Too nice a painting, though.

    • Old Man Yells at Cloud

      No, in the real world sometimes the best you can do is to kick the can down the road to prevent losing ground.

    • Creepoman

      “So head balls-out for the greater evil?” WTF is she trying to say?

  • The Wanderer
  • Dr. Rrrrrobotnik

    And then there’s *this* asshole. Oh, btw:

    “We actually had nuclear weapons until the end of the Cold War, we actually had nuclear weapons stationed in South Korea. So this is very frightening to them! They’ve been basically cornered into feeling like they have to develop a nuclear weapon.”

    We withdrew our nukes from South Korea in 1991, so either North Korea has a very long, retroactive memory or you, Jill Stein, are an idiot.

    • Professor Fate

      Both could be true -yes. At least I’m sure that the North Korean Gov has been very sparring in letting their citizens know we took the nukes out.

      • Dr. Rrrrrobotnik

        I’m sure, and it’s not like South Korea isn’t under our nuclear umbrella: as Trump idiotically blabbed, we have boomers off of North Korea at all times. But claiming that North Korea is acting rationally is an insanely useful-idiot statement.

        • Professor Fate

          well one could make a case they are acting rationally by their own lights. keeping the US blustering is a way to distract attention from the hideous living conditions the common folk are suffering under. What I mean is you can see their reasons for doing things without actually endorsing their actions which are, considering the clown show in DC very dangerous as each side’s bluster could lead to things getting out of control.

  • Ducksworthy

    FSB always has Plan B.

  • Bananas Foster

    Stein and Nader’s love child will someday rule the world.

    Or at least cock block the returning savior who is “just as bad” as the anti Christ.

    • Cock Blockula

      If there’s a cock that needs blocking, I’m on it!

  • shivaskeeper

    Evan, you poor soul. I thought you were done having to cover her. My condolences to you for this.

    Also, too, fuck her. Fucking moron.

    • Covfefe

      Shiva — she’s yours.

      • shivaskeeper

        Nope. Not on a bet.

        • Covfefe

          I double dog dare you.

          • shivaskeeper

            Nope.

    • armed_bears

      Grotesque. Former altar boy talkin’ here, and I don’t think womenz had much to do with it.

    • MynameisBlarney

      Why is anyone in their right minds still willing to be part of that pedo-cult?

    • Antonin Dvorak

      Cardinal Raymond Burke, the rampant crisis of pedophile priests was brought on by women who “feminized” the church and discouraged “manly” men from participating in clerical life.

      Misogyny and homophobia is one sentence. I’ll give him this, he is efficient.

      • Creepoman

        If only he could have worked in an “uppity” or “shiftless” in there, I would have hit my wingnut Bingo.

      • rues

        And, ya’ know, remind me again how many womenz hold positions of authority in the catholic church? FFS, this is really something that just *cannot* be women’s fault.

    • Spotts1701, Nothingburger Chef

      Burke’s agenda is to de-legitimize the current Papal structure. He’s still mad he got sidelined and booted to essentially ceremonial positions when Francis came along.

    • jesterpunk

      So nice to see him take some “personal responsibility” for the problem.

    • NastyBossetti

      Well, as everyone knows, women are the root cause of sin and evil in the world, period. So this only makes sense.

      • Covfefe

        Well. I went to Catholic school. According to the nuns, little boys are the root cause of sin and evil in the world. Took me forty years to outgrow that message.

        • NastyBossetti

          Weird. I went to Catholic school, too. I never got that message, but I wasn’t a boy. I got the messages about how my body itself was sinful and needed to be covered up, lest I lead someone else into sin, which makes me bad.

          • nightmoth

            Jesus—that’s the message home-schooled Baptist kids learn. They also learn sex is only for married heterosexuals and birth control is a sin. But they hate Catholics. Weird, huh?

          • NastyBossetti

            It is weird. The messaging was a bit more subtle than I laid out, but we understood. I’m lucky, though, in that I didn’t really internalize that stuff. I took away what was useful to me – like the parts about helping other people and trying not to judge – and left everything else behind.

        • FlownΩver

          Over in the government school we were envious of the Catholic kids who got November 1 off. Otherwise they were pretty much same same.

  • beatbort

    She lost me at saying the Russian election hacking was “circumstantial”.
    I hope Mueller has some shit on her. That would be so sweet.

    • MynameisBlarney

      Oh, I’m bettin’ he’s got yuuuuge pikes of dirt on everyone at that table.

  • Proud Liberal

    Apparently, she and Bernie are Russian sympathizers. We shouldn’t retaliate against Russia for hacking our election? Wow.

  • A moment of silence for the complex and profound Sam Shepard.

    Ok, carry on.

    • calliecallie

      Noooo!!! That makes me sad.

      • He was one of a kind, no doubt. A pain in the ass genius, the best kind.

  • Manhattan123

    The only things more insufferable than Stein and Sanders are their supporters. Especially the ones who comment on message boards.
    3..2..1…

    • msanthropesmr

      HILLARY EMAIL SHILL PAY FOR PLAY POOP!!@!#

    • Dr. Rrrrrobotnik

      CORRUPTION AND EMAILZ

      • msanthropesmr

        POOOP

    • notanncoulter

      benghaz!!!!1!!!
      v!nC3 f0$t3R!!!11!
      wH!t3W@t3R!!!1!!!!

    • Tio_Doidinho

      CIA DEEP STATE FASCIST NEOLIBRUL HILLARYZ EMAILS!!1!

    • Marceline

      BERNIE MARCHED WITH MLK11!!!!

    • JMP

      DROOOOONES!
      ACA NOT SOCIALIZED MEDICINE THEREFORE NO GOOD!
      SPEECHES AT COMPANIES!!!
      IDENTITY POLITICS BAD REAL LEFTISTS FINE WITH DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN, MINORITIES AND LGBT PEOPLE BECAUSE CLASS ONLY THING THAT MATTERS!!!!

    • Spermy_the_Cat

      RON PAUL 2020

  • Indiepalin

    I dread being the person behind Jill Stein at Target Customer Service.

    • Anna Rompage

      Stein reminds me more of a wal mart & dollar general shopper

    • jesterpunk

      Will she even go into target? They have wifi in the stores.

    • OneYieldRegular

      “Is this iPhone 7 case LEED certified? Can you please check?”

      • CountryClubJihadi

        I just had to buy my insane boss and her entire family these PONG cases to protect them from radiation. http://www.pongcase.com

    • Catstro

      She’s only a couple spritzes of hairspray away from an “I want to speak to the manager” haircut.

    • MynameisBlarney

      Tofu farts?

  • Bub, the cynical zombie

    I remember a simpler time. A happier time. A time when I had absolutely no idea who the fuck Jill Stein was.

    I miss those days.

    • Stranded Devonian Lungfish

      Alas, as a voter in Massachusetts, I have pretty much always been aware of Jill Stein. And every 4 years I have been forced to remember how much I loathe her. 2016 was the worst, of course.

  • Lance Thrustwell

    Jill Stein is the sort of tough, pragmatic leader we need in these troubled times.

    • Jeff Ackerman

      Hopefully Trump will se that he needs her impeccable logic and broad vision and puts her on the “A” Team he has assembled to advise him.

      • FlownΩver

        Seems a natural fit at CDC in Trumpvania “We don’ have to show you no stinkin’ science.” Or maybe DNI if Coates should become as skeletal as he tends to look.

  • Ducksworthy

    “Frequently individuals who go along a treasonous path do not even
    realize they are on that path until it gets to be a bit too late,” John Brennan.This sometimes happens to very stoopid people.

  • Spotts1701, Nothingburger Chef

    It takes two to negotiate a peace treaty, Jill. And the North Korean government’s position that the entire peninsula is theirs is a bit of a deal-breaker with the South.

  • therblig

    MSNBC lady helpfully pointed out that while that might be the case, North Korea is the one testing nuclear missiles right now.”

    why didn’t MSNBC booking person helpfully point out that no one gives fuck about what jill stein has to say about anything?

  • Marceline

    A story about Nancy Pelosi followed by one on Jill Stein? Ugh. This site is going to be inundated by alt left idiots.

  • schmannity

    I had no idea Jill Stein had a fondness for Russian pee. Wonkette is so educational.

    • Tio_Doidinho

      Must be organic and local source, obvs.

    • P’jama Pahnts

      Hey, maybe she was the one wh…nevermind

  • Good_Gawd_Yall

    That’s it: I’m calling for IQ tests to be made mandatory before any candidate can run for any public office anywhere. And the score must be in the triple digits. PERIOD.

  • msanthropesmr

    Hey SHY!
    We need the
    Stein
    Nader
    Andersen
    T-Shirt idea that I had before the election
    STAT

  • beatbort

    What are Vlad, Jill and the other toadies gazing so fixedly on in that photograph?
    The ceremonial sacrifice of a Chechen before the Baked Alaska is served?

    • susan_g

      They were watching their souls leave the room.

  • Bub, the cynical zombie

    I suggest sending Jill Stein to Pyongyang on a personal diplomatic mission to help ease tensions and negotiate an end to the current crisis. I also support letting them keep her.

    • msanthropesmr

      Very close to violating rules for radicals.

    • With Dennis Rodman.

      • Bub, the cynical zombie

        Get them both rooms in that huge hotel they built.

  • calliecallie

    I can only hope that somehow Jill Stein gets sucked up into Mueller’s investigations. That would be nice.

    • msanthropesmr

      I think it would be nice if she were sucked up by aliens.

      • The Wanderer

        Why are you being so mean to the poor aliens?

  • spangled

    bitch, please give me back the $11 i gave to your recount in a fit of desperation/depression. i know you only spent it on healing crystals.

  • Fucko Jillsy cashes Rusky/NK checks, which sure beats the 9 to 5 work she’s spent her life assiduously avoiding.

    Get a fuckin job, you two-bit unemployable hippie leach. I hear your local farmer’s market needs a goat and avocado inspector… apply NOW, Fucko.

    • Dr. Rrrrrobotnik

      Hey, all those silvery shawls aren’t cheap.

  • alwayspunkindrublic

    Maybe Jill can head to North Korea with some juice boxes, blankies, and participation trophies. If she can find her way there without getting lost.

    • Ducksworthy

      And wind up in Cincinnati again?

    • ariel_gee_398

      Not unless she takes Susan Sarandon, too.

      • alwayspunkindrublic

        I wonder if they vaccinate in North Korea?

  • Does Dr Stein suffer from premature gay hair?
    https://media1.giphy.com/media/26DOJwj9M4npUa54A/giphy.gif

  • Good_Gawd_Yall

    I hate her.
    That’s really all I got.

  • Ducksworthy

    I don’t know but I suspect Jill is a fascist plant to discredit whats left of The Left in Amurikka.

  • notanncoulter

    shut up
    shut up
    shut up
    shut up
    shut up
    shut up
    shut up
    shut up
    shut up
    shut up
    shut up
    shut up

  • P’jama Pahnts

    Throwing bricks through LED-screened TVs is far less satisfying than it was back in the tube-screen days.

  • DoILookAmused2u? Résistance☨

    I find my hacking skills are thwarted by even the weakest paper ballot cyber security.

    Also too, expert infosec folks have confided to me that they share a similar ignorance about how to exploit cellulose more generally.

  • OneYieldRegular

    I know a Jill Stein supporter who, when the topic turned to North Korea, said that for all we know North Korea is a paradise, and that all of the supposed evils the country’s leaders practiced were probably just “American propaganda.” When called on that comment, the Stein supporter replied, “Well anyway, America does worse.”

    • DoILookAmused2u? Résistance☨

      Can we crowdfund their relocation to DPRK paradise?

    • Spotts1701, Nothingburger Chef

      *blinks*
      America does worse than shooting people with artillery pieces?

    • Lance Thrustwell

      That would be one of those “blame America first” liberals that conservatives are always raging against. Yuck.

    • BreakingDeadMen

      Your friend should be strapped into the Clockwork Orange machine and made to watch oral testimonies from N. Korean defectors.

    • The Wanderer

      People have, in fact, slipped across the border from China and have taken videos of what life is like when you look beyond the happy, shiny things. It’s fucking wretched.

    • OrG

      USAmerica has done plenty of bad shit. There’s no reason to make shit up.

      • Covfefe

        I, personally, have done tuns of bad shit. We should lay off Donald?

        • OrG

          Nope.

  • Joe T.

    Incoming Steinbots to protect the Tofu Palin in 3, 2, 1 …

    • John Thorstensen

      The Tofu Palin! I love it!!

    • timpundit

      ‘Tufu Palin’ is today’s winning snark. Congratulations!

  • Ducksworthy

    Jill still supports the Molotov/Ribbentrop Pact.

    • John Thorstensen

      That worked out well.

    • Tovarish Z

      She seems like she would have been a member of the Comintern, even after Stalin abolished it.

      • BreakingDeadMen

        She would have stayed a Trotskyite even after she help icepick him.

  • BreakingDeadMen

    Yeah, I actually saw that live. Blithering idiot is a kind way to describe her.

    • alwayspunkindrublic

      I usually go for “vegan butthole”.

      • BreakingDeadMen

        I try not to think of her butthole.

      • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

        She can only buttsechs with vegetables?

      • SisterArtemis

        DAY 22 AND GOING STRONG!!!!

        • amrak63

          Maybe the Wonkette Powers That Be should just change the site’s name to veganbutthole-dot-com and be done with it. ;)

          • SisterArtemis

            could get a redirect, I suppose…

  • beingreleased

    It’s easy (and fun) to blame Jill Stein for Trump, but it is important to remember that there are people out there who are so dumb they voted for Trump.

    • BreakingDeadMen

      The impressive thing about Stein is that she was actually the least qualified candidate of a quartet that included Gary Johnson and Donald Trump.

      • John Thorstensen

        Didn’t she serve on a selectboard once?

        I would have thought, though, that her song stylings from long ago would have disqualified her utterly. You may be tempted to look for them on the intertubes. I would advice you not to.

        • BreakingDeadMen

          Somebody (Charles Pierce maybe) said that Jill Stein’s folk music career was the least surprising thing about 2016.

      • eka

        I think she comes off as slightly more competent than Gary Johnson, but it’s possible it’s only because she got less screen time back then.

        • BreakingDeadMen

          He shit the bed pretty fantastically.

    • Ducksworthy

      I think we need to come up with a name for them. Ignorant Racist Clodhoppers is too long.

      • BreakingDeadMen

        Pricks?

      • amrak63

        Trump Chumps.

  • JMP

    It’s almost like this self-aggrandizing asshole is nothing but a willing tool of the far right, working to dupe credulous liberals who hate the Democratic Party because of their giant egos into helping elect Republicans, just like Glenn Greenwald.

    • DoILookAmused2u? Résistance☨

      You’re giving her too much credit. I doubt she can see past her own shadow.

      • SisterArtemis

        It’s the mirror in front of her face; kinda hard to see past her shining visage.

    • Lance Thrustwell

      Some people use the term “Regressive Left”, I dunno how people here feel about that label tho.

      • OneYieldRegular

        It’s not strong enough.

        • DoILookAmused2u? Résistance☨

          Intellectual Black Hole?

        • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

          “Useful Idiots” always works.

          • Ducksworthy

            But that would include the whole GOP.

      • JMP

        Since it’s a term primarily used by the far right idiots against all liberals who think it’s actually a clever play on words, I’d say using it would be dome.

      • Regressive progressives?

        • Covfefe

          In Canada they used to have a party that literally was named the “Progressive Conservative Party.”

          • Mulroney destroyed the PC’s Brand…then Preston Manning’s xenophobic Christians, er, the Reform Party of Canada took over.

            All 20 years before the Tea Party (and then Trump) destroyed the GOP

    • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy
    • Like Greenwald, and Assange. Clost right wingers duping naive lefties.

      • JMP

        Though the rapist Assange isn’t really hiding his support of fascism any more, but that doesn’t stop some self-proclaimed self-deluded leftists from falling for his bullshit still.

  • amrak63

    Wait, what?

    Jill Stein has a pecker? (I prefer to avoid the term “dick” for the sake of all the Richards of the world, although I am not one of them.)

    Is this some futanari thing?

    “Enquiring” minds want to know…

  • Gee, Your Hair Smells Horrific

    Jill Stein is like a humorless British socialist from 1975 (the West = capitalism = pure evil) but with less charm and no coherent argument.

    • Dr. Rrrrrobotnik

      She really is a throwback to the Soviet Union-loving useful idiot from the 70’s who managed to discredit the rest of the left simply by existing. I’m glad to know she’s keeping up the proud tradition of fucking the rest of us over.

    • Werewolf

      Or a humorless British socialist from 2017 (cough*Jeremy Corbyn*cough).

    • The Wanderer

      Anthony Whichway-Bent?

  • Counter Sniper

    Since she was at the now infamous dinnner with Flynn and Putin it could be surmised that she was part of the plan to thwart our election. Especially when you see trumps narrow win margins in those key states fell into the range of votes she won.

    Third party runs have been used as a ploy more than once to try and muddy an election and since Putin is smart and devious I wouldn’t put it past him to engage in multipronged avenues of attack against our elections.

    Coincidence? Perhaps. Definitely worth investigation though. All traitors need to have justice served to them. I don’t care what party they belong to.

  • beingreleased

    OT: Who thinks Trump will use the opportunity to remind everyone that he’s the best president ever for giving this guy a Medal of Honor and that all the other presidents suck.

    https://twitter.com/NPR/status/892062458315239424

    • mardam422

      How long into the ceremony will it be before Trump compares himself to the MOH recipient? And if it’s under a minute, will the MOH recipient ever actually receive said MOH?

    • GunToting[Redacted]

      Literally the first thing I thought when I heard this story on NPR was “How will Donnie make this presentation all about himself and shit all over an actual hero?”

    • P’jama Pahnts

      I wonder how I would feel earning this award only to be receiving it from that guy

      • beingreleased

        Trump is lucky that most people do have a sense of propriety and so are unlikely to tell him to go fuck himself.

        • Eileen Besse

          …and the rest of us are UNLUCKY for the same reason….

  • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

    I do not want to touch her peepee.

  • Crystalclear12

    Both the same. . .
    Yeah. . . feeling all ragey again.

  • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

    I’m waiting to hear about Bernie’s Russian connections.

    • Skwerl the Taco Hunter

      Bernie Sanders Is a Russian Agent, and Other Things I Learned This Week

      https://www.thenation.com/article/bernie-sanders-is-a-russian-agent-and-other-things-i-learned-this-week/

      • Ducksworthy

        Yeah. Bernie voted against the sanctions bill because it included Iran in a crazed GOP attempt to blow up Obama’s nuclear deal. Fucktards.

        • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

          But no Democrats did.

    • Anna Rompage

      I don’t know about Russian agent, but you should ask him about his lake front mansion…

      • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

        Being a career politician in a backwater postage stamp state has it perks, evidently.

    • Proud Liberal

      I doubt he has many Russia connections but he did admit that he used Russian hacked emails to his advantage in the election.

      • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

        Maybe no active involvement, but certainly a cui bono.

        • BreakingDeadMen

          I’m absolutely with you. What we came to know as fake news began to flower during the primary on the Sanders boards and social media. IDK if Bernie was involved personally, I’d like to think he wasn’t, but it beggars belief that no one in his campaign had contacts with whoever was disseminating that stuff.

        • amrak63

          Cooey Bono? Was she Sonny’s wife after Cher?

          • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

            Yes.

  • The Replicant Brooke

    God why is MSNBC giving TofuPalin a platform? Literally why?

    • Proud Liberal

      They also had Katrina Pierson on. I don’t know what to think about this rightward shift at MSNBC. Not too happy about it.

      • The Replicant Brooke

        Whoa I forgot all about Katrina Pierson! Dammit.

    • Swampgas_Man

      24 hours to fill. Same reason every crackpot gets on.

      • nightmoth

        Exactly. I wish we could bring back 6 hours of dead time with a test pattern on every teevee.

        • leemoder

          Shit, just play old Bugs Bunny ‘toons. Bet the ratings would spike.

  • Jeffery Campbell

    Can we bring back shunning and banishment, please oh please oh please?! I too, have a little list.
    https://youtu.be/1NLV24qTnlg

  • Bill D. Burger
    • Bub, the cynical zombie

      Donald Trump is better at #Winning than Jill, apparently…

  • BadKitty904

    OT: As a Floridian, I keep a close eye on national ‘gator news…

    Authorities Capture Alligator Roaming Around Upstate NY Town
    https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/07/31/us/ap-us-odd-alligator-caught.html

    • P’jama Pahnts

      It way too early for autumn leaves. Stupid tourist gators.

  • John Thorstensen

    Old, from July of last year, and I’ve quoted this a couple times, but this gem from Charlie Pierce is well worth repeating:

    Anyone who thinks a prospective HRC administration is a “nightmare” but
    that a prospective Trump presidency would bring upon the nation some
    sort of a cleansing progressive fire, should not be allowed to operate
    an electric can-opener without adult supervision.

    … from http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a46614/jill-stein-bernie-sanders-democratic-party/

    • Manders

      And boy was he right. Along with anyone else with eyes, ears and critical thinking skills.

  • Isn’t there a retirement home, where Stein can go live with Ralph Nader, and they can comfort eachother that they are certainly NOT to blame for Dubyah and Trump?

    • Anna Rompage

      Why yes, yes there is.. And I believe it’s in Costa Rica…

      • Bub, the cynical zombie

        I heard it was at the bottom of a mineshaft.

        A deep mineshaft…

    • John Thorstensen

      You mentioned Nader. Now I have to do something about the steam shooting out from my ears, dammit.

    • alwayspunkindrublic

      The Little Wanderers Home For Addled Purists.

  • h4rr4r

    She has been a useful idiot since the soviet days.

  • Bill D. Burger

    Jill Stein said she “…doesn’t play politics.” Nope, she plays fools for their money.

    https://i.imgflip.com/1ez2j5.jpg

    • Dr. Rrrrrobotnik

      “Playing politics” usually requires getting elected to something.

  • timpundit

    God, MSNBC. Just go dark. Except for 9pm to 10pm, M-F ok?

    • ziggywiggy

      This week Joy Reid will be in that spot. She’s guest hosting for Rachel. I love both those ladies.

  • EvelyndeBarry

    But Hillary wasn’t perfect enough for me!!

  • Thorn Spike

    How the hell did she get through medical school?

    • Catstro

      What do you call the person who graduates at the bottom of their class in med school?

      • OneYieldRegular

        Unfortunately, I think it’s still “Doctor.”

      • John Thorstensen

        Oh, I know! I know! Call on me! ….

        “Doctor.”

      • SeeTrain65

        If they practice, likely “The latest threat to raise my good doctor’s malpractice insurance rates.”

    • Dr. Rrrrrobotnik

      Testing ability =/= common sense.

      • Oblios_Cap

        e.g;, see Ben Carson.

    • kouros

      Daddy-O’s $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

    • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

      Many many thousands of people do so, also law school. I does not mean you’re a genius.

  • Ilgattomorte

    Okay, I confess! I’m the 400 pound hacker. Well, 365, but close enough. It wasn’t Russia, it was me. I hacked the election because Hillary was snotty and also, because I hate pants suits. To my knowledge, Donald Trump has never worn a pants suit. Otherwise, I guess Hillary and Trump are exactly the same. Besides, being a 400 pound hacker myself, I felt it was time for our first large man with tiny hands President. So, there was that too.

    Furthermore, I also hacked Leon Panetta. All of that conspiracy stuff about Panetta is bullshit. I only hacked him to get at his risotto recipes. You don’t get to be 400 pounds without working at it, you know.

    • Antonin Dvorak

      Panetta, Podesta, tomato, tomahto.

      • Ilgattomorte

        Oops.

      • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

        He did say “also”.

    • Good_Gawd_Yall

      How on earth did you get Gary Johnson to ask “What is Aleppo?” like that?

  • Daniel Hooper

    Jill Stein Steps On Own Dick For Two Solid Minutes, And It Is BREATHTAKING

    So many jokes and statements to make here…

    Wonkette: Equal Opportunity Dick Joke Maker.
    Are we sure Rebecca didn’t write this? I have trouble Evan, like most men, would be able to treat the headline material in an appropriate way.
    When I think about Jill Stein, I do tend to hot and bothered with rage, and the only ejaculations I have are very profane.
    You know, you could’ve taken out everything except, “Jill Stein” and, “Dick” and have gotten the same point across with less words. Maybe throw in an “=” between those two…

  • The Rain in Spain’s Therapist

    Stop giving this crackpot exposure!

    • John Thorstensen

      Is the a crackpot, or a crank?

      Discuss.

      • The Wanderer

        Hmm. On a dumbth scale of zero to Trump, I’d say that a crackpot is a level or two above a crank. A crank only occasionally talks about a pet theory or oddity, because the forebrain still exerts a restraining influence; a crackpot tries to make a religion out of it.

        • John Thorstensen

          Good distinction. As a gen-yoo-wine scientist, I occasionally have to deal with cranks, who can seem surprisingly normal at times, until they try to convince me that, say, gravitation plays an unimportant role in astrophysics.

    • BreakingDeadMen

      I was shocked MSNBC thought she had something worth hearing. I switched to horse racing after a minute of her drivel.

  • Villago Delenda Est

    This person is delusional. She knows nothing about North Korea, at all.

    • Swampgas_Man

      Remember, Scott (Dilbert) Adams is considered an NK “Expert” now.

      • Carpe Vagenda

        Well, by Tucker Carlson. I’d be willing to bet actual Swanson frozen dinners prefer Stein.

      • amrak63

        “Scott (Dilbert) Adams is considered an NK “Expert” now.”

        http://i.imgur.com/oB8dAbR.gifv

    • Bub, the cynical zombie

      She doesn’t know much about anything at all, so far as I can determine.

    • Steve Cole

      In my prior (military) life I spend a lot of time on the DPRK, and they are messed up. Paranoid. Aggressive. Dangerous. There have been many initiatives to resolve this, but in the end it suits the Kims to be Paranoid. Aggressive. Dangerous. And until that changes, there won’t be change.

    • Spotts1701, Nothingburger Chef

      In North Korea you’re either a government stooge (and even that is up to the fickleness of the leader, the guy who executed his uncle by AA gun) or you’re a dirt-poor starving peasant who might, might survive long enough to have a dirt-poor starving kid. Assuming you don’t say or do the wrong thing and end up in a labor camp or “disappeared”.

  • Vincent Ricola

    Jill Stein couldn’t win an election on my PTA board because of her dumbshit stances on almost every topic. I wish people would stop trying to elect idiots, tramps, and thieves into high political offices.

    • Hamilton Ω, AKA Formerly DN

      Well we could, but we would have to figure out how to get idiots, tramps, thieves, morons, morans, cretins, unremitting assholes, and incurable ignoramuses to stay home and not vote.

      • amrak63

        And/or how to get those other idiots–the ones who were perfectly free to register and vote, but just couldn’t be bothered–to get their sorry @$$es to the polling places and vote for imperfect, but certainly preferable, candidates.

    • Villago Delenda Est

      Not to mention Trumps.

  • Good_Gawd_Yall

    You know, I try not to be all judgey on people I haven’t spent much time learning about, but from everything I saw of her during the run-up to the election debacle, she didn’t seem charismatic, informed, able, sensible, or well-grounded in politics. I couldn’t figure out how or why she got any votes at all, or even got onto the ballot given that her staff couldn’t make plane reservations. But when you add the Russians into the mixture, it starts to take shape, doesn’t it?
    The Mueller hearings are going to be must-see TV, absolutely.

    • BreakingDeadMen

      Yeah, people compare her to Nader. But Nader had accomplishments.

      • Steve Cole

        Upfist. Nader is why I am a green and inertia is why I am still a green. Need to fix that someday.

      • alwayspunkindrublic

        Death to the Corvair!

        • Oblios_Cap

          Unsafe at any speed!

      • MynameisBlarney

        Right?
        He actually got shit done, Stein…not so much.

      • Vincent Ricola

        Agree. I didn’t vote for Nader and still curse his name on occasion, but at least he had a career history that made him somewhat qualified for the job. I don’t understand how Jill Stein qualifies to do anything in politics, unless we’re counting her internet money grifting skills.

    • Carpe Vagenda

      The Green parties of the rest of the world have all pretty much disowned the US Green party specifically because of Jill Stein and her horrifying willingness to see potentially millions of people die so she can pwn some liberals on the internet.

      Basically she’s boiling America’s bunny for not appreciating her horrible folk music, is my theory.

      • eka

        I didn’t know the other green parties did that. That makes me feel better, because it’s them I like. I guess I hoped stein was merely an aberration. But she’s not the only crazy one in the American party.

        • Villago Delenda Est

          The Russian Green Party explicitly condemned Stein for appearing at that Vlad party.

        • Carpe Vagenda

          This is from a european Green publication

          It doesn’t take much to see that the US presidential system is not built to give a fair chance to third party candidates. Even if the other choices are as problematic as Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, their undesirability is no match for the systematic discrimination against third parties by the US presidential election process. Given these circumstances, the case for voting Green at the presidential level may just be too hard to make.

          That is why a very common critique of the Green Party of the US isn’t just that they have unrealistic policies, but also unrealistic political goals. Currently the GPUS only has local representatives, 117 in total, without a single elected representative in a state or national legislature. In the past, the Greens in total have had four state representatives, only two of which ran as Greens and the other two switching after being elected. Plenty of other candidates have run unsuccessfully in the GPUS’s 30-year history and the explanation of their defeats could be any number of factors which are beyond the scope of this article. Regardless, in a country that has around 520,000 elected officials, getting beyond 117 seems like a reasonable goal…

          Yet it still seems that there are no resources nor mapping out of areas where Greens could stand a chance of being elected to some higher profile positions on the local and state levels. Instead, their visible communications still focus on Jill Stein and her Presidential race. There is no doubt that campaigning for the White House is a proven way to get very coveted and sought after national media and attention, with such considerable hype and buzz around it. It certainly worked for Donald Trump. But for actual political power, can that be built from the top down?

          Evidence from Green successes in Europe would predict probably not. When you look at the success of Austria’s Van der Bellen or Finland’s Haavisto, they did not come from strong presidential campaigns alone. Both the Austrian and Finnish Greens had elected officials at various levels of government for years and were either in opposition or in government before their nearly successful presidential runs. It was through building name recognition, gaining voters’ trust, expanding their professional capacities such as campaigning expertise, and finding a selection of viable candidates, that these parties gained more and more electoral success which allowed them to move to higher levels of government, whether it was regional, national, or European parliaments.

          It’s like they’re looking to govern or something.

  • OT – Back from the store. That was interesting – I was approached by a young woman, 19-20, very cute, sporty-style, bubbly. It started like she was hitting on me, it turned into her asking me if I go to church. But she was sweet and polite, we chatted for a few as we walked, and she gave me a hug as we parted.

    Now, you can call it a Gaydar Fail, but my SWIC is a f’ing Garada, and I haven’t been wrong yet. Maybe my being friendly and encouraging with her will have effects, later. Everypony should Be Themselves, and Accept themselves.

    Also too, except for the plumber grinning at me as I left, no catcalling or honking today, in the whole 3 mile round-trip. Maybe the Shits are more worried about Drumpf’s latest stupidities than we realized?

    • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

      Church person = Possibly Not Gaydar Fail, as we know. I once sat next to the music director of the Los Angeles cathedral at a concert and he seemed a bit friendly.

  • SayItWithWookies

    Kim Jong-un will be thrilled to know that someone’s bought into his North Korea as victim narrative – which doesn’t even fool most North Koreans. Too bad for him that he’s only fooled a pretend politician. Oh – speaking of which, could they not get a real politician to speak to? Was the usual stable of media whores all booked up?

  • Rick Hill

    First of all the evidence is not definitive, it’s circumstantial that Putin is smiling because Stein just polished his knob, right before they sat down to eat.

  • MynameisBlarney
  • Oblios_Cap

    Damn. That last picture must have been the fugly table.

  • Thurman Munster IV

    You see, both sides do it! Both sides have ignorant self important assholes yammering on the teevee

  • CountryClubJihadi

    I fondly remember when she and her staff flew to the wrong city and they had to order Pizza for the crowd. She should just go be a gym teacher somewhere.

    • Michael R

      She should sort recyclables somehwere .

    • Unregistered Hijabi Rockstar

      I always think I see her at Whole Foods, but it’s just that every woman who shops at Whole Foods looks like Jill Stein.

  • (((fka_donnie_d)))

    Why does Granola Spice get more airtime than Hillary?

    Oh, right, KKKlinton KKKash. I forgot.

    • armed_bears

      Granola Spice… I like the appellation.

      • (((fka_donnie_d)))

        Thanks, but honestly I thought it was pretty obvious. I was surprised nobody did it before.

      • amrak63

        The earlier “Tofu Palin” is also great.

    • amrak63

      “Granola Spice”. ^_^

      http://i.imgur.com/uQa1fG4.jpg

      • (((fka_donnie_d)))

        Long as it ain’t a chocolate one.

        Sorry.

        • MynameisBlarney

          HAHAHA!

          Pewper!

  • Dr. Rrrrrobotnik

    You know, I’d have a lot more sympathy with third parties in the U.S. if they actually put in the time and effort to win local and state races. That way, they could actually have a chance of putting their policies into effect and have an impact in American politics.

    But no. It’s only ever about the egotism of the heads of these parties, who exist solely to emerge when elections are most critical to kick us square in the dick. No intent or ability to help or fix anything, just a temper tantrum masquerading as principle.

    • Hamilton Ω, AKA Formerly DN

      I would have a lot more sympathy with third parties in the U.S., if they didn’t run such unmitigated morons, morans, yahoos, fucktoads, fucktards, dimwits, fuckwits, twits, and turds for office.

      • Oblios_Cap

        you forgot bunglecunts.

        • Hamilton Ω, AKA Formerly DN

          Oh, fuck! You are so right!

          I worry that I may be turning into one of them.

        • dshwa

          Hoofwanking bunglecunts.

          • amrak63

            “The Hoofwanking Bunglecunts” would be a great name for a rock band…oh, sorry, I thought this was Dave Barry’s blog.

      • ryp

        Probably the last time a significant third party candidate was preferable to either of the two major party presidential candidates was 1924, when Robert M. La Follette Sr. ran.

        I’ll leave arguing about Henry Wallace for others, a decent man, superior Ag Secretary, but by his own eventual admission seriously naive about Stalin, he ultimately was largely ignored in the election of 1948.

      • Mark Mark Mark

        Too much woo

    • Perkniticky

      If only the Greens in America would act more like the Greens in the UK – who stood down in some areas to ensure that someone on the left would win instead of the Conservatives. And it worked. We should all bring this up the next time a vanity candidate fucks up another election.

      • Hamilton Ω, AKA Formerly DN

        So the UK Greens actually used strategery?

        I am quite frankly impressed!

        • Perkniticky

          They also run candidates in local elections – and hold a fair number of local council seats. So they have actual experience in government. That’s probably where they get practice in strategerizing.

          • Hamilton Ω, AKA Formerly DN

            The US Green party is a joke, and it can’t even claim to have redeeming quality of being a funny joke.

            Oh, I’m registered as a Green Party member because I used to be Republitard, became enlightened, decided the Democrats sucked and chose the next choice down out of spite. I’m not proud of doing that. Next time my auto registration bill is due, I’m changing to Democrat. Maybe.

          • You deserve something special for carrying on as if partisan affiliation makes a difference with the federal U.S. Government
            https://www.humanewatch.org/images/uploads/HSUS_meaningless_award.jpg

          • Hamilton Ω, AKA Formerly DN

            Thanks for the award! I’ll have to work on rearranging my award wall to make room for it. I suppose I need to move my award wall out of the bathroom, now.

      • Grokenstein

        But…then how would the gadfly-and-rainbow chasers inform us that they are more progressive than everybody else?

      • The US Greens are NOT representative of Green Parties worldwide. In fact, the US Green Party are increasingly being taken over by “red-browns” – the kind of neo-Stalinist “leftists” who want an alliance with Trumpists, Tea Party types, evangelicals and white nationalists to destroy the hated globalist liberal (((cosmopolitans))). https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/07/13/on-caitlin-johnstone-and-david-cobbs-attempt-to-destroy-the-green-party/

        • Perkniticky

          That’s very interesting. Maybe the Greens are fulfilling the far left party role in the US because there are no legitimate leftist/socialist parties like the British Labour party (not that Labour is entirely filled with far leftists, but it’s a big tent party that encompasses a lot of the lefty spectrum).

          • Full disclosure, socialist/far-leftist here. But I consider the Jill Steins and Glenn Greenwalds of this world to be more like fascists than socialists – they want a welfare state at the expense of disposable “others”. But yes, historically there was a large swathe of Trotskyists and other radicals who joined the US Greens as a default left-wing 3rd party – people like former Socialist Workers Party presidential candidate Peter Camejo who would be spinning in his grave to see what Jill Stein and David Cobb have done to his party. Though Trotskyists had many faults they at least realised that there was nothing socialist about taking orders from Moscow.

        • I’ve come to believe that Greens in Mexico are a PRI front to fracture the opposition that they get on their left. A number of years ago, I heard a radio ad for the Green Party of Mexico/ My head nearly exploded when the ad went on about how they support capital punishment.
          I never heard any concern about that from the GPUSA or affiliated orgs.

      • julianenglish

        Things work differently in a parliamentary system with proportional representation than they do in a two party, winner take all system. The best third parties can hope to do is move the two major parties slightly in their desired direction; the worst is when they act as a spoiler, as Nader did in 2000, and both Sanders and Stein did in 2016. To be fair, Bernie really did have a chance. He want a third party candidate, just an also ran in the primaries. Nonetheless, his refusal to get fully behand the party’s candidate after she took the nomination (no matter how she did it( helped out Trumonun the White House. Thanks, guys. At least it should put the lie to the ludicrous claim that there was no difference between the two.

    • Bub, the cynical zombie

      Ya know, I’ve been a devoted football fan since 1977. I think I should be the next head coach of the New England Patriots!

      • Hamilton Ω, AKA Formerly DN

        Sounds good to me. As an (alleged) Electrical Wizard, I am uniquely qualified to provide a beautiful letter of recommendation for you as soon as I find my Crayolas.

        • Bub, the cynical zombie

          Much appreciated!

    • Exactly. It’s always interesting to ask just how many village/city/county elected positions they have, and how many candidates they’ve put up for them. The usual response is a blank look, or a quick redirection to their rant on the corrupt governor or president.

    • Sean McLaren

      “a chance of putting their policies into effect and have an impact in American politics.”

      Which is exactly what they want to avoid. If they won local races they’d have to implement policies, change them to get them to work, and generally demonstrate that their philosophy can actually be translated into viable governance. But that would rob them of their eye rolling certainty (and I think this is why they’re so reminiscent of and friendly with the Trump thing) that all of this is an easy fix, and everyone else is just to dumb, lazy, or corrupt to make everything work as perfectly as they could make it work.

    • Gayer Than Thou

      Also too, if they ran real candidates in local races, maybe sometimes the turds would get weeded out before they got to national races.

  • Rick Hill

    “So this is very frightening to them! They’ve been basically cornered into feeling like they have to develop a nuclear weapon.”
    What spurred them to develop their nuculer weapons was Dubya going and invading Iraq.

    • Bub, the cynical zombie

      The “Axis of evil speech” was in January 2002. I suspect it made an impression.

      • amrak63

        Supreme irony–his speechwriters probably just included North Korea in order to have a non-Muslim country in the Axis.

    • JMP

      That and his concurrent cancelling the agreement Clinton had made with N. Korea where they agreed not to develop nukes in exchange for aid; that sure worked out well, didn’t it, W?

      • Manders

        Thiiiis.

  • Hamilton Ω, AKA Formerly DN

    Fuck Jill Stein in the eye sockets with 900′ high flaming votes. She is almost one tenth as bonkers as Donnie. She’s breathtakingly bonkers!

    And, to be fair, Jill Stein probably has a bigger dick than Donnie Dick.

  • Michael R
  • Phoenixdoglover

    Almost makes me pine for the days of Ralph Nader, when he was the go to guy for the far left.

    • BreakingDeadMen

      Nader seemed like he had a point in 2000. But it was pretty clear by 2002 that he did not. How anybody could run on a campaign that Trump is less dangerous than Clinton, particularly as a ‘Green’, is beyond me.

  • Ricky Gay

    Take Jill Stein’s Money!

  • Anna Rompage

    Yes, the leader of NK is a totally stable and mentally sound person who is rightfully scared the US might provoke and attack… That’s why Kim Jong Un used a fucking anti aircraft gun to execute his loving Uncle, and had his brother knocked off in a Malaysian airport using VX never gas…

    • John Thorstensen

      I hear their cuisine is delicious, too.

      When they have any food …

    • Dutchman

      He sounds nice….

  • Iam Reading

    Hey, anyone who voted for Jill Stein, fuck you.

    • The Wanderer

      I wouldn’t go that far.
      “Hey! Anyone who voted for Jill Stein? Pooh to you with knobs on!”

    • Edith Prickly

      Let’s see if the Stein trolls come out again.The last time I made fun of Stein voters i got a couple of spit-spraying diatribes in response. Tl:dr: HILLARY SUCKED AND SO DO YOU

      • alwayspunkindrublic

        I had a rabid Steinbot Facebook friend. I finally had to smother him with a pil….er, I mean, block him.

      • SeeTrain65

        “Send in the clowns. … Don’t bother … they’re here.”

  • DainBramage
  • Marla

    Stein’s pseudo-intellectualism to, well, EVERYTHING makes her more of a danger to what is remaining of America’s standing in the world more than Trump ever could hope to achieve.

    • Iam Reading

      But she feels really strongly that she’s SMRT.

      • JMP

        Just like Donald!

    • alwayspunkindrublic

      I don’t even remember the name of her vice-presidential pick, but he had that incomprehensible, uber-lefty post-modern academic meta-gibberish down pat.

      • Marla

        Ajamu Baraka was her V.P. pick. Stein was all about getting her joke of a “Green Party” into an electoral vehicle for their entry into bourgeois politics

        • amrak63

          Oh, I thought his name was “Pajama Bazooka”.

      • Carpe Vagenda

        Ajamu Baraka. He’s for some good stuff, but he makes no fucking sense at all when he’s discussing things he supports which are done by people he doesn’t support. It did, however, give me some small measure of satisfaction that he edged out Nina Turner although absolutely not because of sexism which doesn’t exist in left politics and which female politicians are not in any way subject to.

        • alwayspunkindrublic

          If I recall-which I actually really don’t-he had some convoluted, tortured logic for supporting Assad, mostly because anything the State Dept. was for, he was against. Like Groucho as the King of Fredonia.

          And yes, I saw no misogyny or sexism whatsoever from the BernOuts.

          • Carpe Vagenda

            He made a name for himself early on by protesting when Clinton stopped executing people because he was not executing people for disingenuous reasons or some shit, which Imma go out on a limb and say that the people not getting executed were willing to bend their revolutionary principles to accept.

          • alwayspunkindrublic

            Well, that makes sense. If we can’t articulate a sufficiently revolutionary and aggrieved intellectual framework to halt executions, it makes FAR more sense to continue to put people to death. The victims will be proud to advance The Struggle.

          • Olds Philosopher

            Hate to be picky, since your overall point is valid, but it’s the Marx brothers (comedic gods IMHO). Anyway, Groucho sang ‘Whatever it is, I’m against it’ in ‘Horse Feathers’ (set in college), not ‘Duck Soup’ (set in Freedonia). Both comedy classics, though many consider ‘Duck Soup the best of all.

          • alwayspunkindrublic

            You’re right…I completely muffed that one. Thx.

  • Toomush_Inferesistance

    So, one of the ways in which Russia has interfered in other countries’ elections since WWII when they fucked over all their neighbors’ elections, down to the work they’ve been doing in the Ukraine includes weakening opposing parties by running grift parties that slice off a small edge of the pie. That wouldn’t be like, say, the Green Party last year, would it?…

    • Iam Reading

      Lock them up

    • DainBramage

      Here’s hoping Mueller goes over their finances with a fine toothed comb.

    • JMP

      Russia’s interference in Ukraine is good, because the US was against their puppet dictator, and I reflexively oppose all US foreign policy regardless of the merits, plus according to disproven reports from RT the democratically elected opposition was the real dictatorship and was filled with nonexistent neo-Nazis. I am one of the only TRUE PROGRESSIVES and not a crackpot!

      • John Thorstensen

        “There are two many states. Please omit three. P.S. — I am not a crackpot.”

  • beatbort

    If there was a vaccine to protect people from Jill Stein, I’d take it.

    • BearGHAZI

      There is! ‘Not being a Doofus’

  • William
    • BreakingDeadMen

      Shemp was in The Bank Dick
      Stein is an “in the tank for Russia Dick”

  • JMP

    We’re talking about Jill Stein, someone who only managed to be the third worst candidate on the ballots because Trump is that bad; Gary Johnson was both an utter moron and a Rand cultists, but at least he wasn’t anti-vaccination and a tool of Vladimir Putin.

    • BreakingDeadMen

      Johnson is such a dolt that even William Weld told people not to vote for him.

      • Carpe Vagenda

        But then David Axelrod’s Chicago Tribune endorsed him, so it’s a wash.

      • Shanzgood

        He was also pretty rage-y for being a stoner. Remember when he freaked out on that reporter? I can’t recall what it was about but he really flipped his shit.

        • Pisto75666

          Wasn’t it over the Aleppo question?

          • Shanzgood

            No, I think the Aleppo question was just a derp. The temper tantrum was about something else.

          • Pisto75666

            I did some Googling, now I remember. It was over his tax policy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvULsrjLdI4

    • Unregistered Hijabi Rockstar

      Wasn’t he anti-abortion, too? I remember him being sold as a chill alternative, but secretly a douche.

      • Carpe Vagenda

        He was George W Bush’s best friend and enough of an idiot wingnut that he couldn’t get re-elected. Here’s my favorite quote:

        June 6 — Boosting his friend George W. Bush to reporters, Gov. Gary Johnson of New Mexico recalls a conversation they had at a conference on state government. ”George turns to me and says, ‘What are they talking about?’ I said, ‘I don’t know.’ He said, ‘You don’t know a thing, do you?’ And I said, ‘Not one thing.’ He said, ‘Neither do I.’ And we kind of high-fived.”

        The Times went on to support Bush.

  • Mavenmaven

    “Can I have my check now, Vladimir?”

  • NotALiar

    I believe Sanders was right to vote no on the sanctions. He was in full support of the part dealing with Russia. Putting Iran in the package is an attempt to sabotage the Iran nuclear deal.

    • BreakingDeadMen

      IDK, it’s typical Bernie horseshit. That was what was on the table. But it’s better to take the high road than the accomplish anything despite whatever the downsides are in Bernie land.

      • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

        I developing my Bernie theory. He’s a career politician with a pose of being pure and righteous which he exploits to get special treatment, in a way that is almost deluded and not-self-aware, but is still almost a kind of sleaze.

        • BreakingDeadMen

          Playing spoiler, if you fundraise on it, is a kind of grift.

        • Parakeetist

          Exactly.

      • leemoder

        Purity is far easier to maintain when you’re not, y’know, actually responsible for anything.

    • Proud Liberal
      • NotALiar

        Interesting. Thanks

    • spangled

      see, what I don’t understand about that reasoning, is that Bernie voted to ADD the Russian sanctions to the Iran bill. why did he vote to add the russia part to the iran part, if he didn’t want to vote for the iran part?

      The only people who didn’t vote to attach the Russia sanctions to the Iran ones were Mike Lee and Rand Paul- http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/337806-russia-sanctions-deal-clears-key-senate-hurdle

      • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

        Maybe he thought that would make it fail and it backfired?

      • NotALiar

        Interesting. I’ll give that a read

  • Mr. Blobfish

    Yup. She’s dirty also.

    • Paperless Tiger

      That’s not dirt, it’s earth.

      • Edith Prickly

        GMO-free, unvaccinated earth.

      • ahughes798

        Actually, it’s called soil, if you want to be a proper botanist. Dirt is what you sweep off the kitchen floor. My Horticulture 101 teacher would get angry if you called soil dirt.

    • anon_the_great

      Useful Idiot #3

  • andyshelt

    Just a point on the paper ballots issue.

    As a Brit, I’m used to voting in local and national elections by a paper ballot.

    The ballot papers are then counted in a local facility such as a town hall by volunteer public sector workers with representatives of all the parties monitoring the process and resolving any disputes over any unclear ballot markings between themselves.

    Has the US ever used this relatively fraud free system in any elections in the past or in the present and what are the objections to this low tech but effective and transparent system that seems to me to be far more secure and less prone to error and fraud than electronic voting machines or punched card ballot machines.

    Is it purely down to the size of the US electorate or are other factors in play here?

    OK, the UK is a smaller country, but a couple of minutes after the last General Election ballot was closed at 10pm an Exit Poll was published which gave a fairly accurate outcome of the final result with the actual outcome (with the exception of a couple of seats) pretty well known by about 3-4am the next morning.

    Genuine question (with a tiny bit of snark!) but why does US democracy seem to have such problems in running what should be a fairly simple process that most of the industrialised world manages easily?

    • Villago Delenda Est

      Idiocy. Sheer idiocy.

    • Paperless Tiger

      Because in America vote-counting is a private franchise. What could possibly go wrong?

    • JMP

      Some of the US – one of the big factors in play is that there is not a US voting system; there’s 51 of them, as each system is controlled by the state government.

      • Villago Delenda Est

        Some states are smarter than others. Oregon has vote-by-mail, which has…you guessed it…a paper ballot! So there’s an audit trail! Then you have some states where it’s purely electronic, with no paper trail.

        • eka

          Even in a single state you have different systems. When I lived in a different county it was electronic only, here we feed paper ballots into a machine.

          • ahughes798

            That’s what we do here, but you can’t get a record of how you voted, which I would like to see happen.

    • Dr. Rrrrrobotnik

      Primarily it’s because we as a society like the best and easiest ways to do things, but don’t want to pay for it. So we go with the neatest gadgets and farm out the labor to private firms. Sometimes it works, unless the tiniest thing can go wrong. Then it instantly becomes a clusterfuck.

    • Antonin Dvorak

      Some states do, unfortunately, a lot have been enticed by the lobbying of the voting machine companies. Conservatives love hem because it is an easy way to suppress votes (by simply having to few machines available) and they worship making everything for profit.

    • Vagenda of Rebel Scum

      Idiots Listening to slick presentations by idiot voting machine companies. Possibly kickbacks from said companies in some cases but can’t be proved.

    • miss_grundy

      Because America would never use a tried-and-true practice from another country. Heaven forbid! We have to always try to reinvent the wheel, even though the wheel works fine without reinvention.

      • Guinnessmonkey

        Um, we used to call the secret ballot the “Australian ballot”, because that’s where we borrowed the idea from.

    • TJ Barke

      Because of ratfuckery

    • ahughes798

      We used to have paper ballots….everything seemed to work fine. Then they went away because new technology is ALWAYS better than old ways of doing things.

  • anon_the_great

    sanctions are not the solution…

    Rich coming from someone who supports a boycott on Israel.

    • anon_the_great

      A righteous boycott may I add.

  • Mr. Blobfish

    Won’t someone please think of the despots?!?

  • YellowDog

    Stein is Putin’s useful tool. I think she may be too dumb to realize what happened. She didn’t get rich off it, which would have signaled knowledge and intent; the perpetual candidate (and loser) got a few more minutes of fame.

    • Zippy W Pinhead

      and all that recount money, don’t forget about that grift

  • tempus

    Shill, honey, you can’t even tell the difference between Ohio cities whose names begin with a ‘C’–no wonder you think North Korea’s Glorious Leader is nice.
    I’ll take ‘Useful Idiots’ for one billion, Alex.

    • SeeTrain65

      “Yeah, she may have mistaken Cincinnati for Columbus or Cleveland, but at least she didn’t confuse it for Canton, Caldwell or Cadiz!”

  • Bitter Scribe

    What next…praise for Rodrigo Duterte’s war on drugs?

    • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

      3, 2, 1 . . .

  • Serai 1

    Yeah, talk to the lunatic dipshit woman who got .00003% of the vote and has never done anything before, instead of the SANE, COMPETENT WOMAN WHO GOT THE MAJORITY OF THE VOTE AND HAS BEEN DOING THIS SHIT HER WHOLE LIFE.

    Fuck, I have NO use for the big media outlets these days.

    • Helene Logan

      YES TO THIS! Why any news organization listens to anything Dr. Dingbat has to say is beyond the pale.
      And I still can’t square that the most qualified person to ever run for POTUS still remains unworthy to a pantload of dipshit puritans who “couldn’t bring themselves to vote for her because Benghazi/emails/she’s just like Trump”…arrggghhhh!
      So now they troll, endlessly defending their obviously stupid vote for this clown, who has the opinions of a 14 year old in freshman world history class. STFU TROLL. STFU DR STEIN.
      It’s the Nader voter all over again. BUT MUCH WORSE.

      • Cat Cafe for the Prosecution

        YES

      • Manders

        Dr. Dingbat is gold.

    • Cat Cafe for the Prosecution

      That’s MOMMMM. Who wants to talk to MOMMMM. We already know she’s ALWAYS right and we don’t LIKE it.

      • grindstone

        Precisely….Hillary is scary mom. Jill Stein is the interesting cool hippie aunt who lets you drink a wine spritzer with her on the back porch. ONLY NOT, because this is real life and we need MOM. Aunt Jill is a freaking freeloading twat who seriously needs to grow up.

  • miss_grundy

    Where are the Dominican and the Franciscan nuns of my youth?

  • dshwa

    Who needs to STFU about all the things forever more: Cillizza or Stein? Discuss.

    And I called dibs on AOT,K.

    • TJ Barke

      Aot,k.

    • Cat Cafe for the Prosecution

      Stein. She is marginally more dangerous and has completely fooled otherwise perhaps decent people. Although I’m not sure about the “decent.” Most of them are hateful and stupid.

      • kareemachan

        I was gonna say more hateful than stupid, but upon reflection, I’m not sure.

  • amb310

    Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 7.2 million recount fun bux that are missing!

  • anon_the_great

    Someone should explain to the good Dr. it was Japan, not Korea, the US flew atomic bombing missions against. Two of them I recall.

    • Finnibar87

      Whack job Jill Stein wasn’t paying much attention in history class, she was too busy making dream catchers.

  • Randy Riddle

    I can’t really form an opinion on Stein’s remarks until I hear what Vermin Supreme has to say about North Korea.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxaLOsqTIQw

    • starfanglednut

      That guy is awesome.

  • chascates

    She should go back to medicine.

    • Randy Riddle

      Or wherever she came from.

    • Vagenda and Pee-ara

      …and take Ben Carson with her.

      • Manders

        One thing this election has confirmed for me: the title of Dr. (and PhD for that matter) is no guarantee of anything, including and especially critical thinking skills.

        • Vagenda and Pee-ara

          I’m stop not quite convinced Carson is an actual Doctor. At least Stein sounds kind of smart. Carson sounds like an actual idiot.

      • ahughes798

        She’d have to carry him. He’s always asleep, or on the way to it.

    • Zippy W Pinhead

      She should just go… away

    • Finnibar87

      I wouldn’t want to be whack job Jill Stein’s patient.

      No vaccines, for starters.

    • amrak63

      I disagree with that–she plays footsie with anti-vaxxers, so she has no business practicing medicine.

  • leemoder

    Our very own Lord Buckethead.

    Maybe I’m being too harsh on Mr. Buckethead.

    • SammyDEEEE

      Yeah…
      Buckethead is at least entertaining. This woman is as boring as she is stupid.

    • (((Aron)))

      Lord Buckethead?

    • Cat Cafe for the Prosecution

      Oh, no, she’s our very own Lord Haw Haw. Mr. Buckethead was actually making real commentary on the political system, and deliberately presenting himself as a joke. She’s a traitor, spewing treasonous bullshit.

  • Dutchman

    The Revenge of Tofu Palin.

    Sad…

  • what, me worry?

    Let’s break this down. Russia interfered in the election in two distinct ways.

    First, they broke into DNC emails and released embarrassing transmissions that show the DNC stepping on it’s own collective dick, and colluding with one campaign against another.

    A party that was concerned with free and open elections might respond to that by sacking it’s political leadership, because, you know, while Russia might have exposed all those dirty dealings, the DNC did, actually, do them. Oh, but clamoring about free and open elections is only a thing when your preferred candidate loses. Got it.

    Second, they engaged in large-scale disinformation on social media in order to sway voter opinion.

    The latter is legal. In an open society, it is legal to print your point of view and if it sways popular opinion, then maybe we look at how partisan the main stream media has become. There is no objective news broadcast in the US anymore, save perhaps for NPR. So, in that environment, where everyone questions all the news they receive, because all of it is filtered through a partisan filter, people are apt to believe the news they most agree with. And a lot of people were prone to agree that Clinton was shady.

    The former, it seems, would be corrected if the DNC took Stein’s advice and actually beefed up cyber security. Or, you know… Maybe don’t collude with your preferred candidate to kneecap the other, and actually have a fair primary process. I know it’s silly and idealistic. The DNC lawyers have already argued that the DNC is under no obligation to hold fair elections, or even hold elections at all. And all those Bernie people who donated to his campaign under the assumption that the DNC would obey it’s own charter? BAHAHAHAHA! Suckers.

    The real, obvious threat to the election system is clearly the easily-hackable, no-paper-trail diebold touch screens, which mostly GOP states seem to use above all others. Again, Stein’s point is correct.

    Now, let’s try to divine the reason NPRK’s regime so desperately wants nuclear weapons that specifically can reach US Soil. It isn’t for a provocative first strike. They have a handful of devices, none of which are ready for prime time. The US has thousands. The US has several hundred that can be parked right off NPRK’s coast. So, based on the paranoia of a dictator who knows his regime is as strong as the hand he’s playing, it isn’t unreasonable to assume, from NPRK’s perspective, that they need some deterrence from a US first strike. Whether or not that is a rational fear isn’t the point. It’s a fear they can reasonably have from their limited perspective.

    So, how do you solve that? By threatening them some more? Seems to me that would just convince them of the need all the more.

    As for Russia, again, in order to understand the point, one has to try to view the issue from the point of view of a Russian citizen, who is only exposed to state-run TV. Is it surprising that Putin has a high-80’s approval rating when their news is nothing but state TV propaganda? Would more sanctions from the US help or hurt that perception?

    Now, let’s flip to the US perspective, where the average citizen is also only subjected to propaganda. Only, instead of a state-run propaganda service, they are party based. Ans since both parties are captured by the interests of large corporations, you are really just exposed to one of two versions of corporate hegemony.

    But you know, she’s a whack job, right? So let’s all mock! AHAHAHAHAHA!!!

    • SammyDEEEE

      Lol.

    • Finnibar87

      Jill Stein is a fucking whack job.

      It is what it is.

      • what, me worry?

        Because she tries to understand the perspectives of people our political establishments don’t agree with? Or is it because everything you read and see on TV paints her as a whack job? Or both, maybe?

        • akita96th

          Nah…shes a whack job…

        • Finnibar87

          No, because she is a raving whack job, a conclusion I came to all on my lonesome watching said whack job Stein trying to explain shit she is ignorant as fuck about.

          Learn to cope.

        • Dg Hacket

          If you are supporting her then she’s definitely whack

        • No because she’s nuckin futs.

    • Zippy W Pinhead

      “colluding with one campaign against another.”

      WRONG

    • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

      Shove it.

      • what, me worry?

        Cogent. Well argued.

        • amrak63

          All you deserve, troll.

        • Finnibar87

          There is nothing to argue about; Jill Stein is indeed a whack job.

        • Persistent Tennessee Rain

          It was all the attention your post deserved.

          • amrak63

            Jinx! Buy me a Dr Pepper! (Coke will do if DP is not available.)

        • kareemachan

          Well, it’s what was a logical response to your crap.

          BTW, blocked.

    • Renee E. Babcock

      I just stopped at the whole the DNC was colluding with one campaign bit, because that narrative is so provably false that I’m quite certain none of the following word salad is actually going to be any more accurate or worth reading.

      • Zippy W Pinhead

        Too dumb;didn’t read

        • Renee E. Babcock

          Too smart to bother with nonsense.

      • Finnibar87

        It’s some more whack job Jill Stein spew.

      • what, me worry?

        Well, then.. Shame on you. This is from the meagre reporting that’s actually been done on the lawsuit.

        As all eyes have been focused on the Trump kakistocracy, the DNC has been dealing with a lawsuit filed against it in federal court in Florida last October. The lawsuit alleges that the DNC’s bias toward Clinton over Sanders amounted to fraud, misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty and negligence. The plaintiffs have pointed to damning evidence in the emails posted by WikiLeaks proving that the Democratic Party was working against Sanders from the start.

        While the mainstream media has almost completely blacked out coverage of this lawsuit, Jordan Chariton has covered it for the TYT Network. He notes that in a courtroom in South Florida over a week ago, a DNC lawyer said openly that if the party wanted to do things like the old days and pick a candidate over cigars in back rooms, it would be within their legal rights to do so.

        “We could have voluntarily decided that, ‘Look, we’re gonna go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way,’” Bruce Spiva, lawyer for the DNC, said during a court hearing in Carol Wilding, et al. v. DNC Services Corp., according to court filings exclusively obtained by TYT Politics.

        Chariton reports that the DNC’s lawyer also implied that, despite the DNC’s charter and bylaws stating that it must be neutral during Democratic primary contests, the DNC charter does not imply a contractual obligation to follow through.

        “There’s no right to not have your candidate disadvantaged or have another candidate advantaged. There’s no contractual obligation here . . . it’s not a situation where a promise has been made that is an enforceable promise,” Spiva said.

        http://www.salon.com/2017/05/13/the-dncs-elephant-in-the-room-dems-have-a-problem-its-not-donald-trump/

        • Finnibar87

          Dude, it’s just a lawsuit.

          Sanders wasn’t even a Dem.

          • what, me worry?

            The fact of the lawsuit isn’t what’s shocking. The shocking bit is the DNC defense – it’s perfectly ok for us to screw Bernie, or anyone else.

          • Zippy W Pinhead

            STILL WRONG

          • amrak63
          • renegade500

            At that point, Sanders had no mathematical chance to be the nominee. They weren’t screwing him over – he did that to himself just fine by not appealing to a wider swatch of the Democratic party. And I have no problem whatsoever with the party having a preference for the person who actually spent decades as a party member, working for the good of the party and the people, over the person who joined the party for 5 minutes to use it for his own agenda.

          • what, me worry?

            It certainly worked out well for you.

            You know, the next time my team gets to the World Series, I’m going to lobby for them to give Games 1, 4 and 7 to the pitcher who’s been with the team longest, instead of our best pitcher against the existing competition, because that’s how you win.

          • kareemachan

            My, aren’t you touchy.

          • amrak63
          • Finnibar87

            Not how baseball works, homes.

            It’s pretty basic, though:

            You hit the ball, you catch the ball, you throw the ball.
            see?

          • Dg Hacket

            Well, they don’t play baseball in mother russia

          • renegade500

            No, this country is screwed, because some people just didn’t give a shit about anything except their own little myopic interests, and fuck everyone else. Unlike people (apparently) like you, I wouldn’t have had a problem voting for Sanders had he won the nomination, because I knew what was important. I know how our government works. But a lot of people who don’t seem to have paid much attention to how our political system operates suddenly felt it should operate by the rules they wanted, and threw a hissy fit when it didn’t. And now we are all paying for that clusterfuck temper tantrum. I only hope too many people aren’t harmed as a result. Something a lot of people who voted for Stein didn’t seem to think mattered.

            And your analogy is idiotic – nothing was undeservedly taken from Sanders and given to Clinton. You don’t get to delegitimize the millions of people who voted for Clinton over Sanders, just because you don’t agree with their choice.

          • Manders

            Well said. This “I didn’t win; it must be rigged” is very Trumpy.

          • amrak63

            Horseshoe theory yet again.

          • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

            Sanders is a Left Trump the more I think about it. Well, he and his supporters claim common ground via “populism” and WWC.

          • amrak63

            And “Russia is our friend”. Don’t forget that one.

          • Spotts1701, Nothingburger Chef

            No, you go with the pitcher who has proven themselves in consistent competition. Not the one who has only gotten one or two looks and the other team hasn’t gotten “the book” on them.

            Sanders had not run in a competitive race in 20 years. That’s a long time to not see game action.

          • what, me worry?
          • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

            So how did he lose California by 7%? Massive vote tampering on a scale never seen in this country? A couple snarky DNC emails?

          • what, me worry?
          • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

            Ah, so it was massive vote tampering, supported by quotes from a couple Bernie supporters. Whereas I had no problem at all voting for Hillary at my local polling place. Mwahahahaha.

          • Spotts1701, Nothingburger Chef

            It is disingenuous, at best, to compare an indoor rally (where, you know, there are fire codes and other restrictions limiting attendance) and an outdoor rally.
            It is more likely you’re just being an ass.

          • JMP

            I see our troll failed analogy class as well.

          • what, me worry?

            The argument, that Bernie wasn’t a “real” Dem, that HRC was a Dem all her life, is analogous to a team who gets a star arm right before a big game and chooses not to use it, in favor of a player that’s been there longer.

            See, the star arm, in that analogy, is Sanders. The old guard is HRC. It loses something when I have to explain it to you.

          • amrak63

            Uh-huh. If Covfefe had been able to run against Sanders–once the GOP opposition research got through turning Senator Sanders into Bernie Beelzebub, something it never had to do, but was quite ready to do–Covfefe actually would have won the popular vote as well as the electoral vote, and Covfefe wouldn’t even have needed any extra help from his master, er, buddy, Putin.

          • Finnibar87

            They are correct.

            It is indeed legal.

          • what, me worry?

            OK, you know what? It might be.

            But it isn’t legal to pretend to have an election and cost millions of people hundreds of dollars, when they donated to a campaign based on the charter of the Party holding the election, while they instead disadvantage one candidate while advantaging another.

            That’s called fraud. Not voter fraud. Actual fraud. The fleecing of people for material gain through false pretenses.

          • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

            There was a fucking election, and he fucking lost by fucking 12%. Explain how some supposed little bit of DNC insider favoritism did that. Actually, don’t.

          • what, me worry?

            The DNC charter requires the DNC to be impartial and unbiased in their handling of that election. The plaintiffs have presented a case that they were neither of those things. The DNC has issued a defense that consists of, “So?”

            If the election wasn’t impartial, calling it an election is a misnomer. In actual terms, it’s called perpetrating a fraud on the rank and file of the party. And again, the DNC defense so far is, “So?”

            It’s fine if you’re ok with that, but own it.

          • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

            People voted. Either explain that actual votes were tampered with or STFU.

          • JMP

            The DNC was impartial and unbiased, the plaintiffs are conspiracy theorist idiots, the election was impartial, and you are repeating a long disproven lie, you liar puppet of the fascist dictator Putin.

            Tell us the one about 9/11 being an inside job again, or the moon being faked, or vaccines causing autism.

          • what, me worry?

            Then why not use that defense. The plaintiff’s have the burden of proof. If they say the DNC was bias, and the DNC says they weren’t, the plaintiffs would have to prove in what way they were biased.

            The DNC didn’t do that. They gave the plaintiffs a pass on proving their case, and conceding that, sure, they were biased. So?

          • JMP

            Please. This is a nuisance lawsuit, and you don’t even have a credible source about it – you linked to an article from Salon that quotes from the likes of gossip columnist Chris Cillizza and the fucking Young Turks, which is down there with The Intercept and Jacobin among fauxgressive publications that are effectively right-wing propaganda. There’s nothing credible about it, you liar.

          • amrak63

            In the USA, the extremes of Right and Left both serve the interests of Putin’s Russia–hence the astonishing similarities between the two.

          • JMP

            Along with the extremes of right and the Putin propagandists who are pretending to be extreme left like What me worry? here.

          • JMP

            They never did disadvantage one candidate, so your point, it is moot along with being stupid.

          • kareemachan

            Um, you’re using the term “us” VERY loosely.

            In other words, eff off.

          • what, me worry?

            In the voice of DNC lawyers, “us” would be the DNC, dipshit.

          • Le Chapeau

            Precisely what was the mechanism of screwing Bernie? He won small sample size caucus primaries, but got his ass thoroughly kicked on all others.

          • Zippy W Pinhead

            Gotta love the Salon link- yes Bernie Bro Central has an opinion

        • Renee E. Babcock

          blah blah blah more uninformed word salad. It’s like some annoying mosquito buzzing around.

          • what, me worry?

            The argument above is quoted from the attributed source, so, try as you might, you’re not actually insulting me.

          • amrak63

            Then I guess we’ll just have to try harder.

            http://i.imgur.com/QRazkDQ.gifv

        • amrak63
        • Edith Prickly

          I’m glad Wonkette doesn’t allow comments, otherwise we’d have to put up with people using stories about third-party loser candidates as an excuse to re-litigate the Democratic primary.

        • kareemachan

          wmw never has a proveable premise. Just bullshits til the cows come home.

        • Spotts1701, Nothingburger Chef

          Speaking as someone who, you know, actually went to law school when you start basing your claims on “unjust enrichment” and “breach of fiduciary duty” (to an entity who has no fiduciary duty to you), you’re throwing spaghetti at the wall to see what will stick.

        • CripesAmighty
          • what, me worry?

            Is that the same author who wrote, “Everyone who disagrees with me is a Russian Operative: An emotional child’s guide to deflecting criticism”?

            Seems like a lot of people here have read that one.

          • CripesAmighty
          • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

            Is she talking to Bernie?

          • JMP

            No one ever said that; that’s just a bullshit response to accurately pointing out that certain people are Russian operatives. That’s as stupid as the constant stream of, when someone points out that a racist attack against Obama was racist, the screeching response of, “you keep calling all criticisms of Obama racist!” even though no one has ever done that.

    • Edith Prickly

      No whackjob, no whackjob, YOU’RE THE WHACKJOB!

    • amrak63

      http://i.imgur.com/ml91ykT.jpg

      And that goes for your boss Tsar Vlad, too.

    • dshwa

      Reading this is a minute of my life I’ll never get back.

      • what, me worry?

        And, just to point out, not one of you has even tried to refute any of it. Because you know it’s all true, but it seems to be the way you want things.

        • Zippy W Pinhead

          No dipshit, it’s because we’ve seen your drivel many times before, over and fucking over. You have posting diarrhea. We’ve refuted your dopey bullshit before, you’re just too stupid to listen to anyone

        • dshwa

          We’ve refuted most of this nonsense before, and from better writers. You’ll understand that we’re bored with doing so again and again for whichever pseudo intellectual troll happened to wander in to drop their “you were mean to Stein” and “Bernie would have won” leavings all over the carpet this week, so have stopped bothering.

        • Finnibar87

          I refuted all of it.

          Jill Stein is, in fact, a whack job.

          That’s all one needs to know about the woman.

        • amrak63

          Because we know you’re just a sophist here to try to stir shit up with Gish Gallops and other cheap debater’s tricks. I made the mistake of taking you seriously enough to argue with you last time. I will not repeat that error. Now…

          http://i.imgur.com/uWRONyg.jpg

          • what, me worry?

            Thanks for continuing to read my comments.

          • amrak63

            Don’t give yourself too much credit. I merely skimmed your verbal diarrhea (h/t Zippy), not read it in depth (as if it had depth).

          • Zippy W Pinhead

            lol, thanks- that little coward blocked me long ago.

          • Finnibar87

            Jill Stein, whack job; her supercilious smile makes her even more so.

            But seriously. North Korea was ever so frightened the once by the US, so it’s holly jolly hockey sticks for the Hermit Kingdom to have nuclear weapons.

            That’s whack job Jill Stein for ya.

          • Le Chapeau

            Your comments appear here, and, as inveterate readers, we read them automatically, as it were. But that does not mean you have anything to say worth reading. Aaaaaaaannnnnnndddd, go fuck yourself.

          • what, me worry?

            Truly, the warmth and hospitality of the “inveterate readers” here, such as yourself, is an inspiration. Clearly, you are an open minded bunch willing to consider a variety of perspectives and opinions, as evidenced by the number of people who have recommended I “go fuck myself” and “get the fuck out”.

            Your vocabulary is obviously immense. Kudos!

            It is the irony of Clinton supporters still whining about the unfairness of having their dirty laundry published and social media inundated with anti-Clinton propaganda, after they actually did circulate those emails among themselves, and through David Brock, unleashed an army of paid trolls on social media themselves, that I find remarkable.

            And the fact that you’re still here replaying the election and blaming someone who received, what? 1% of the vote? Yes, it was all Stein’s fault. Because those were Hillary’s votes she stole. Which is the dumbest possible argument imaginable.

            Votes don’t belong to your candidate by default. She has to earn them. Evan is bitching about Stein taking votes in Michigan? Well, maybe if your candidate actually, you know, campaigned in Michigan, she might have earned some of them.

          • Le Chapeau

            Nope. Don’t care about the emails. Not whining about Hillary. I don’t like Jill Stein because she’s an asshole, just like you.

          • what, me worry?

            Stricken as non responsive. The article is a long whine about Stein costing Hillary the election and daring to still have opinions that she says out loud on TeeVee. But that’s not misogynist. Somehow.

            Fact is, the major party candidates were both historically unpopular and disliked. People who voted for Stein, knowing she’d lose, did so because they couldn’t bring themselves to vote for either of them.

            Had Stein not been on offer, they would have stayed home, netting Clinton near zero additional votes.

            Evan’s “analysis” is the kind of math Democrats do to make themselves feel better.

            And your continued hospitality is heartwarming.

          • Le Chapeau

            The energy you put into being a complete douchebag is impressive.

          • what, me worry?

            I’ll take that as the compliment you didn’t intend.

            Thanks for staying on topic!

          • Le Chapeau

            Well, the topic, really, is you. I’ve used about 60 words to get you to take the time and effort to write about 250. Time and effort you’ll never get back. Thanks for being manipulated.

          • what, me worry?

            Your mistake is assuming I write my comments for you.

            Education and Healthcare are public goods and should be treated as such.
            Unions enable workers to gain a fair share of the wealth they create from businesses who would otherwise exploit them, and should be encouraged and reinforced.
            Wall St is shockingly lawless and requires tight regulation to ensure they are not gambling unnecessarily with taxpayer insured money.
            Fracking has caused undue harm to the environment and the water table and should be banned. Money should instead be spent to encourage the growth of renewables.
            Trade agreements with other nations or regions should be designed to discourage the migration of jobs from high salary areas to low salary areas, and should not allow an unaccountable committee of corporate lawyers to nullify sovereign law. Fair trade, not free trade.
            The wealthy and corporations should be asked to pay more, much more, in order to redistribute wealth back to the people who created it.
            The past several wars the US has fought were unnecessary, costly quagmires that created more terrorists than they killed, and killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people in the process.

            Assuming you don’t fundamentally disagree with these core principles, why do you support candidates who do?

          • Le Chapeau

            And which candidate who had a chance of being elected do you think had any intention of taking on those issues?

          • what, me worry?

            The point, my stubborn friend, is that these policies, all of them, are widely favored by the democratic base. Even centrist agree with these principles.

            And then they support candidates who don’t. I’m asking why?

          • Le Chapeau

            Hillary Clinton actually supported them. Do you think that the person who first tried, in her husband’s administration, to establish universal health care was not committed to those principles? And you did not answer my question, my evasive friend.

          • what, me worry?

            Well, let me refresh your memory –

            https://youtu.be/HSMGrKSUgj4

            “Single Payer Healthcare will never, ever come to pass.”

            That doesn’t sound supportive. And that was just last year, not 25 years ago. Was that a lie for her donor constituency, while winking to the rank and file?

            Or is it more likely that she’d lie to her rank and file, while winking at the luxury boxes her donors were sitting in, to let them know her campaign promises were all bullshit?

            That’s the core question that all politicians have to answer when they get their money from organizations that are opposed to the goals of their base. She was lying to someone. Pick your poison.

            To answer your question in all honesty, my priorities were different than yours. In my opinion, continuing to support bad candidates who say one thing to the donors and something else to the voters, just because the Republicans are worse, provides the Party zero incentive to ever give me better candidates. As long as they can depend on my ‘least objectionable candidate’ vote, they’ll continue to sell off core policy goals to big business for the money to run the next election. And I think that’s wrong.

            Just look at today’s news. The DCCC just said, of course we’ll support anti-choice candidates! The abortion issue isn’t a litmus test!

            Which, is incomprehensible to me, and at the same time, I predicted it a month ago, when I said, “If someone ever finds a way to make money from forcing poor women to have babies, count on the Democratic Party to sell off that position too, and expect you to suck it up and compromise some more.”

            Well, I was wrong about the motive, but I was right that the Dems have zero qualms about abandoning core principles in the name of expediency.

            And as I’ve said in the past, I question the value of winning elections, if, in order to do so, you have to abandon the things you wanted to win the elections to do.

          • Le Chapeau

            It is pretty much a given that at the very least Hillary would work to strengthen the ACA and make it more effective. And you making the Democratic National Committee the be all and end all of Democratic party principles and action is extremely short sighted. The party is being pushed in a more progressive direction, and you still haven’t answered my question. Given that the current “administration” is pure evil, and the perfect illustration of the banality of evil, you have to answer the question: whom would you prefer to have won who had a chance to do so?

          • amrak63

            @LC: If he’s sincere (which I doubt), he genuinely believes that enough Stupid White Folks (my tribe, from which I somehow evolved to a higher level) can be weaned away from their various flavors of vacuum-skulled, knuckle-walking bigotry, to support social democratic candidates who are pure enough to meet his approval–despite decades of electoral evidence to the contrary.

            I don’t know where he thinks sufficiently pure candidates will get enough money to run successfully for office, without resorting to funding sources which he considers disqualifyingly tainted. Wizards will alchemically transmute unicorn poop to platinum and sell it to raise the funds, I suppose.

          • disqus_DCiinn37br

            Agree with everything you said here. Personally, I think he is a troll. He clearly isn’t a progressive- see his ‘triggered libs, hur dur’ comment from a while back.

          • Le Chapeau

            He’s not sincere, and the buttmunch didn’t even vote.

          • what, me worry?

            Ok, now you’re just being pedantic, because I specifically addressed your question in the previous comment. But you still evade mine.

            I have proven to you, through her own words, that the candidate you supported didn’t support your progressive goals. My question remains, if you truly believe in single payer, public education, regulating the financial sector, protecting unions, and a less belligerent foreign policy, as you say you do, then why did you support a candidate who, through her own statements, openly mocked those goals? Especially when there was a candidate who embraced them?

            When centrists can be honest in answering that question, we can have a dialog. Because as long as you keep supporting candidates who are derisive of the things in which you claim to believe, you aren’t voting in your own stated interest. You’re voting in aetna’s interests.

          • Le Chapeau

            Oh, and by the way, did you vote?

          • what, me worry?

            I did, not that whether I did or not matters to this conversation, nor is it verifiable, since I live in GA, and we use the easily hack able, paperless Diebold touchscreen almost exclusively. I cast a vote. Who actually got that vote? That’s really anyone’s guess.

          • Le Chapeau

            OK, now we get to the nub. Oh, it matters, in fact, it is the thing that matters most. Ladies and Gentlemen, Shit fer Brains here admits he did not vote. Fuck him inside out and backwards. The bitch can lecture us from the fantasy world he lives in, but won’t carry out his duties as a citizen. Honey bunch, here in the real world you make a choice, sometimes not the best, but the best rarely comes along, but you deal with the reality and put your shoulder to the wheel. Assholes like you don’t like reality, and then feel entitled to whine about it. Not here, where I goddamn guarantee you we all voted. I don’t care if you voted for Jill Stein or wrote yourself in. No vote, you can just fuck off.

          • what, me worry?

            Your reading comprehension needs work.

            Did you vote?

            I did COMMA not that it matters…

            Because it doesn’t matter whether I voted or not. You’re just so eager to dismiss the argument rather than confront it, that you’re seeking any reason at all to not deal with the content. Even “misreading” my reply.

            I did vote. It doesn’t matter. If I hadn’t voted, I can still have an opinion. It’s an opinion you don’t like. I accept that. A lot of apologists for why we can’t have nice things don’t like being told they are apologists for corruption.

            The fact is, most Democrats agree with me on policy, and then vote for someone who won’t lift a finger to make that policy a reality, because, reasons. It’s too hard.

            The real reason is, American politicians are too corrupt to vote for something that will benefit everyone, if their monied special interests don’t give them the green light.

            You’re an apologist for a corrupt system, but too smug to realize it.

          • Le Chapeau

            My apologies. You voted. Good for you. You still blather on about a corrupt system with no way to change it. Democrats made sure that more than 20 million people have health insurance, which I suppose to you is just more corruption. Idealism in politics is a hard row to hoe, because of the realities, and yet, Democratic politicians have worked to make this nation better for decades. For gay people, for minorities, for transgender people. Republicans won’t go there. Democrats did, and brought about change, which the ignorant imp in the White House is now trying to roll back, aided and abetted by the GOP. Politics has been called the art of the possible, and Will Rogers said, a century ago, that we have the best Congress money can buy. People of good will still work hard in those conditions to do the right thing, and not every Democrat is a slave to corporate interests. Just because reality doesn’t come up to your standards doesn’t mean it all sucks.

          • what, me worry?

            For a bunch of folks who claim that the Right doesn’t do nuance, you sure have a hard time moving away from the stark, black and white caricature of a progressive you’ve built for yourselves.

            It is corrupt to allow your financial backers to dictate the polices you are allowed to advocate. If your electorate has a set of policy goals they want to achieve, your job is to work towards those goals. That is a far cry from blaming politicians for not achieving everything we ask for. Here’s where your argument breaks down.

            I wasn’t opposed to the idea that incremental advancements were possible. I didn’t even object to the idea that incremental advancements were preferable to large legislative wins. They aren’t, but it is a silly thing to argue about. My objection was to the abandonment of the end goals toward which those increments were intended to progress.

            “Politics is the art of the possible”, fails to take into consideration that what is currently in the mainstream debate is the spectrum of the possible. With Clinton, the debate excluded single payer. Without her, it includes that model. That’s a step forward, and it is because she lost.

          • Le Chapeau

            I heartily disagree with your conclusion, having not only read widely but have listened to many who did not vote for Hillary and not once have I heard, “she didn’t back single payer.” What I did hear a whole lot of is the result of 30 years of being smeared by Republicans with lies, and 30 years of condescending, misogynistic coverage of her in the mainstream media. So at this point I must ask, what’s your plan? Surely you have one, since you seem to know so much about politics

          • what, me worry?

            Well, you’ve heard it at least once, because we’ve been discussing it for some time.

            Generally, the plan is to primary key establishment democrats in the leadership, hopefully unseating a few of them to give the rest of the caucus pause.

            If there is one thing that gets the attention of career politicians is the idea that the voters won’t simply vote for the candidate with the biggest ad budget.

            Ultimately, I’d like to get to the point where taking huge checks from special interests who don’t share the values of the Democratic rank and file is a net negative – where the cost of defending those donations is bigger than the ad buys they generate. When politicians view money from negative sources as a negative for their campaign, they’ll stop taking it, I assure you.

          • Le Chapeau

            For that, you’re going to need to start the way the Tea Party, bless its heart, did, by winning local elections, which many state Democratic committees are now beginning to plan for. You can’t primary a seasoned Democratic rep or senator with somebody fresh off the political turnip truck, no matter what their credentials are. You need good, trained candidates to unseat incumbents in primaries. You start on school boards and city councils, state houses, governors’ mansions, and then shoot for the federal offices. Republicans fear primaries because their base is insane and stupid, and they know it will go for whomever the Kochs put up against them. Democratic voters tend to be on the sane side, and will be attracted to people who can demonstrate, both with a record of achievement, and a credible platform, that they are the better choice.

          • what, me worry?

            DWS is going down next year.

          • Le Chapeau

            Que?

          • amrak63

            Why should we be hospitable to puritan or Putinite trolls?

            (“Or” because I’m not sure which kind Alfred E. is)

          • what, me worry?

            You should be hospitable to everyone who isn’t openly hostile to you. It’s only polite.

            I’ll often attack your policy positions, and your advocacy, and I may attack some of your preconceptions. If I think you’re being dishonest, I’ll say so.

            But I won’t attack you. It isn’t polite. Also, I don’t know you. I operate under the assumption that everyone is a good person.

          • disqus_DCiinn37br

            I only just noticed- he actually believes bullshit conspiracy about David Brock. David Brock, the man who gets nearly as much of these conspiracies as Soros.

          • TX Dept. of Space Tacos

            thank you! same here.

        • JMP

          No, liar, not a single word that you’ve written has been true; fuck, you even keep repeating the lie that the DNC somehow rigged the primary for Sanders even though it’s not only been proven that never happened, but that that particular lie was propaganda invented by the Russians and Wikileaks, the fascist propaganda outfit run by that tool of Putin, the rapist Julian Assange.

          • amrak63

            You misspelled “Ass-Mange”. ;)

    • Persistent Tennessee Rain

      tl;dr

      • JustPixelz (((Ω)))

        I skipped to your comment.

        • Persistent Tennessee Rain

          Mine had more content. ‘jes sayin’

      • JMP

        Christ, this asshole again. But maybe since he’s finally not showing up a day after the post, he’ll finally get the banning he deserves!

        • what, me worry?

          You’re so triggered. Maybe some chamomile tea?

          And banned for what, exactly? do all opinions in Wonkette’s comments need to be homogeneous?

          Geez, what boring people you are.

          • JMP

            You know, when you repeat right-wing memes like using “triggered” as an insult, it kind of gives away that your pretense of being a leftist Bernie Bro is nothing but a facade.

          • amrak63

            I wish I could give that one 100 upvotes.

          • Ill-Advised

            Upvoted both, because truth never gets old.

          • what, me worry?

            I actually got the word triggered from Vassar, which, I know, is such a right wing place… LOL

          • amrak63

            How many left-leaners use “triggered” as a smear word, vs. how many right-leaners?

            JMP’s point stands.

          • what, me worry?

            Except where the word is used, not as a smear, but an identifier.

            It truly is remarkable to me how angry the Wonketariate gets when it’s pointed out that the establishment of the party has some ‘splainin to do. It’s almost like they don’t want to know how corrupt the party is.

            And when someone points it out, reasonably, they freak out. I’m not sure what else you call that.

          • amrak63

            “I’m not sure what else you call that.”

            Putin’s sophist-trolls trolling, as they are paid to do.

          • Royal Ugly Dude

            You’re a Vassar woman? I’ll be dammned.

          • what, me worry?

            I’m not sure if that’s misogynist, homophobic, or simply uninformed.

          • Ill-Advised

            Vassar started admitting men so long ago, it no longer qualifies as a Seven Sister. So there’s that.

          • JMP

            The misuse of it as an insult the way you’re using it is completely a right-wing thing, it’s as dead a giveaway as “Social Justice Warriors”, “virtue signalling”, “Political Correctness” and “cuck”.

    • kareemachan

      So… you’re a jilly?

      • amrak63

        I’m half-convinced he’s actually a Vladdy. ;)

        • JMP

          Most of his trolling has been defending Putin, no matter what he does, while falsely claiming to be liberal; I’m much more than half convinced of it.

    • JustPixelz (((Ω)))

      “Many people say Jill Stein was better candidate than Crooked Hillary. SAD!”

    • what, me worry?

      26 angry, triggered comments and counting. This place is the best. :)

      • amrak63

        You define “anger” more broadly than I do.

        http://i.imgur.com/VpqsIQ4.jpg

      • JMP

        Stupid troll is to dumb to tell the difference between mockery and anger!

        • amrak63

          I would say “contempt”, but “mockery” gets much the same idea across.

        • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

          Mockery, disgust, boredom, debunking, et cetera, are all always “anger”. RWNJs do the same thing.

          • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

            Contempt also too.

          • amrak63

            Horseshoe theory corroborated again!

        • The use of “LOL TRIGGERED” to gloat proves it’s either an alt-rightist / *channer pretending to be an alt-leftist to troll; or that alt-leftists and alt-rightists are indistinguishable these days. Take your pick.

          • amrak63

            I lean toward the latter hypothesis.

        • what, me worry?

          Um… “too dumb”.

          It’s important, when you’re insulting people’s intelligence, not to make stupid grammatical errors, or you look like this guy: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2a93f788735b810046419c1c092ca3045b2625679696652f3029a1e2c4d83bae.jpg

      • Kitty Smith

        Because in the end, it’s all about how many people you trigger, and how much anger you inflict.

        How are you any different from the Trump-humpers again?

      • disqus_DCiinn37br

        You’re a troll, and with this comment you’ve proved it. You are a purity pony, and anyone who is an actual ally of the left would not mock people by saying they are ‘triggered’ like a common alt-righter.

        • what, me worry?

          I’l admit to finding a certain amount of humor in the evidence and fact-free abuse hurled at me from the rest of the posters here. It doesn’t make me a troll. It makes me a dissenting voice with a sense of humor.

    • JMP

      “First, they broke into DNC emails and released embarrassing transmissions that show the DNC stepping on it’s own collective dick”

      No they didn’t. They broke into DNC emails and released them through Wikileaks while lying about what was in them to make them seem controversial, like claiming that they showed the DNC “rigged” the primary, even though the actual stolen emails showed no such thing.

      When your first sentence is a complete lie, that doesn’t speak well for the rest of your giant wall of text.

      • what, me worry?

        Show me where all collusion the emails referred to didn’t actually happen?

        The Clinton camp didn’t get questions in advance from a DNC operative-slash-propagandist employed by CNN?

        The DNC communications folks weren’t plotting to use Bernie’s religion, or lack there of, against him?

        Would you like a link to the emails in question?

        When Brazile got caught, red handed, she tried very hard to make the story about the hacking, and not about the dirty dealing she was just outed as having done.

        Because, you know, none of it really happened. Nothing to see here. Move along now.

        • JMP

          Ah yes, the good old troll strategy where they post a wall of lies, then when everyone comes along to point out that they’re lying, they scream “prove it”.

          No, asshole, you’re the one making extraordinary claims. Claims that have been completely, conclusively debunked. That’s especially true when you’ve been trolling Wonkette for months now, and every thing you’ve written has been worthless trash.

          The burden of proof is on you, who have not given a single source to back up your bullshit.

          • what, me worry?

            The NYT says you’re full of shit.

            https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/us/politics/dnc-emails-sanders-clinton.html

            And the Post.

            http://nypost.com/2016/07/22/leaked-emails-show-how-democrats-screwed-sanders/

            And the observer (paywall)

            Pretty much all of my local papers. But I guess their just all hippie rags.

          • amrak63

            You want us to read links, find some that don’t push ads into our faces.

            The Times fell for Russkileaks. Yawn.

          • what, me worry?

            You certainly have a lot of rules about what you will and won’t read. My guess is that the list of articles you read, and the list of articles that give the DNC a pass for their behavior, overlap quite a bit.

            Back to your bubble, now.

          • amrak63

            Some of us have to worry about paying for more important things than NYT subscriptions.

            Your Russian (or at least GOP) masters pay for all that for you, so you wouldn’t understand that.

          • JMP

            I like how Putin propagandist’s liar’s “evidence” is posting year-old articles from right after the stolen emails were leaked by the rapist Julian Assange which reprinted his false claims as to what they showed, before those claims were debunked as the actual stolen emails actually showed no such thing.

            Also, funny that the Putin propagandist wants to keep us focused on the irrelevant content of those emails, rather than the important issue, that they were hacked by Russian intelligence and leaked, along with lies about their contents, in order to influence the election in Trump’s favor, in particular spreading the lie about primary rigging to convince Bernie-or-busters to stay home or vote for Putin’s other puppet Jill Stein.

          • what, me worry?

            I like how disagreeing with you gets one labeled a Putin Propagandist around here. And how Assange’s legal status is in any way relevant to the content on his website. As if the US wasn’t more interested in prosecuting him for espionage.

            And it’s funny how the misbehavior of your own Party’s leadership during a Presidential primary isn’t relevant to you. Only the way the emails were obtained and disclosed is relevant.

            That does seem weird to me. You do realize that if the Party played the Primary on the up-and-up, there wouldn’t have been anything to disclose?

            Apparently, that’s irrelevant as well.

            Neera? Is that you??

          • JMP

            No, the fact that you repeatedly lie to deny and simultaneously justify Russian interference of the election, claim other atrocities by the dictator Vladimir Putin’s regime are justified, and even denied the fact that Putin has had tons of journalists and dissidents assassinated, is what makes you a Putin propagandist. And what’s wrong with noting the fact that Assange is, besides being a tool of fascism, an rapist who is hiding in the Ecuadorean embassy to avoid getting prosecuted because he raped at least two women? He also committed those rapes in Sweden, which is whey they’re the ones who want to prosc

            My own party’s leadership did not misbehave at all, you liar, you just keep repeating that stupid disproven lie. The Democratic party DID play the primary on the up-and-up, and you keep repeating those lies to distract from the important issue of the actual theft of those emails and use of the hacking by Russia to swing the election to Donald Fucking Trump.

          • what, me worry?

            “lie to deny and simultaneously justify Russian interference of the election, claim other atrocities by the dictator Vladimir Putin’s regime are justified, and even denied the fact that Putin has had tons of journalists and dissidents assassinated, is what makes you a Putin propagandist.”

            Show me where I did any of those things, win a pony.

            Fail to show examples of my exact words making these claims, and you are a filthy liar.

          • YourMom

            Assange has about zero credibility by now. He’s in it for his own ends. Not mine. Not yours.

          • what, me worry?

            I would suggest his motives and his credibility are separate metrics. If I concede your value judgment on his motivation, how does it impact the accuracy of the documents he publishes.

            No one has seriously disputed the authenticity of the emails. Brazile tried, because she doesn’t understand how email headers work. But no one since.

            So, if he’s posting authentic documents, how does his motivation damage the credibility of those documents, other than the fact that you don’t like them?

          • amrak63

            …they post a wall of lies…

            I believe the technical term is “Gish Gallop”.

    • Dutchman

      It’s quite simple, all of you BernieBros, Jillies and Purity Pony riders got your wish. You voted for irrelevant candidates and convinced enough people that Hillary was Beelzebub in female form and that they should stay home rather than vote for her.

      You got your wish and she lost. Now that you’re discovering that pragmatism might not be such a bad idea you’re all trying to rationalize your actions.

      There can be no mea culpa, rationalization or obfuscation. You own the fact that Trump is residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Just own it.

      • amrak63

        Or else the purists did not vote at all, which had the same effect.

        Dutchman:

        http://i.imgur.com/uQa1fG4.jpg

        • ahughes798

          97 million people did not vote. I doubt that more than 1% of them voted for Stein or Bernie. What’s the other 99%’s excuse?

          • amrak63

            Some of the non-voters probably wanted to vote, but were prevented from doing so by GOP voter suppression, and/or other factors beyond their control. They are blameless.

            The majority, however, could have voted, but they fell for the Both Sides K’rupt Duopoly horseshit (I used to believe that to some degree, but I woke up before the 2016 primaries).

          • ahughes798

            I should have put “eligible voters.”

          • Xylem

            59% of eligible voters voted in 2016.

          • YourMom

            Anecdotal here: I was on the phone for four solid days making GOTV calls into PA, then Michigan and then Nevada. ALL of these were people we’d identified earlier as being Hillary voters. We began reaching people who’d decided to just stay home. Remember-this is not long after the Comey letter and a barrage of targeted Facebook fake news links. All the Rs, the Steiners and Putin’s cyber-shitstains had to do was create doubt about Clinton, enough to suppress her support. So, the combo of throwing people off the voting rolls AND creating doubt gave Trump some important margins. There are probably many more cumulative events that affected this election. There is one group investigating the voting machines used in the very counties that swung by tiny margins to tip their states to Trump. There is a suspiciously similar vote % of victory in several of these counties. If anything, everyone should want to know everything about what happened there. If you’re smug about the result of this election, don’t be certain Putin or any other sick fuck can’t pull off a similar trick in favor of other parties. These electoral vulnerabilities put us ALL at risk.

          • ahughes798

            I wasn’t being smug. The idiots who stayed home are worse than smug.

          • YourMom

            I didn’t think you were being smug at all. I meant those who were all in for Trump and still are…and those who thought bringing HRC down would somehow fulfill the “revolution”-whatever the hell that means! I was just adding to what you said. So much gets lost in comments when we’re not editing ourselves carefully to avoid misunderstanding. Thanks for your comment…

          • amrak63

            “…fulfill the revolution…”

            Yep, the old “heightening the contradictions” strategy.

            Just look at how well that worked for the German Communists of the early 1930s. Once the Germans got a taste of Nazism, they overthrew it in disgust and installed the Communists into absolute power. Red Germany then allied with the Soviet Union to conquer the globe, and now the world writhes in agony under the invincible Red Alliance of Germany and Russia, the Master Nations.

            Oh wait, that’s NOT what happened, is it? ;)

          • ahughes798

            No worries. I quite possibly had a dumb spell yesterday, and it smacked just as I read your comment! Thank you for replying!

      • amrak63

        The Purity Left believes the Clintons are Mr. & Mrs. Beelzebub because they bought every lie the right-wing’s get-the-Clintons propaganda machine cooked up. It is my observation of this phenomenon which converted me to the Horseshoe Theory.

        • Dutchman

          I must admit, the RWNJ’s demonization of the Clinton’s is without a doubt one of the most highly successful ad campaigns of the last half century.

          • Zippy W Pinhead

            They actually spun it from her being a closet commie, left wing radical, Wellesley lesbian ball buster to being the exact opposite- a Wall Street loving , establishment neoliberal warmonger.

            And the dolts who bought into this crap never even noticed the 180 degree change, but instead just happily believed both sets of lies

          • amrak63

            On a more personal level, they believed both that HRC was an (exclusively) lesbian ball buster and that she had an affair with Vince Foster, then had him killed to cover it up.

            Cognitive dissonance? What’s that?

            I believe Mr. Orwell called it “doublethink”, but then, the GOP has been using 1984 as an instruction manual for a few decades now.

          • Natalie Au Natural Hedonist

            It strokes their, “I Knew it!” smug complex. They will believe anything that buys into their prejudices.

          • YourMom

            This is a great point.

          • John Frum

            Also worth noting that the right’s Hillary Hate has origins in her 90s pathfinding on the issue of health care reform.

          • YourMom

            Exactly. And her emergence as a feminist just poured fuel on their reactionary bonfire.

          • John Frum

            Yeah! Remember “I’m not gonna stay home and bake cookies”? And they peed themselves! That’s a big part of the GOP Hillary fetish

          • YourMom

            The far right started out in the 1970s cranking out shitty little newsletters in their garages and mailing them to friends, neighbors and the news media. The themes then were about the “scary Jews” and their plot to control the world and the news media “were totally in on it.” There were slight variations to this refrain, but the upshot is, this was the beginning of decades of creating suspicion of the news media, while at the same time cajoling and threatening the news media to eschew any facts that might bolster a centrist or even center/left viewpoint. Anyone who worked local news can attest to the daily drumbeat of phone calls and letters accusing them of being socialist tools of the devil or other godless traitors. Social media, Citizens United and a flood of money poured into outright propaganda wars in the past 8 years was like a blueprint for fucking weasel Vladimir Putin and his employees to propagandize this election. Stein is a willing tool and members of the Cult of Saint Bernard who are still poo-pooing what 17 IAs are saying..and who have parroted ALL of the right wing smears against Dems are fools and tools.

        • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

          I read somewhere once that in the 1990s, when conspiracism was fashionable on the left (JKF assassination, etc.), Larouchies actively worked to ingratiate themselves with LW journalists who thought they were getting “access” while be duped into helping spread Larouchie theories. I found a piece on it years ago, I have to find it again.

          • YourMom

            We had a saying among the political-science majors at my university: “He/she is so far left, she/he is far right.”

        • what, me worry?

          Sadly, your observation is actually confirmation bias. You want to believe that the left has been duped by Right Wing fantasies, so you believe any story that tells you that, and ignore any evidence that doesn’t support it.

          In fact, the number of people who consider themselves progressive, and who also believe nonsense like the Vince Foster thing, the pizzagate thing, Benghazi!! ™, the Seth Rich conspiracy, etc. is very, very small. Like statistically insignificant. Most people on the left don’t think Hillary is the devil.

          We think she has a character flaw that allows her to sell off core principles for campaign cash from special interests who profit from Democrats abandoning those principles. That’s not a right wing talking point. Right wingers don’t mind when Clinton says things like, “Single-payer will never, ever come to pass.” They like that stuff. It’s progressives she’s slapping in the face.

          Right wingers like it when Dick Gephart gets up in front of an Insurance association and says that Single payer will happen over his dead body.

          The fact is, most people like the idea. The vast majority of Democrats like the idea, including a lot of centrists. At least, that’s what they say.

          And then they support candidates who don’t only abandon that goal, but actively mock it.

          • disqus_DCiinn37br

            This ‘we’ stuff is really pathetic. You aren’t representative of the left. You don’t speak for anyone but yourself.

            Newflash: WE ARE THE LEFT. You are just one measly part of it.

          • what, me worry?

            But, in other arguments, you maintain that I’m not a progressive at all. Here you seem to be saying I am.

            “We” refers to progressives who don’t think it’s an awesome idea to sell out core principles for campaign cash.

            It’s more than just me.

          • amrak63

            All right, where do you think the candidates who meet your purity standards can get enough money to run for office successfully?

          • disqus_DCiinn37br

            Incorrect. You haven’t given us any evidence that that has happened. You never do. That is partly why you are a troll- you demand that we prove a negative so you don’t have to give us evidence for your accusations. It’s all here on the page, dude.

          • what, me worry?

            I’ve posted numerous links all over this thread, to analysis of the events in question, to the candidate, in her own words, declaring closely held progressive shibboleths to be pie in the sky pipe dreams that will never be reality. I’ve taken that candidate at her word, and I’ve said here that her motives, just like mine, aren’t relevant to that decision.

            You, on the other hand, will only post insults, inaccurate assessments of my postings, and whiny rants about how much you dislike my commentary.

            So, don’t read it. Problem solved.

          • disqus_DCiinn37br

            I’m taking you at your word for the purposes of this convo. I said I have a strong suspicion that you are an alt-righter. As I’ve said before, you’ve outed yourself as lying about part of your identity. The ‘triggered’ comment proves it.

          • what, me worry?

            You’re alt-right radar is off. It’s also irrelevant. You want desperately to dismiss my arguments by identifying me as being with a hostile tribe, so you don’t have to engage the actual content. It’s a standard technique for people who don’t have command of the facts they pretend to understand.

            It’s called ‘discrediting the source’. It’s the same thing many others do here to avoid uncomfortable conversations. If they don’t like the content of some link I post, they’ll discredit the source. Because, as we all know, Newsweek, that hippie rag, can’t be trusted.

          • julianenglish

            It doesn’t really matter “what” anyone here is. He could be a particularly loquacious banana peel, all that matters is the veracity of his facts and logic of his analysis. Go ahead, banana man. I’m listening.

          • Crazt Maist Waizy

            Pffffft…. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

            Sure, buddyboy, sure.

          • julianenglish

            You really don’t think the message and messenger can be separated? Hitler was a vegitsrian, and very good to his dogs. So, you’d say that vegetarianism and begging good to your pets are bad things?

            Unless you’ve taken a personal interest in attacking someone, who cares about that person’s identity? Is a fact or good argument more or less so depending upon who says it?

            Would you find what I’ve written to be more convincing if I were not a lesbian Libyan midget from Montana?

          • Crazt Maist Waizy

            I think everyone here has quickly seen your true colours. You are supporting a troll who makes points with no evidence. Nothing more needs to be said, apart from the fact that your attempts to belittle me are borderline misogynist.

            Gonna make a crack about triggering me like whatmeworry?

          • julianenglish

            My true colors are that I am very well versed in logic and so I bristle at logical fallacies.

            As to mysogeny, I gather that must mean you are female. I hadn’t really considered your sec or gender. Mine wasn’t so much an attempt to belittle you, but the adoption of the same sort of condescension found in your reference to me as “buddyboy.”

            “Caio, baby.” Is a shout out to Kojack, probably before your time.

            Lesbian midget — an attempt to demonstrate, via a minority if one, how pointless it is to concern oneself with the personal identity of others in debate.

            Caio. Ba ba ba person.

          • amrak63

            Hmmm–I’ll need to reconsider my initial good opinion of JE. His white male privilege (disclosure: I am also pale and male) is beginning to show.

          • julianenglish

            True, and yet, sometimes a particular white male actually does display a decent grasp of logic, and a closer approximation of objectivity than some other parties to a debate, regardless of, or even in spite of, their privilege. Otherwise, you have backed yourself into a corner. If you did not think you had more rather than less in the way if analytic skills you would be lurking rather than participating in this discussion, burdened as you are by privilege.

            How do we know what we know and how do we know that we know it? Among the better answers is that objective truth, though real, cannot be known with confidence. We gather the evidence as best we can, and test our beliefs in discussion with our peers. We strive for justified true beliefs, never really knowing if our justified beliefs are true or not.

            Personal attributes of the various parties to debate may shed light upon motives and bias, requiring especially careful attention. But simply saying, “hey, look! This dude is a dude and he’s white,” or “this is a black woman” means nothing in the final intellectual product of public debate.

            I am justified in saying that the sun does rise in the east, no matter who makes that observation.

          • amrak63

            History tells us that enough of those white people who say they agree with you, between the moment you walk away from them and Election Day. will hear the constant drumbeat of right-wing dog-whistle, and increasingly open rather than dog-whistle, racist propaganda, swallow it hook, line, sinker, and flopping in the boat, and go vote for the GOP.

            I know my tribe. You don’t.

          • The thing about this is that you think that the pizzagate/Vince Foster bullshit is the only false narrative that the right wing has been pushing. Sure, that’s the extreme end of the scale, and only utter morons believe that stuff, but the very idea that Clinton is “corrupt” or that there was something up with the Clinton Foundation, or that she was selling access etc is ALL a fabrication of the right wing and their bullshit factory.

            You may not believe the extreme end of the scale, but you clearly believe the less outlandish things that were generated deep in the black, black heart of the right wing anti-Clinton machine. You are either falling for their bullshit, and therefore a “useful idiot”, or you are aware of this and you are trying to recruit useful idiots.

            Dumb or lying, which is it?

          • what, me worry?

            Do you believe that Hillary Clinton is really opposed to Single Payer healthcare? I don’t. But she certainly poured a lot of cold water on it during the primary.

            Now, given the evidence we know to be true – that Single Payer is wildly popular among Democrats, that she has a history of supporting Single Payer, and that several of her major donors benefit financially from this change in goals, what is your judgment on why she expressed this pessimistic vision of the future?

            Maybe she’s just had a change of heart and doesn’t actually believe in single payer anymore. She expressed the right wing talking point during the primary that it was too expensive – even though it costs less everywhere it’s ever been implemented. If that’s the case, she doesn’t represent my goals in this area, and I was right to not support her.

            Or, maybe he agreed to temper expectations with regard to single payer in deference to the sizable investment Pharma and Insurance made in her campaign. In this case – if she sold out the goal of single payer for campaign cash from insurance and pharma – then she’s corrupt. And before you freak out about that word, I’m not saying she’s any more corrupt than most other politicians. But selling out your goals for money is corrupt, by definition.

            We can do the same analysis of her positions on public college education, and wall st financial industry regulatory reform, and unions. In each case, her platform and talking points were right of center, and favored the interests of her donors over that of her stated constituency.

            It’s possible she hasn’t been influenced by the money at all, and really believes that corporations should be free to exploit their workforce (refused to support policies designed to protect and strengthen unions, historically supported almost all free trade agreements), that banks should be free to prey on college students (no on free public college tuition, voted for bankruptcy reform that screwed students and enriched her donors), and that Wall St should be allow to do whatever the fuck it wants (refused to even consider legislation that could break up too big to fail banks). A lot of people believe that stuff. It isn’t unusual. But we call those people Republicans.

            I don’t listen to the noise. I listen to what the candidates say, and I compare those statements with their actions. Whether Clinton has been influenced by her donors to shift right, or she did it on her own, it doesn’t matter. She wasn’t representing my interests, nor was she representing the interests of most people who call themselves Democrats.

          • amrak63

            Very well, for the sake of argument, let us suppose you are correct that HRC, and Democrats in general, temper their social-democratic leanings in order to obtain campaign contributions.

            If they did NOT obtain funds from sources which you consider tainted, how do you think they could obtain enough funds to run successful campaigns? They can’t do anything to help our less fortunate citizens if they don’t win the elections.

            Or do you think they, or a sufficiently pure (by your professed standards) third party, could win elections without large amounts of money? If yes, how?

          • what, me worry?

            I answered this question inn the comment above.

            “Sanders raised more money every month than Clinton did in the last half of the primary campaign, and did it almost exclusively on individual donations…His candidacy, if nothing else, proves that Democratic reliance on and obsequiousness toward corporate donors who are openly hostile to the goals of Democratic voters is no longer necessary. It’s a choice.”

            I don’t consider corporations tainted. I am accepting the fact that corporations have their own priorities, and those priorities will tend to differ, diametrically, with the priorities of the average worker.

            So, if Democrats want to brand themselves the Party of the American worker; the defenders of the downtrodden and put upon; the stalwart for fairness in Democracy… Then getting your money and your marching orders from Goldman Sachs probably isn’t the best way to walk that walk.

            And when there is a funding mechanism to replace that – direct internet contributions – you don’t have to be that guy anymore.

          • amrak63

            Again, how do you know those “direct Internet contributions” actually came from the people who were said to have sent them?

            In the end, we have an irresolvable impasse.

            You believe the majority of Internet contributions are authentic grass-roots sources.

            You believe a sufficient percentage of Stupid White Folks can be enlightened. (Again, I know my tribe; you don’t.)

            You believe those two things make your particular understanding of social democracy achievable.

            I lack your faith.

          • what, me worry?

            That’s almost a reasonable position, but what you’re missing is motive. Let’s assume your right, and a bunch of those $27 donations came from some Russian operative. For what purpose?

            The reason special interests give large donations is for access and influence. $27 doesn’t buy you that. A Russian plan to give to Bernie, $27 at a time, doesn’t promise to impact his agenda in any way. It’s just a conspiracy theory with no motive for the conspiracy.

            The odd thing, to me, is that you lack faith in the origin of online donations, but have complete faith that enormous donations from special interests that absolutely don’t have your interests at heart wouldn’t impact Hillary’s policies at all. To which, I can only quote Barney Frank, who said, “People say, ‘Oh, it doesn’t have any effect on me,’” Frank told NPR at the time about the constant need to continually raise money as a congressman. “Well if that were the case, we’d be the only human beings in the history of the world who on a regular basis took significant amounts of money from perfect strangers and made sure that it had no effect on our behavior.”

          • julianenglish

            Re the search for motive, it would take very little money to give a possible spoiler sufficient funds to keep going long after legitimate citizens would no longer sustain the effort. Further, it makes one hell of a story. The leading candidate may have a war chest of 50 million dollars, growing by a million a day, while the little guy has 20 thousand growing by 10 thousand a day, and the lead story is. “Little guy’s campaign donations growing by 50% a day!”

          • amrak63

            Would not a large number of “independent” contributions which actually came from the same source have the same effect as a single large contribution which openly came from a single source?

            Again, you believe the mutual independences of the multiple contributions are real. I lack your faith.

            Also, Senator Sanders would not need to be informed of Putin’s intentions (if my suspicion be correct) in order for Putin to use him. Sanders, more likely, was an honest tool.

            I doubt that Putin ever expected Sanders could win the Democratic nomination. Putin merely wanted to alienate just enough purists, and plant just enough suspicion in the minds of undecided citizens that HRC was Madame Beelzebub–building on the long GOP smear campaign against the Clintons–to keep just enough votes away from Clinton in just the right states to deliver a narrow “victory” to his lackey Trump.

            No, I don’t believe contributions have no effect on policy. Rather, I lack your faith that “corruption” is always avoidable, or that it is inevitably and necessarily evil.

            Many of the people who made the New Deal and the Great Society happen would have been quite corrupt by your standards.

            If you are an honest hard-Leftist rather than a GOP or Russian (but I repeat myself) tool, then all I can say to you is: “Grow up.”

          • julianenglish

            Direct internet comtributions are a poor substitute for public funding, though politics being the art of the possible, perhaps the best we can do.

            Imagine something like this:

            zero advertising beyond formulaic statements of position, etc. allowed, and even then, a limit on expenditures.

            Return to the old equal time rule.

            Various candidate fora, equal in number and type, such as individual half hour interviews, capped with perhaps four full debates, all paid for in full by the federal government.

            Something like this would have beneficial effects in almost every way, except for those dependent upon ad revenues as those who want to buy a politician of their very own.

            Politicians in office could spend much more time actually serving rather than campaigning. For members of the house. In particular, with a two year cycle, campaigning for the next election begins the day after the last one.

            As for the voters, it cannot be doubted that they would actually end up better informed that they are currently.

          • amrak63

            Good ideas. Now, how do we get there from here?

          • julianenglish

            Thanks.

            Getting there? Hmm. Can’t get there from here.

            Implementation is probably not politically feasible at the moment. Campaign finance reform efforts always come up against the first amendment and get ground down in the courts. I think we are destined to have a pretty disfunctional political system for the forseable future.

          • You’ve taken one quote (which you actually got wrong, she didn’t say that “single payer” would never happen, she implied that Bernie’s plan from the primary would never happen.) and giving me 4 extra verbose paragraphs on that. This is not a college essay, you do not have to pad your replies to fill a word count.

            I don’t have time to go through your full diatribe, suffice it to say that you have let the perfect be the enemy of the good, to the detriment of literally everyone on the planet. Good job, kiddo

          • what, me worry?

            “I choose not to read your comment, but I disagree with you” is the type of response I’ve come to expect at Wonkette. It combines all of the presumption, laziness and reflexive contrarian bent that is common here.

            You inferred from her statement that she didn’t really mean what she said. That’s on you. She said it would never, ever happen. And if we voted for her, she’d be right. Because she wouldn’t fight for it.

            Now, look at the national debate on the Democratic side for the past 6 months, and compare it to a year before that. With Clinton as the titular head of the national party, Single Payer was a fever dream that wasn’t even considered a serious policy.

            Since she’s gone into the woods, even corporate insiders like Chuck Schumer are embracing it. The debate has shifted, Single Payer is now in the legitimate policy debate, and it is because Hillary Clinton isn’t President.

            This is how the Overton Window shifts – when Status Quo candidates lose, the status quo can’t be certain of their footing. They start listening to the voters again, if only for a short time. That moment is our opportunity to shift the debate.

          • amrak63

            Very well, where will pure candidates, Democratic or 3rd-party, get enough funds to win elections without resorting to sources which you consider to be corrupting influences?

            Or do you think Federal or major state offices can be won without needing large amounts of money? If yes, how?

          • what, me worry?

            Any politician who receives a bulk of their financing from organizations that are hostile to the goals of their party is going to be influence by that money in a direction that is opposed to the party’s stated goals. So, clearly, if you want to be the party of working Americans, the poor and the minority community, you have to get your money from organizations that align, at least in general, with your stated goals.

            And I wish you’d stop using that dishonest ‘purity’ meme. It isn’t about ‘purity’ or refusal to compromise. There is a difference between compromising in order to get part of what you want, and discarding stated long term policies because your donors paid you to. It is beneath you, and me, to have such a dishonest buzzword debate.

            But the bottom line is, I question the value of winning elections, if, in doing so, you have to abandon the very goals you wanted to get elected to accomplish.

          • amrak63

            I notice you still did not answer how sufficiently pure candidates can win election campaigns without raising large sums of money.

            I must assume that you know no such way, and so you are willing to accept political defeat for the sake of maintaining your definition of integrity.

            “Politics is the art of the possible”, it is said. You would seem to disagree with that.

            Very well, for the sake of argument, let us accept that it is better to lose elections from lack of funding than to temper one’s goals to improve one’s chances of winning the elections.

            How will you change anything if you can’t win elections?

          • what, me worry?

            Sanders raised more money every month than Clinton did in the last half of the primary campaign, and did it almost exclusively on individual donations. In the internet age, a progressive candidate with a strong online presence doesn’t need to scrape and bow to Corporate America, only giving voice to those scraps of policy they’ve pre-approved for the rabble.

            His candidacy, if nothing else, proves that Democratic reliance on and obsequiousness toward corporate donors who are openly hostile to the goals of Democratic voters is no longer necessary. It’s a choice. It’s easier to get one big check than 100,000 small checks. It’s that ease; that laziness; that’s at the heart of what’s wrong with Democrats.

          • amrak63

            “online”

            “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog.”

            How many of Sanders’s donations–without his knowledge–actually came from GOP/independent-right or Russian (but I repeat myself) sources?

          • julianenglish

            Campaign finance reform is the obvious solution.

          • amrak63

            CFR would be good. How can that be done?

          • amrak63

            And when Status Quo candidates don’t really lose, but have the election stolen from them, in an act of war by a hostile foreign power? What does Overton have to say about that?

          • what, me worry?

            “And when Status Quo candidates don’t really lose, but have the election stolen from them,”

            As a progressive, and a previous Bernie supporter, I feel your pain, while enjoying the irony of that statement.

            Clinton lost. She doesn’t reside in the White House. She doesn’t get to sign bills or executive orders. She lost.

            You can make the case that Russia made mischief. I’m certain they did. But unless they hacked the election system and changed the votes, people actually went to the polls and when those votes were counted, Clinton lost.

            But by all means, let’s all comfort ourselves in the popular vote totals, because Democrats are genius at the moral victory. It’s real victories we have trouble with.

          • And the strawman that you’ve just built is exactly typical of pretty much everything you’ve said on here.

            Look, you can speculate wildly all day, but the fact of the matter is that you’re guessing what would have happened were Hillary Clinton president.

            We KNOW that single payer won’t happen with the current failure in chief, but at least Hillary was starting on the correct side of the debate, which is “give health care to MORE people, FIX the ACA”, and she has shown the ability to grow and change her positions.

          • what, me worry?

            I’m not guessing, I’m taking Clinton at her word. She said that single payer would never happen. She had no intention to fight for – to put political capital into – a cause she didn’t believe was a possibility.

            And as long as that’s true – as long as the leaders of the party aren’t willing to even make the argument – Clinton’s statement becomes predestined fact.

            But notice how that fact has changed. In the past 6 months, with the Republicans eagerly and voraciously trying kill the entitlements state in one fell swoop, people are finally acknowledging the complexity and unwieldy-ness of the ACA. How Insurance companies will game the system to eek out a little more profit, because, after all, they are in the business for profit, not to give you healthcare. The debate is now on our turf. Single-payer isn’t a pipe dream now. It’s in the mainstream debate as a legitimate policy proposal.

            People are coming to the realization that a simple, straightforward medicare-for-all plan isn’t just far easier to understand and sell to the public, but also far easier to defend. It’s also less costly, and produces better outcomes. It’s more fair. It’s better for poor people. It’s better for businesses, it’s better for the economy.

            So, who’s against it? Insurance companies and Big Pharma. The very organizations dumping millions of dollars into Democratic coffers, with the provision that Democrats treat single-payer as a nice dream that will never come true.

            The corruption of Democratic legislators is not a sufficient reason to keep 29 M people from accessing the healthcare system, and that is all that is stopping single-payer from being a legitimate policy goal.

          • Single payer has always been a policy goal of Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, but your blind adherence to one garbled quote, and your general hatred of HER seem to have you thinking that this is a new thing… The practical fact of the matter is that a single payer health care system is simply not going to happen in the US in my lifetime. Political realities are things, and you can’t hand wave them away with wishful thinking.

            And I say this from the comfort of my amazing single payer system up here in Canada.

          • what, me worry?

            We could have the same conversation about her steadfast refusal to consider legislation that would result in breaking up too big to fail banks. It isn’t just that quote. There are many quotes. Or how she refused to support public college education because, flippantly, she “doesn’t want to pay for Donald Trump’s kids to go to college.” (frankly, I think they could all use some more schoolin, but that’s me)

            It’s all fruit from the same tree. These are all positions that benefit her donors at the expense of the voters.

            But back to single payer, your speculation on its chances is just that, baseless speculation. It won’t happen this year, or next, certainly. But it also isn’t dismissed out of hand and a hippie’s wet dream either. Dyed in the wool conservadems like Chuck Schumer have flirted with it. This is a guy who wouldn’t give the idea the time of day 8 months ago, now he’s kind of on board.

            And that’s because he’s scared. The leader of the status quo of the democratic Party, a sure lock for the Presidency, running against an ass clown like Donald Trump, lost. The status quo lost to someone who doesn’t know foreign policy from a poorly managed casino. The fact that this wasn’t an historic, Nixonian-level blowout in Clinton’s favor – that Trump even had a puncher’s chance in this race, is an incredible blow to the “Way things are done”.

            When that happens – when the career guys suddenly can’t predict the outcome of clearly obvious things – they suddenly realize they’ve completely lost touch with the electorate. They spend so much time hob-nobbing with business leaders and lobbyists, and catering to the needs of their donor base, that they have no idea how pissed of the average American currently is.

            That has to be terrifying. So, the Chuck Schumer’s of the world are currently casting around to figure out what people actually want. They’re actually listening to their constituents. It might only be for 5 minutes, so we – the voters – need to give him our priorities RIGHT FUCKING NOW. And when he hears how popular single payer is, he gets on board.

            Kind of. There’s still the donors. Baby steps. I predict it will happen in less than 10 years.

          • amrak63

            RHB–You forgot to mention that she was seen near the grassy knoll with a couple of the little gray aliens. ;)

            I read it on the Infowars site; it must be true! ^_^

          • Well, yeah, but those things are just common knowledge. Like the fact that she’s actually a reptilian overlord in a human skin suit, just like all celebrities and politicians!

          • julianenglish

            And Michelle Obama is a transsexual married to a gay Muslim from Kenya. Old news.

          • laughatbabyboomers

            Both Clintons have failed MISERABLY at Supporting liberal policy since the 90’s.

            It really looks pathetic when you blame the right for the actions of the CLINTOM FAMILY.

            What is wrong with you?

          • Well, my major failings are that I’m unable to put up with idiots like you for more than this sentence, and I could probably stand to lose a bit of weight.

        • laughatbabyboomers

          Just leave the left. We could have gotten Sanders elected if you clowns realized you no longer share the ideals of the left.

      • Gorillionaire
      • persistently_resistant_gayby

        HALLEJUAH – THOU HAS SPOKEN THE TRUUUTH!

      • what, me worry?

        Just as Clinton has absolved herself from any responsibility for her epic failure (“I take responsibility for my decisions, but they aren’t why I lost” is not taking responsibility for your decisions), Clinton supporters are still here, absolving themselves from their own actions.

        It was you lot who told us that you didn’t need us. “Go vote for your irrelevant candidates. We’ll win in a landslide anyway. We’ll prove, once and for all, that the Left is utterly irrelevant, and we can continue to safely ignore you with impunity.”

        I’m sure you all don’t remember that, but it was a standard theme during the General, screeched at all of us that warned you that you had nominated a shockingly vulnerable candidate, and if we weren’t listened to, she’d like lose.

        She lost.

        Now your refrain has changed. It isn’t your fault, for refusing to work with us on a sufficiently progressive platform. It’s ours for refusing to knuckle under, even though you told us, explicitly, that you didn’t need us.

        • Dutchman

          Actually, my refrain has not changed one bit. I was looking at all of the Purity Pony riders(you) and saying that if you insisted on buying and pushing all of the crud that Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Hannity and the rest were peddling that we’d end up losing. Losing the White House. Losing a SCOTUS seat. Losing on healthcare. Losing on the environment.

          It turns out that I was correct and we as a nation were dragged into this insanity because of you losers.

          You own it.

          • what, me worry?

            Since the Left hasn’t bought into the idea that Hillary killed Vince Foster, or that she’s somehow intertwined with some pizza parlor basement pedophile ring that has no basement, or any of the other wild stories that the Right has pitched about Hillary over the years, I’m afraid I don’t know what you’re talking about.

            My criticism of Clinton remains the same, with one addition. She’s too willing to sell core principled goals to special interests who will profit from Democrats abandoning them, she’s far too belligerent with regard to foreign policy, and she’s unwilling to take responsibility for her own failures of judgment. None of that has anything to do with the Right Wing spin machine. It has to do with her voting and advocacy history.

            If you want to stop losing, start supporting candidates who share the goals you believe in, rather than selling them to the Insurance industry for a campaign check.

          • amrak63

            How will candidates who meet the standards of purity in which the troll claims to believe ever raise enough money, from the sources the troll would consider sufficiently pure, to run a successful campaign?

            Wizards would transmute unicorn poop to platinum through alchemy, perhaps, then sell the platinum to raise the funds?

          • disqus_DCiinn37br

            I think he’s an alt-right troll. He certainly isn’t a progressive by any stretch. I mean, he:

            Made that disgusting ‘triggering’ comment, and then used the exact same excuse with the same wording as alt right trolls do when they are cornered on ‘triggering’ comments.

            Seems to have no funding solution that would allow us to ever get things done. A sure sign he doesn’t want to solve the problem, he just wants to feel superior to us corporatist neoliberal shills.

            After the primary seems to have refused to support and vote for the only person who could have helped us do what we want

            Refuses to admit the vast right wing misinformation campaign against Hillary and has instead chosen to believe them.

            I also think he is just a simple troll- he makes that triggering comment, makes wild claims and accusations and when pressed for evidence never does, he doesn’t even answer half of what anyone says to him (usually the bits that are the most devastating to his ‘argument,’ and has stalked Wonkette for months repeating the same thing and attacking us all.

            I’ve blocked him now- debate is far more interesting when the person is actually there is good faith and doesn’t insult everyone. I think he is likely very young, possibly 15 or something, and of the sort that thinks they know better than everyone else

          • 73angelD

            Just because people don’t agree with you 100% on every subject, you label them alt-right. LMFAO. I’m sorry. I was raised to think for myself and not just go along with the crowd. I can be a Democrat and not like Clinton. She was a terrible candidate with no message. NONE. She lost to a no nothing reality TV personality. The blame for the loss belongs to Clinton and the DNC.

          • Crazt Maist Waizy

            Perhaps if you actually read all Ive put thus far, you’d actually understand why I think he’s an alt right troll. Besides, I strongly believe him to be. I never said for definite.

            He told us of his joy at triggering us all. You really see no similarities? The only other people I’ve ever met who do that are RWNJs.

          • 73angelD

            He stated his opinion and was attacked. He’s not a right wing troll simply because he’s not a fan of Clinton. That’s ridiculous. I’m a Democrat and have voted Dem for the past 26 years. I don’t really care for Hillary Clinton. I’ve been called a BernieBro – really nice when you’ve experienced sexual assault and are referred to as a rapey frat boy, told my vote doesn’t matter, told I’m not a REAL Democrat. – Talk about a purity test!

            He is straight forward with telling you he doesn’t believe any of the phony conspiracy theories from Infowar, fox news, etc. Had he been peddling that bullshit, I would agree that he’s a right-wing troll.

            This is the reason he didn’t vote for her.
            “She’s too willing to sell core principled goals to special interests who will profit from Democrats abandoning them, she’s far too belligerent with regard to foreign policy, and she’s unwilling to take responsibility for her own failures of judgment. None of that has anything to do with the Right Wing spin machine. It has to do with her voting and advocacy history.”

            He’s not calling you or anyone else names – although your pretty quick to do just that.

          • Crazt Maist Waizy

            Wrong.

            He did not state any facts at all. He repeated several PRATTs and the same smears of Hillary Clinton the right wing media, particularly Fox, have been doing. She won the primary fair and square, yet he has a conspiracy for that. She has fought for universal healthcare loads in her career and felt down about it once, and he has a convenient conspiracy to attack her there too. He just repeats conspiracies about her that the right wing media does.

            He has also been constantly asked to provide evidence for his ridiculous claims, and he never provides any. That is what trolls do- expect everyone else do the work to prove his stuff wrong, instead of bothering to want and actual debate. If he said ‘Hillary did this, and here is a paper on it with the evidence. Here is another saying that she…’ we would all be all ears. But he doesn’t. We don’t take kindly to someone slandering a Presidential candidate who inspired so many people and thinking that if we ever fight back we’re the ones being uncivil. Fuck that.

            You haven’t explained why you get labelled a ‘BernieBro,’ and none of us here have seen those conversations at all. Makes me think there is probably a reason for it if Democrats on the internet always call you one, and the only common denominator?

            You know the bit you quoted? It is STILL not sourced. It is still without any evidence! As I said, we don’t take kindly to someone coming here and constantly attacking everyone for supporting a Presidential candidate, literally for months on end, without any evidence, all the while deciding we aren’t even on the left at all. Do you realise how fucking insulting it is to our intelligence to pretend as though he has any actual workable points and that he isn’t just here to cause trouble? Are you seeing it now?

            You’ve even quoted some of what he has said, so you must have read some of it. He told us in the thread that he was glad he triggered us all. He. Was. Glad. He. ‘Triggered’. Us. All.

            That is why he is clearly not a liberal. I don’t know how much experience you’ve had on the internet, saying things like that is only ever done by right wing trolls. He. Was. Glad. He. ‘Triggered’. Us. All.

            We are not ‘calling him names.’ We are justifiably angry at him trolling here for months, and expectinf us to just swallow his unevidenced, purity pony bullshit.

            He attacked Wonkette. He. Was. Glad. He. Triggered. Us. All.

          • 73angelD

            How can you even say that? The emails showed the DNC colluding with her campaign when they are supposed to be impartial during the Primary process. No one ever denied what was exposed in the emails. DWS stepped down and Donna Brazile got caught giving debate questions to Clinton prior to the debate. You trying to spin it in a way that she comes up smelling like roses is ridiculous. You sound EXACTLY like Trump supporters that say the collusion with Russia is made up.

            Clinton has a history on changing her stance on policy not because it’s a benefit to the public, but because she deems it politically expedient. That is why I don’t like her. She doesn’t seem genuinely concerned with anything other that getting elected.

            You are also projecting. “We don’t take kindly to someone slandering a Presidential candidate who inspired so many people and thinking that if we ever fight back we’re the ones being uncivil. Fuck that.” – You do the SAME thing to Sanders supporters – you refer to all of his supporters as rapey frat boys – BernieBros. You attack supporters personally and then try to play the victim. If it was policy you didn’t agree with, so be it. But it was ALWAYS personal.

            The whole BernieBro meme was debunked. It was made up by pro-Clinton journalists like Amanda Marcotte – but it didn’t stop you.
            https://extranewsfeed.com/poll-disproves-bernie-bro-myth-c38c876f8d05
            https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/02/15/hillary-clinton-feminism-sexism-bernie-bros-democratic-primary-2016-column/80374526/#
            Every canvassing meeting/event I went to for Sanders had 60% women. His supporters weren’t sexist. Any critique of Clinton I heard had to do with her policy positions. It was NEVER about gender. Sander’s message just resonated with them more than Clinton’s. It’s really that simple.

            He is not a Liberal, that I agree. He is a Progressive like myself. We are not your enemy. We are your allies. If you want to continue pushing away the Progressive arm of the Democratic party, fine. But just be prepared for a two term Trump Presidency.

            You can’t keep telling us (fellow Democrats) that you do not need or want our votes and then turn around and blame us for not voting for your candidate.

            Clinton lost states that have voted Dem for 30+ years. She did a shit job of trying to relate to voters and took them for granted. She lost and it was her and her campaigns fault. Stop making excuses for their horrid behavior.

            At this point in time. I’m over the election. You know why? Because no amount of bitching and moaning is going to change anything. My focus now is on researching the three Dems running for governor in my state of FL. They all want me to donate to their campaigns and I don’t really know enough about them. I also need to look at who is running in 2018 for Senate and volunteer to get more people to the polls. That is all any of us can do now.

            So you can continue to bash those with differing opinions on the 2016 election – which is a complete waste of time and helps Trump or you can get your ass in gear to help get the Senate and House back in the hands of the Dems. It’s the ONLY way Chump with be impeached.

            On a final note. Not liking Clinton is not an attack on Wonkette. I’ve been visiting this site since Obama’s first run in 08. Were all his supporters sexist rapists too??????

          • laughatbabyboomers

            “and the same smears of Hillary Clinton the right wing media, particularly Fox ”

            How old are you?

            At 26; I hate hillary clinton for being hillary clinton. I don’t follow right wing news. I am WAY more liberal than you; any day.

            Hillary Clinton is TRASH. That is how REAL Liberals feel.

            Stop blaming the right and start taking responsibility.

          • Such a filthy CMW comment

            This discussion ended about three days ago, dude. The one who needs to grow up is the one who is so riled by a three day old discussion that they just have to comment.

            I doubt a person who calls a woman and fellow left winger ‘trash’ in capital letters is more liberal than me.

            You haven’t actually shown me what you don’t like about Hillary. When you just don’t like a woman for a reason you can’t explain, that should worry you and the people around you.

            By the way, I had a look at your profile. You are a serially abusive purity pony, and I kind of pity one with such visceral hatred for anyone but Saint Bernie.

            Go away BernieBro. Us actual Bernie supporters would like to speak in peace.

            I’m blocking you, because this discussion is now irrelevant to me.

          • laughatbabyboomers

            Whiny brat

          • John J Publicus

            If you’re. A ‘real liberal’ you’re not a very smart one cupcake….

          • John J Publicus

            I’m digging all those citations that you put up too….

          • 73angelD

            Google is your friend.

          • John J Publicus

            What a pathetic excuse for sloth…

            They told me that some people were allergic to knowledge, I didn’t believe them…. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b0395813cea1e214963599dd66d5bcdc0eb9bf08da60091e5fed01e1269fd9d4.jpg

          • 73angelD

            Eyeroll…….Let me guess. You need a citation proving Clinton lost the election too?

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiX9s2IVlBw

          • John J Publicus
          • 73angelD

            As Sec. of State she approved $120 million for gun manufacturers (4 million to the manufacturer of the guns Adam Lanza used to murder children) and much if it when right back into the pockets of the NRA. Even Obama referred to her as Annie Oakley. Thankfully she is no longer the poster child of the Democratic party.

          • John J Publicus

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b0395813cea1e214963599dd66d5bcdc0eb9bf08da60091e5fed01e1269fd9d4.jpg

            Not that I think you’re a moron, you’re just wrong.

            Of course if you insist, I can make an exception in the moron department

          • 73angelD

            You are willfully ignorant. No different from the Trumpsters.

          • 73angelD

            Oh and you must totally hate Elizabeth Warren for speaking the truth too. This is an interview on the Bill Moyer show. She explains how the banking industry influences Clinton, then a Senator of NY.
            https://youtu.be/4Gnu0XNPgHk?t=14m40s

          • 73angelD

            Please argue why we should ignore an elected official changing their stance on policy once special interests “donate” to their election campaigns? The only person deflecting is you. I for one have never defended Trump. Ever. So you’re a little lost here.

          • John J Publicus

            Oh please, I’ve yet to see an actual citation of a specific charge, conviction, incidence…anything?

            Yeah, that’s what I thought.

            Crickets…

          • 73angelD

            I guess you didn’t watch the links I provided. Not surprised. You are just as ignorant as the Trumpsters yelling “fake news” evey time they hear something unsavory about their hero Chump. You’re no different. Keep your head in the sand. It’s what you do best.

          • John J Publicus

            More poss poor deflection

            You really should think about taking some lessons or something…

          • sgt. jmk of the résistance

            You DO know what Dutchman is talking about because you’ve swallowed the bullshit that HRC is a corrupt corporate shill.

          • what, me worry?

            Actually, in assuming she’s been bought is giving her the benefit of the doubt. I want to believe she’s actually a progressive, but that she feels she needs the cash more than the principle. That makes her weak, but not evil.

            The alternative is that she really does think we should be fracking everywhere, and that Wall St should be gambling with our retirement funds, and that students should be stuck in indentured servitude for their professional lives, and that America really should spend the blood of our children in wars of corporate access, because she really is an economic and foreign policy conservative Republican.

            And I don’t vote for Republicans.

          • sgt. jmk of the résistance

            No, she really DOESN’T fucking think we should be fracking everywhere:
            https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factsheets/2016/02/12/hillary-clintons-plan-for-ensuring-safe-and-responsible-natural-gas-production/

            And she really DOESN’T fucking think that Wall St should be gambling with our retirement funds:
            https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/wall-street/

            And she really DOESN’T fucking think that students should be stuck in indentured servitude for their professional lives:
            https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/college/

            And she really DOESN’T fucking think that we should spend the blood of our children in wars of corporate access:
            https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/military-and-defense/

            But thanks for revealing that everything you know about her came from Bernie’s Dank Meme Stash.

            And for proving my point.

          • what, me worry?

            Well, gee. Now that you point out what she claims on a website, that just answers all the questions, huh? It’s not like she’s ever actually advocated those things and cast those votes in the past.

            Anyone who believes the campaign promises, even when the candidate’s history suggests the exact opposite, is an idiot.

          • sgt. jmk of the résistance

            Go on, sugarlump. Name the vote where she plumped down firmly for saddling students with crippling debt.

            Name the one where she gave Wall St – an important economic driver in the state she fucking represented in the Senate – carte blanche to plunder people’s retirement funds.

            Specify which vote it was in which she said that corporations should be able to send kids to die for their own corporate agendas.

            Tell me WHEN she has ever advocated ANY of that shit.

            Like all of the asshats who have spent 35+ years slagging this woman off, there’s a micron worth of fact – yes, she doesn’t demand that fracking be banned everywhere immediately – and a metric fuckton of smear in everything you say about her.

          • what, me worry?

            She voted for the bankruptcy reform act that made privately held student load debt non dischargable in bankruptcy, screwing students and enriching her banking donors.

            She advocated for the financial modernization act that removed the firewall between commercials and investment banks, and exempted specifically the type of financial instruments that were at the heart of the financial crisis.

            Every war she voted for as senator, or advocated as sec of state were wars that enriched corporation and cost the blood of children. Iraq. Libya, just to name 2. In 2008, she promised to attack Iran. In 2016, she promised to increase our war footing in Syria.

            As sec of state, she used her position to advocate on behalf of US fossil fuel companies for fracking worldwide.

            You don’t seem to know the history of the woman you are supporting. Maybe you should find out. Did you only read her website?

          • John J Publicus

            Just loved all,those citations you put up that prove all this.

            Oh, wait….

          • what, me worry?

            These positions are all well known, and I’ve linked them all in this thread. You’re too lazy to look, or you really don’t want to know?

          • John J Publicus

            Lol, yes I’m sure you linked all sorts of things in this thread… https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/681f0d98c55d7daf7b37ac46e1519729b3a010c4cb1e39719dde20e3479c2696.jpg

          • what, me worry?

            Ok, you’re too lazy to scroll. Got it. That’s all you had to say.

          • John J Publicus

            Nope, nothing. All I see going way back in he thread is more bullshit and not one credible source. All opinion, no facts. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b0395813cea1e214963599dd66d5bcdc0eb9bf08da60091e5fed01e1269fd9d4.jpg

          • sgt. jmk of the résistance

            Oh I see you don’t mind lying.

            “She voted for the bankruptcy reform act that made privately held student load debt non dischargable in bankruptcy…”

            Nope. Not even close – from Time Magazine:

            “Before 1976, all education loans were dischargeable in bankruptcy. That year, the bankruptcy code was altered so loans made by the government or a non-profit college or university could not be discharged during the first five years of repayment. They could, however, be discharged if they had been in repayment for five years or if the borrower experienced “undue hardship.” Then, the Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judgeship Act of 1984 made it so all private student loans were excepted from discharge too.
            Two decades of further tweaks to the bankruptcy code ensued until 2005, when Congress passed the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, which made it so that no student loan — federal or private — could be discharged in bankruptcy unless the borrower can prove repaying the loan would cause “undue hardship,” a condition that is incredibly difficult to demonstrate unless the person has a severe disability.”

            The 2005 bill was passed by Republican majorities in the House and the Senate. Secretary Clinton didn’t co-sponsor the bill, AND SHE DID NOT VOTE FOR IT – she either abstained or was absent for the vote.

            “She advocated for the financial modernization act…”
            Was that the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act that Bernie voted for in 1999? The OTHER Clinton had a hand in that, not her.

            “Every war she voted for as senator…”
            You mean the ONE time she voted for the only option that promoted diplomacy before even considering military action? Or were you perhaps thinking of Bernie’s FIVE votes for military intervention that you fucknuts magically don’t hold against him?

            Oh… or did Bernie’s five votes for military intervention not “[enrich] corporation and cost the blood of children”?

            “As sec of state, she used her position to advocate on behalf of US fossil fuel companies for fracking worldwide.”

            Promoting American businesses is part of what the Secretary of State does – doesn’t matter what his or her personal feelings are about a particular business.

            Seems to me that the person who read only one website was you, cupcake – and that was clearly Bernie’s Dank Meme Stash.

          • what, me worry?

            OK, so, your argument makes 2 claims – (1) that the 2005 reform act didn’t actually have any impact on bankruptcy discharges of student debt, and (2) Hillary didn’t vote for it, so, nya, nya, nya!

            Here are several articles from legitimate sources explaining how the 2005 act screwed students, calling the lie to your excuse:

            http://business.time.com/2012/02/09/why-cant-you-discharge-student-loans-in-bankruptcy/

            “Congress passed the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, which made it so that no student loan — federal or private — could be discharged in bankruptcy unless the borrower can prove repaying the loan would cause “undue hardship,” a condition that is incredibly difficult to demonstrate unless the person has a severe disability. That essentially lumps student loan debt in with child support and criminal fines — other types of debt that can’t be discharged.”

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/14/private-student-loans-bankruptcy-law_n_1753462.html

            “But because of a 2005 reform law, private student loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy, except in extremely rare cases.”

            http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9803213

            “The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act was enacted in 2005 to include private student loans as one of the 10 debts that can’t be forgiven.”

            So, you’re either wrong, or a liar.

            And here are scholarly articles on why Hillary’s vote for that law is a problem, along with Liz Warren, calling Hillary a corrupt skank for flipping on this, just for fun.

            https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/us/politics/the-vote-for-bankruptcy-reform-that-haunts-hillary-clinton.html

            [“Had the bill been transformed to get rid of all those awful provisions that had so concerned First Lady Hillary Clinton? No,” Ms. Warren wrote. “The bill was essentially the same, but Hillary Rodham Clinton was not.”

            She wrote that as first lady, Mrs. Clinton had been “willing to fight for her beliefs.”

            “As New York’s newest senator, however, it seems that Hillary Clinton could not afford such a principled position,” Ms. Warren added.]

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/02/09/elizabeth-warrens-critique-of-hillary-clintons-2001-bankruptcy-vote/?utm_term=.75476d9474a8

            [“I didn’t like the bill any more than I had liked it before. It still had very bad provisions. But I also pushed hard for a deal to protect women and children. So okay, I held my nose. I voted for it,” she said]

            So.. In spite of your protestations, apparently Liz Warren thinks her vote for the bill is indefensible. And above is Clinton defending her vote for the bill. But you say she didn’t, so.. ok, sport.

          • sgt. jmk of the résistance

            Why don’t you read my actual words instead of warping them?

            Know how I know you didn’t?

            Because you cited the article I FUCKING QUOTED.

            And your bullshit about “here are scholarly articles on why Hillary’s vote for that law is a problem”? They just prove what a fucking liar you are.

            Know how?

            Because THEY’RE ABOUT THE BANKRUPTCY BILL AS IT WAS IN 2001. When that bill AGAIN came up in 2005, SHE OPPOSED IT, although she didn’t vote against it because Bill was in the hospital and she was with him.

            FROM YOUR OWN FUCKING ARTICLE:

            The bill actually never came back to the Senate for a final vote in that Congress. But Republican victories in the 2004 elections gave the bill new momentum, and when it came up for a final vote in the Senate, Clinton (as well as almost all of the other female Democratic senators) were in opposition.

            Clinton missed the vote because her husband was in the hospital but she issued a statement decrying it. In particular, she said the bill did not take into account “significant changes that have taken place in our national economy” since the Senate had last considered the bill in 2001, because Republicans had joined together to reject Democratic amendments. At least one of the amendments she had won in 2001 was also dropped from the bill.

            Let’s unpack some of the politics. In 2001, the Senate was evenly split, with 50 Republicans and 50 Democrats, so Republicans needed to work with Democrats such as Clinton to advance legislation. After the 2004 elections, Republicans had 55 seats in the chamber, making compromise less necessary. Thus Clinton had less incentive to back a bill that was being rammed through Congress.

            Warren, of course, made her comments and wrote her book before Clinton’s 2005 vote against the bankruptcy bill…

            One could suspect, as Warren did in 2003, that contributions made Clinton more sympathetic to the financial industry as a newly elected senator. But Clinton argues that she voted to advance the bill — “held my nose” — as part of an agreement to make the bill better. Warren says the main provision touted by Clinton was only a fig leaf, but we have no idea of how Clinton might have voted on final passage in 2001 because the bill did not come up for a final vote that legislative session.

            In the end, however, Clinton was against the bankruptcy bill at the moment it really counted — final passage in Congress. (In all, 26 Democrats opposed the bill and 18 supported it, along with all 55 Republicans.)

            So for all the money the financial interests contributed to Clinton’s campaign, she did not give them the support they desired.”

            So fuck off sideways, you dishonest little troll.

        • disqus_DCiinn37br

          You’re a liar.

          A. Clinton was the most experienced candidate in a long time, besieged by a multi-decade smear campaign by the right, she did nothing wrong, and still won the popular vote. It wasn’t her fault she lost and you know it full well.

          B. You are lying. “It was you lot who told us that you didn’t need us. “Go vote for your irrelevant candidates. We’ll win in a landslide anyway.” Wrong. We told people like you that you needed to vote for Hillary instead of a third party because that vote would be wasted, and give America Trump. We told you that we DID need you, idiot. That was always the lesson. But you couldn’t do it, could you? You just had to satisfy your pathological need to feel like you are better than everything else.

          C. I suppose pretending that all of us here on Wonkette aren’t on the left really helps you compartmentalise and blame everyone but yourselves and Trump supporters for Trump’s win. Newsflash, we have just as much right to be on the left as you do. Even more so, considering we actually support America’s primary left party and you don’t.

          D. Listen to you? Like you listened to Bernie when he told you to get behind Hillary for the sake of the country? Instead of sitting on the sidelines and demanding we all stretch to fit around you, how about you help us? You just couldn’t thought could you? You had to decide you were the purest of us all and refuse to work with anyone who didn’t believe in a straight white male saviour.

          E. Our ‘refrain’ hasn’t changed. We asked you to stop insulting every Democrat and vote with Democrats for the sake of the country. You couldn’t though, could you?

          The GOP had a hit file on Bernie thicker than you. If Hillary wasn’t going to win, a person the right could falsely compare to the Nazis as a ‘national socialist’ certainly would not have.

          You preach about progressiveness, but the only thing you are trying to do is destroy anyone who tries to advocate progressiveness but not in the same way. Hypocrite

          Of course, all this is assuming you actually are on the left at all. I think you are on the alt-right myself. That utterly unprogressive triggering comment, indistinguishable from those by the alt-right, proves you are lying about some part of your true identity.

        • amrak63

          No, it’s not your fault. Even more than Putin, the voluntary non-voters who fell for the “Both sides are equally corrupt and evil” BS bear the most blame.

          Though what you call “corruption”, others would call the normal give-and-take of politics in the real world–a place in which, mentally, neither the hard Right or the hard Left (the ends of the horseshoe) spend much time.

          Many of the people who made the New Deal and the Great Society happen were hella corrupt by your standards.

          All of this, of course, assumes that you are a sincere hard-Leftist rather than a conscious tool of the GOP or Russians (but I repeat myself).

          • what, me worry?

            I vote based on my own personal priorities, and my Number 1 priority is getting private money the hell out of public political campaigns. Large donations from special interests are the core issue that causes politicians to vote against their constituents’ interests. If they were banned, single-payer would be obvious. Public college education would be a no-brainer. Wall St wouldn’t be able to gamble with our retirement funds and our kids would be far less likely to be thrown into the meat grinder of a war. Because the people who profit from those activities would no longer be allowed to legally bribe the people who make that shit happen.

            Political campaigns should be publicly funded. Broadcast networks should be required, as a condition of their FCC license, to block out certain times for public service announcements regarding political campaigns. There should be vigorous debate, and the fairness doctrine should be re-implemented, so voters can’t just retreat into a bubble of familiar rhetoric they always agree with.

            And you’d be right to say, “Good luck with that.” Because it doesn’t seem likely, right? I mean, incumbent officials have a built-in fund raising advantage, and the power to end that advantage, or not. Special interest groups, seeking to affect pending legislation, will tend to bribe… ahem.. I mean “donate to” sitting officials rather than upstart challengers, in order to impact their behavior. And those interests certainly don’t want to lose their current influence.

            So, why would people already elected vote to end their own built-in advantage? Corrupt people don’t give up their corruption without a fight.

            Which is why I vote the way I do, and I encourage anyone I speak with to vote that way too. The only way to remove the public corruption of large scale donations to politicians, is to make those donations a net negative to that politician’s campaign. And that means the electorate has to view it as a negative.

            The primary and general voter, seeing that Politician X has taken $500,000 from Wall St firms has to assume that politician will now vote in favor of legislation to benefit those firms, regardless of what they say on the stump, call that what it is – corruption – and reflexively vote against that candidate.

            Once that happens on a large scale – once polling shows that voters view them more negatively the more large donations they take from special interests, the less attractive those donations will be. And when that happens, they’re much more likely to ban those donations, because they aren’t helpful anyway.

            So, for the past 20 years, I’ve reflexively voted against any politician who has taken large scale donations from special interests, and I’ve advocated that strategy wherever I’ve gone.

            Whether or not that eventually works, I can’t control, but at least I have a consistent ethos.

        • julianenglish

          Like nearly all social phenomena, the outcome of elections is over determined. We have far more potential explanations for behaviors than we need, and can’t run experiments in a lab to narrow the field. We can only build untestable hypothesis and see which one hang together best.

          Among the various contributing factors to Clinton’s loss are these:

          Bad decisions on the part of Clinton and her team, lack of sufficient political skills on the part of the same, Donna Brazile’s actions re a town hall debate, Bill Clinton’s tarmac indiscretion with Lynch, Podesta’s hacked emails, Wikileaks and Julian Assange’s desire for reveng, polarizing but effective campaign Russian activities in support of Trump, the oddity of the electoral college, Comey’s unprecedented public announcement that Clinton was not charged with a crime, and his editorializing of her carelessness, Comey’s announcement just before the election that the case against Clinton was being reopened, then his later announcement that the potential new evidence was not germane after all, and certainly more things that I just do not kow about.

          Of course Clinton made mistakes, that may have been sufficient, but we can never know for sure. Any permutation of other factors might also have been sufficient, with no way to know for sure. But some combination of factors proved sufficient, conclusively demonstrated by her electoral college loss in the general election,

    • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy
    • Manders

      You are absolutely wrong about NK btw. The missile they recently tested can hit New York. And they’re not doing it as a deterrent. They want us to normalize relations with them. It will help keep current leadership in power. And we’ll probably have to do it, unless we’re prepared to lose thousands, perhaps millions of people to a warhead. We didn’t deal with the growing problem ten years ago when we should have. The Democrats tried. Guess who blocked them?

      And, you know, the person making the threats is not HRC. It’s not Obama. It’s the nutbar in the White House. The one who has named an Ambassador for Religious Freedom but not one for South Korea. The one with no foreign policy experience, who has a Sec of State who has no foreign policy experience, who is not listening to the people who DO have that experience.

      None of the above problems would we have if literally anyone else had been elected President.

      • what, me worry?

        That’s an absurd analysis from any perspective. US nuclear capability isn’t a secret. Trump’s reactive nature isn’t a secret. Any launch from NK would leave NK itself in ash, and they know it.

        You don’t threaten an army with a slingshot and expect the army to take your threat seriously. And if the people in the army think it’s a serious provocative threat, that suggests the insecure nature of the people in the army.

        No one is launching at us while we’re armed to the teeth with nukes. Stop your fear mongering.

        • amrak63

          “Stop your fear-mongering”

          This, from a representative of the same faction which has spent the past several months screaming at the rest of us:

          “Don’t believe the stories about Russia interfering in our elections or the Russians might get their feelings hurt and that would somehow lead to WW3 OMG WTF BBQ!!!1!”

          • amrak63

            We all know what a sensitive guy Uncle Vlad is:

            http://i.imgur.com/dCWn1Bq.jpg

          • You should ice that burn

            “In Russia the Ferns smell you!

          • YourMom

            And always remember this one (as a means of self-defense): In Russia, road forks you!

          • Manders

            I would love to know exactly what about that statement is fear-mongering, but I blocked the goofball b/c he clearly knows nothing whereof he speaks.

            I get that it is scary–I too am scared–but I get through it by reminding myself that loons have had nukes for some time now, and we’re all still here, because even loons understand MAD.

          • what, me worry?

            Manders just said here, exactly what I said to Manders:

            “Any launch from NK would leave NK itself in ash, and they know it.”

            And yet, insults me as “goofball” and blocks me. But also agrees with me.

            Your Wonketariat, everyone!

        • Oy you again. Please to note not russian bot

        • disqus_DCiinn37br

          What about your fearmongering about Clinton and non-existent debate ‘help’? Looks like someone failed the Hypocrisy-Cover Up Exam…

          • what, me worry?

            Pointing to the fact that Clinton has, on numerous occasions, modified her positions to more closely align with the desires of her donors is not fear mongering. It’s an identification of a defect in character.

            My objection is to Democrats who sound and govern like Republicans, openly mocking core progressive goals that have approval from a large percentage of voters, simply because their special interest donors are hostile to those goals.

            If that doesn’t concern you too, perhaps you’re the problem.

          • disqus_DCiinn37br

            You’ve so outed yourself as a troll here! Your objection to Democrats is that they are “openly mocking core progressive goals that have approval from a large percentage of voters”? Exactly what you were doing with your ‘triggered’ comment. Exactly what you were doing.

            Look, we all know you are pretending to be something you are not.

            I’ll tell you exactly what the problem is, and it isn’t me. It is people like you pretending to be progressive when actually you just want to stall it. Or, that is what I would say if you weren’t clearly some kind of alt troll, whether alt-right or somehow alt-left. I don’t know which, but I don’t even think you are really a Bernie fan.

            I mean, it makes no sense that you are a Bernie fan- you are screaming at us that we are horrible, dumb people for supporting Hillary Clinton- yet Bernie endorsed Clinton when he lost the primary. So your problem is with Bernie.

            If you didn’t vote for Clinton you share the blame for Trump. Simple as.

          • what, me worry?

            Incorrect. I was replying to the very many people who replied to my detailed comments with hostility and insults, rather than addressing the arguments within them. Just look at this thread for a large sample.

            In fact, most people who align with Democrats believe the same things. Everyone should be able to access healthcare equitably. Education is a public good, and therefore should be treated as such. Unions exist to force business to equitably share the wealth created by the workforce, and should be protected and reinforced. Wall St is shockingly lawless, and needs to be properly regulated. And the last several wars we’ve fought were unnecessary, costly quagmires that created more terrorists than they killed.

            Here’s the difference – progressives don’t think that these core principles should be traded away for campaign cash to donors who are openly hostile to those goals. Single Payer healthcare isn’t impossible because people don’t want it. If it’s impossible, it’s because corrupt legislators will vote how their donors tell them to, and the insurance industry is a huge contributor.

            And that’s not a good enough reason.

            Establishment liberals fashion themselves as cosmopolitan and erudite. They are too savvy to stand on silly principles. There’s money to be collected. Money buys elections. Which, to me, is corrupt. Maybe to you it’s smart. That’s fine. But I question the value of winning elections if, to do so, you need to abandon the things you want to win the elections to do.

            You can cast me as a phony if it makes you sleep better, I don’t mind. But you’re only lying to yourself.

          • disqus_DCiinn37br

            Wrong. ‘Hur dur, I triggered you!’ is exactly the sentiment you expressed, and exactly the sentiment the alt-right express.

            You are not progressive. No progressive speaks like the alt-right do, and no progressive would dare insult the many thousands of PTSD sufferers, including millions of traumatised rape victims, by using triggers as mocking insults.

            You aren’t making any points. To do that what you say has to be actually supported by the evidence. You never give any

            Listen up, you purity pony little shit. The left doesn’t belong to you. Progressivism doesn’t belong to you. We are all the left. We all want single payer for America. We all want a fair economy. We just don’t all have the same approach to getting there as you seem to think you have.

            Either you are a BernieBro who takes his talking points from right wing media, thereby being traitors to Bernie, or you are an alt right troll who wants to trigger libtards. Which is it?

          • what, me worry?

            Actually, I made several points, all of which you seem to agree with here, while calling me not-a-progressive.

            “We all want single payer for America” kind of runs counter to supporting a candidates who take cash from Big Pharma and Insurance, who say, explicitly, “single payer healthcare will never, ever come to pass.”

            “We all want a fair economy” runs contrary to a candidate funded by Wall St who refuses to consider regulations that might force them to break up TBTF banks.

            I’m glad you have the same core goals as I do. Perhaps we can work together. I just don’t think supporting candidates who get paid by interests who are opposed to those goals, and then mock those goals on the stump, is an awesome way to make them happen.

            But maybe you’re all playing 11th dimensional chess. What’s the plan to get from “This will never happen” coming from your own candidate, to actually making them happen?

          • amrak63

            The sad truth is, they can’t be done until the population in a sufficient number of states becomes non-white enough for non-whites plus enlightened whites to equal a majority. Alfred E. pretends to believe that enough of my tribe are salvageable that the things Alfred E. claims to want could have been done in 2016.

            I know my tribe. Alfred E. doesn’t. It couldn’t have been done.

          • disqus_DCiinn37br

            A. No one says single payer will never happen. What Democrats are saying is that single payer is an incredibly unrealistic phenomenon when Obamacare barely happened. Most people realise that it is impossible to do it right now. Democrats also have to deal with BernieBros who think we can just magically replace the political climate with a different one and get single payer in a jiffy.

            Newsflash: We’re really sick and tired of BernieBros who think that if we just listen to a white straight man then everything we want will magically happen.

            B. For God’s sake. Being a New York Democrat Hillary should have been way more pro-Wall Street than she was. Yet she wasn’t, and you still aren’t providing any evidence for your claims about her. You never do.

            Newsflash: There is more than one approach to making a fair economy.

            C. You still don’t get it do you? You are a HYPOCRITE. Mocking progressive values is EXACTLY what you did with your ‘triggered comment,’ a comment you strangely haven’t mentioned in all your recent replies!

            D. For anything to ‘happen,’ troll boy, we need you to VOTE for the candidate Democrats put forward. You didn’t. You didn’t accept the primary results, move on, and support voting in the only way to could have stopped Trump.

            This is such a problem with BernieBros (if this is what you really are.) You think that if only your straight, white, male idol was in charge of everyone and if we all obeyed his every thought, then we’d get everything we wanted immediately.

            Listen, runt. We lefties have heard this sort of bullshit for years. For decades this has been exactly the same. Particularly for the more active feminists among us, who are always told if we’d just pipe down and let the white men think for us everything will be grand.

            It is the same patriarchal, white privilege, insulting drivel every time, and you are just one of the many people who try to bullshit us with this stuff.

          • what, me worry?

            “Single payer healthcare will, never, ever come to pass.” ~ Hillary Clinton.

            Your candidate said, explicitly, that single payer will never happen. In those words. The fact that you can sit here and deny she spoke them, when I’ve linked you to the video, or deny that she was passed debate questions, when I’ve linked you to the emails, indicates you’re either an inveterate liar or you’ve suffered a debilitating blow to the head.

          • sgt. jmk of the résistance

            Why don’t you folks EVER post the whole quote so people can see it in context:

            “”I want you to understand why I am fighting so hard for the Affordable Care Act, I don’t want it repealed, I don’t want us to be thrown back into a terrible, terrible national debate. I don’t want us to end up in gridlock. People can’t wait!…People who have health emergencies can’t wait for us to have a theoretical debate about some better idea that will never, ever come to pass.”

            Oh, that’s right, because it doesn’t portray her as quite as hard-hearted as you insist she is.

            The woman who had to wear a fucking bullet-proof vest at personal appearances because of the hatred ginned up against her by insurance companies for daring to try to implement a public option knows a little more about what’s possible in this realm than you do.

          • what, me worry?

            Why? Because I was responding to the provably false statement that “No one says single payer will never happen.” If you look above, that’s the comment I responded to.

            I respond to provably false statements with just the part of the quote that proves it false. The statement was false. Hillary Clinton said single payer would never happen.

            Now, if you want to talk about my opinion of Clinton’s “hard-heartedness”, we can have that conversation, but don’t jump in the middle of another topic and pretend the subject was what you now want to talk about.

          • sgt. jmk of the résistance

            Grown ups speak with nuance and can be understood best when context is provided.

            But I can see why that would be inconvenient for you.

          • what, me worry?

            Grown ups? Given the abuse you’ve spewed at me on this site, do you really want to talk about what grown ups would do?

            Really?

          • sgt. jmk of the résistance

            Oh phooey, did I offend you?

            Aww.

          • what, me worry?

            No, you didn’t. But you can’t behave like a 13 year old keyboard warrior and pretend you know what grown ups do.

          • sgt. jmk of the résistance

            Oh cupcake, at my age, I don’t take well to lectures on maturity from butthurt juveniles who think they know everything.

          • what, me worry?

            If your mental age is truly so advanced, one would think you wouldn’t resort, so quickly, to juvenile insults when you don’t agree with someone politically.

            But sure, you’re part of the noble and sober #McResistance, so clearly, ‘butthurt’ is a mature word to use here.

            Kudos.

          • sgt. jmk of the résistance

            You’ve swanned in here to tell us what’s what, and had several public tantrums because we didn’t fall all over ourselves sharing your very evident admiration of yourself.

            Now you want to claim that I resorted to “juvenile insults”?

            It’s always about projection with you assholes, isn’t it?

            Don’t bother to respond, you lying little asshat.

          • John J Publicus

            Not JUST an angry moron, but a BLIND angry moron….

          • what, me worry?

            And a new 13 year old keyboard warrior has decided to join the fun. Tell me, is it Torrets, or is the go to argument of the Clinton supporters always juvenile insults?

          • Helene Logan

            How about you include the entire statement?
            Oh yeah, that won’t support your argument.

          • kareemachan

            This is why I blocked whatme.

          • Such a filthy CMW comment

            He couldn’t actually articulate beyond ‘Hate Hillary, you’re all bad, grrrr.’ Trying to have a debate with that is pointless, because they don’t deal with one’s actual points.

          • John J Publicus

            He’s a troll from the alt right…

    • Manders

      As for the rest: ts; dr.

      • Lefty Wright

        And of course, perpetuating the false impression that the DNC emails actually showed any collusion in defeating Bernie. If you will notice, the emails griping and discussing Bernie came well after he and his campaign started their false claims of rigging. And if you will also notice, none of them ever entered DNC policy or ads. The Bernie crowd keeps harping on questions being given to Clinton. Come on, giving Clinton a suggestion that lead in the water in Flint may be brought up in the debate in Flint was not a game changer. And any organization that is being attacked by members of their own group as being crooked is going to create some internal ill will. The fact it was not acted on says a lot for the impartiality of the DNC. Yeah, I think DWS should have been sacked years ago. But not because she rigged the system against Bernie. Primary rules were in place years before this primary and Bernie knew them coming in. He even played the superdelegates issue to his advantage. Clinton would have been better off without them and would have sealed the nomination earlier if they did not exist. So no, conspiracy theories and wishful thinking do not prove the primary was rigged. Especially to the tune of over 3.5 million votes, about 10% of all voters. And that does not include some signs of soft support for Bernie, like exit polls in West Virginia showing over 40% of people voting for Bernie planned to vote for Trump in the general election. Or non binding popular votes in Washington state (Clinton won 53%)and Nebraska (Clinton won 60%) that Clinton won even though Sanders won the caucuses. The DNC had nothing to do with that.

        • what, me worry?

          Yep, DWS resigned and Brazile was fired from CNN because those emails showed exactly nothing.

          Thanks for playing.

          • There’s such a thing as someone being too controversial. Wasserman-Schulz was fed to the wolves in the attempt to assuage the wing nuts. Thanks for being a total arse.

          • what, me worry?

            Well, that’s not quite true, is it? I mean, she was elevated to a senior role in the Clinton campaign the minute she resigned. It doesn’t sound like she was exactly ostracized.

            But moreover, why was she so controversial? Everyone here, miraculously, maintains that there was nothing in the emails that was published. The entire primary was run on the up-and-up. If that’s true, why didn’t the emails reveal that? Instead, the showed an entire apparatus dedicated to elevating Clinton at the expense of Sanders.

            https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/23/dnc-emails-wikileaks-hillary-bernie-sanders

            Wasserman-Schultz was the chair of that effort. Surely you aren’t suggesting that’s a noble use of Party power – running a sham primary to appease the masses while having pre-selected the person you want to win? In complete opposition to your own charter?

            Because where I come from, that’s called fraud.

          • Sunnyhorse

            Last I checked, she was running the Democratic Party. Do I need to remind you that Senator Sanders was not a Democrat? He wanted the party’s money and data and loyalty but couldn’t be bothered to join.

          • what, me worry?

            Actually, it’s the Democratic Party that covets Sanders’ email list, not the other way around. He’s the most prolific grass roots fund raiser they’ve ever seen.

            As for being a Democrat, or not, objecting to a candidate who professes policy goals you agree with, like healthcare for all, wall st regulation, empowering organized labor to fight for a fair share of the wealth they create, just because he didn’t join your club, seems like a pretty weak argument to me.

            Or do you not want those things?

          • Truthiness2U

            Dems wanted Bernie’s list, after the schmuck ran as a Dem, in his own words, because he needed the party’s structure/money. He pretty much owed it to them, frankly.

            Bernie also needed things like THEIR data system of contacting voters, but his side decided what they had on their own wasn’t enough, so stole data from Hillary’s side. Poutraged/raised money off of their theft and the DNC’s very reasonable response to his side’s fuckery. Only fired one of the five people responsible, and lied about it later.

            And shocker! The Dem Party wasn’t thrilled with the guy/his org. that did all that.

            Oh and his org. lied about how he WAS going to be a Dem after the ’16 election.

            Anyhew, this is only relevant because all the fake crap that Bernie’s side said/still says (evidently) about “rigging!’ was part of a concerted effort to drive people to vote for nutjob(possible Russian paid off persons herself) Jill Stein, or stay home. Both happened in just enough numbers to give Twitler the “win”

          • what, me worry?

            The DNC’s data contractor was HRC’s ’08 campaign CTO who, shockingly, left security on a confidential list full of PII completely open for anyone to access. That is astoundingly incompetent.

            One person in Sanders’ campaign found it and four people accessed it for 40 minutes, knowing that their activity was audited. The person responsible for exploiting the DNC’s terrible security was immediately fired. That person maintains that the access, with full knowledge of the audit trail, was to alert the DNC of the openness of their security. It is in the same vein as hacking Diebold touchscreens that have little security and no paper trail, so that the candidate “Fix Your Security” wins the next election. Is it a violation? Yes, that’s why he was fired. Was it malicious? According to him, no.

            To characterize that as “Sanders stole data” is just terrifically disingenuous.

            But it would be easily provable. Just show one email from Sanders to Clinton supporters who didn’t overtly sign up for email from Sanders.

            Yeah, I thought so.

            Sanders didn’t need Clinton’s list. Clinton needed Sanders’. Sanders reliably outraised Clinton every month for the last 6 months of the campaign, one donor at a time. I mean, how valuable would Sanders find the contact information of the major banking lobbyists he refused to take money from, anyway?

            But I digress. The DNC, under DWS’ tutelage, immediately shut off his access to his own list, in direct violation of the contract they signed. The agreement requires the DNC to provide notice of any breach and 10 days in which to resolve it. None of those steps were taken, meaning the DNC was in violation of their agreement.

            From that perspective, it certainly appears that the DNC used the Sanders campaign’s passive aggressive “fix your security” message to hobble the campaign’s fundraising arm, until Sanders sued and the DNC caved.

            Even if the staffer’s motives were malicious, the staffer responsible (the 4 doing the work reported to him) was immediately fired, resolving the situation. The DNC was in clear violation of the agreement between the parties, and found themselves in a very actionable position. Here’s an analysis of the suit at the time:

            https://electionlawblog.org/?p=78472

            So, I’m not in agreement that Sanders “owes” the DNC a damned thing, except for his honest assessment of their electoral strategy, which is, they are principally bankrupt. They refuse to change course from their disastrous 2016 election. They refuse to embrace any ideas that might negatively impact their corporate donor base, regardless how popular those ideas are with the voters. And that’s a shame, because it’s killing the party, and the alternative is horrible.

          • Helene Logan

            The problem remains, however, that because Bernie didn’t get the nod, people pulled the ‘Well then, I won’t vote/I’ll vote 3rd party because wahhhhhh!” , which is the childish response to reality.
            I harp about this every fucking election cycle–if your ‘favorite’ doesn’t win, hold your nose if you have to and vote for the practical if not perfect candidate that the party has put forth, no matter how much you think it’s a done deal, because IT NEVER IS.
            Believe me, I was staunch Sanders supporter,, but being A Olde, I have seen this shit happen before and refuse to play the purity game. Do I wish it were a different scenario? Certainly–but so far in my lifetime, it hasn’t changed and no amount of wishful thinking will make that so.
            I do believe that had HRC pegged Bernie for the VP job we may have been able to hold the Orange Turd off, but the number of angry Bernie-or-Bust people I encounter makes me question that.
            And honestly, I never saw HRC as the World’s Most Evil Candidate/Ladyperson/First Lady and people believing all the anti-Hilz hype that the (vast) right-wing (conspiracy) has been throwing at her since forever is what birthed this cavalcade of clowns we’re stuck with. How did people inclined to vote D not see through that bullshit?

          • what, me worry?

            “The problem remains, however, that because Bernie didn’t get the nod, people pulled the ‘Well then, I won’t vote/I’ll vote 3rd party because wahhhhhh!” , which is the childish response to reality.”

            That really depends on your perspective. If you only care about getting the least objectionable candidate in this particular election, with no thought to what came before or what comes after, then from that perspective, I’d agree. It seems a foolish way to get what you want.

            The people who vote third party, in hopes that more people will vote third party, do so based upon the logic that a Democratic Party who consistently gives you shit candidates has no incentive to give you better ones if you will reliably continue to support their shit candidates, just because they happen to be better than the even shittier candidates the Republicans offer up.

          • disqus_DCiinn37br

            No, it isn’t a matter or perspective. It splits the vote and means lefties won’t win at all. If you didn’t vote because Hillary won the primary then you are partly responsible for the shit we have now.

            Of course there is still an incentive. Tell Democrats what you would like, tell them you’d consider donating, tell them you’ll vote differently in the smallest level of government, praise them when they get something right, and, above all, don’t arbitrarily decide they aren’t on the left because they don’t obey you, and don’t insult them as neoliberal Wall Street whoring shills.

            But you still haven’t accepted there is a right wing misinformation campaign against Hillary. So you’ll never be able to have a balanced perspective.

          • what, me worry?

            From your perspective, that may seem true, but only if you assume that everyone who voted for Stein (a) would have turned out to vote otherwise, and (b) would have voted for your candidate. Neither of those assumptions are given. The people who voted for Stein did so knowing their vote wouldn’t elect anyone, and they did it anyway. why do you automatically assume they’d vote for Clinton? They had the chance to vote for her and refused.

            And once again, you are devolving the conversation to a right/left paradigm that doesn’t exist in the Democratic Party. We’ve already established the rank and file agree on probably 90% of the issues. The split in the party is therefore not center/left. It’s corrupt, or not. When the party chooses to alter the policies it pursues for campaign cash from organizations that benefit from that change, that’s corruption. When the candidates they pick are openly derisive of the policies that we all agree should be our goals, you need to look at their major donor list to determine why.

            So, the split isn’t ideological. You and I agree on ideology. It’s whether you are accepting of open corruption, or not.

          • Helene Logan

            How has Clinton come to represent such a level of corruption? She was a highly popular Senator and effective SoS. Is it just hearsay from over 20 years of right wing radio bleating on and on about Vince Foster and the Rose Law Firm? I’m seriously curious.

          • what, me worry?

            In my entire commenting history, I have never criticized Clinton based on right wing slanders. I view her history as a complex woman who made choices that were highly disappointing.

            In my view, Hillary Clinton is a brilliant person who has studied the issues intensely. She has known for decades that LBGT equality is the right moral policy, and that Climate Change is the existential threat of our time, and that Wall St firms, if given the freedom and the opacity to commit fraud, will gleefully do so in as much volume as they possibly can. She knows, through careful study, that killing a lot of people in the Middle East creates a lot more terrorists than it kills. And she knew that the problem in the inner cities wasn’t a lack of police, but a lack of opportunity.

            She knew all of these things years, perhaps decades, before those positions were popular, because she’s that smart. She knew, and made the conscious choice to remain on the wrong side of history on each of these issues. And she did so because she wanted to be President, and in her view, being right doesn’t matter if you don’t win. So, she created a persona of a candidate less enlightened than she actually is.

            You can see her fighting her better angels in every debate, as she struggles to walk the fine line between what she knows is right and what she knows is popular at the moment. And while I don’t believe she truly believes the things she says when she’s slandering progressive goals, slander them she does.

            And while a candidate who hasn’t been on the national stage for very long might be able to get away with that, Clinton cannot, because we’ve watched her modify her positions on these things conveniently, as popular polling has changed on the issue.

            And it’s sad, because if she had just maintained her own moral compass over the years, US public opinion would have finally caught up with her, and realized she was there all along. But she didn’t. Her strategic brain overrode her principled objection to popular opinion, and she went with the flow. And when you do that for 30 years in the national spotlight, it becomes pretty obvious that you’re just saying what you think people want to hear.

          • OrionJeriko

            Clinton is right wing. The disinformation campaign is her baseless accusation that Russia colluded in electing Trump when the reality is that Hitlery’s corrupt organization stole the primary election and nomination from the popular winner Sanders, then alienated the progressive base of the party along with most voters who preferred the populist Trump over the establishment Clinton. You corporatist Democrats will keep losing until you back real liberals who represent the 99% base of working class Americans fed up with lesser of two evil candidates who represent no choice for most of us.

          • Such a filthy CMW comment

            Funny how you supposedly have so much support yet you lost the primary so HARD.

          • John J Publicus

            One more idiot shitgibbon heard from…

          • Helene Logan

            A true point, but were Stein or that Libertarian dope better alternatives to HRC? Unfortunately (and the DNC and HRC are responsible for this, I think), people for the most part thought she had it in the bag and couldn’t imagine a nation that would vote in large enough numbers (in certain sections of the country) to elect an Orange-hued snake oil salesman.
            I think my problem was the vitriol that some Bernie/Stein supporters threw at Clinton, as if she’s the Most Evil of All (worse than Cheney or Kissinger? Really people?). When ‘our own’ painted the candidate in those broad strokes, it didn’t help develop unity. And the media played along, all the while ignoring the outrageous, unpresidential behavior of Trump.

          • AuntyMaude

            My husband voted for Nadar in 2000. And even though we live in the 1st or 2nd reddest state in the union where our vote doesn’t count, I was still mad at him. You have to vote your conscious obviously, but not when your nuts are on the line like they were in 2000 and 2016.

          • OrionJeriko

            It’s spelled Nader. And it’s spelled conscience. Those of us who voted for Nader and the Green Party over the two corporatist stooges Gore and Bush are proud that we made the right choice. Since the Republican Supreme Court made sure to stop the vote re-count in 2000, it ultimately made no difference who anyone voted for. 2000 was a stolen election and a coup d’etat for the Bush crime family. Learn your history. Republican-light Democrats who fail to contest stolen elections after letting down progressive voters by having no convictions and remaining centrists will always lose.

          • OrionJeriko

            The childish response to reality is to pretend that Clinton was a viable alternative to Trump. She was even more of a Republican neocon than Donald which is why she lost after driving away the liberal base who would have delivered Sanders to the White House. Tone deaf corporatists in charge of the DNC still don’t get it which is why you remain the party of LOSERS. We saw through the bullshit and rejected your Hitlery Clinton. Now learn from your mistakes and replace the doddering corporatist leadership in charge of your sinking ship and replace all of the Republican-light centrists with genuine grassroots progressive candidates. Either that or KEEP LOSING.

          • John J Publicus

            My simple response to these simple people is;

            After 30+ years of investigations, nobody anywhere has been able to even CHARGE her with a crime. Either she’s innocent of crimes, or the republicans that have been going after her are incompetent.

            Choose one….

          • Truthiness2U

            Brazile? was temp running the DNC. Later went to Perez.

          • OrionJeriko

            Sanders was more of a Democrat than all of you Republican-light neocons still dominating the party. Thanks to two-time loser Hitlery, your party has been destroyed.

          • John J Publicus

            Does anyone really think this wackadoodle ISNT a Russian troll?

        • YourMom

          Additionally, one great irony is that Sanders adviser Tad Devine was one of the authors of the superdelegate system LONG before the 2016 primary. He was in there egging on the paranoia over superdelegates strictly for political advantage. (We won’t go into how closely he worked with Manafort to manage a Putin-backed candidate in the Ukraine.) As for the popular vote v caucuses, the other hyperbolic hypocrisy in play here is that caucuses, by their very nature, exclude a significant percentage- a majority of voters. This group panted over the wonderfulness of caucuses while bitching about how exclusionary the primary rules are in some states. With a caucus: you have elderly opting out because of long hours standing in line and long hours actually in caucus, you have people who cannot attend because they are sick, because they are caring for a sick parent, spouse, child, you have people who have to work and cannot attend and you have young families who cannot afford those hours of child care. It is costly to local parties to host the caucuses. In many states, there was almost no auditing to ensure people were actual residents of a county or district, or eligible to vote. It is about as undemocratic as you can get.

          • disqus_DCiinn37br

            Almost as if Bernie Bros like the idea of no one else being able to vote but them…

          • OrionJeriko

            The Hitlery Bros lost the general election after stealing the Democratic nomination and still remain sore losers.

          • Such a filthy CMW comment

            Sore losers, says the guy accusing other people of stealing because their candidate lost the primary. Blocked.

            I swear, whatmeworry must have linked this page to his troll friends…

      • thixotropic jerk

        SO MUCH TL; DR!

  • Renee E. Babcock

    I am convinced the Herbal Tea Party is going to do just as much damage to us as the (Lipton) Tea Party.

    • amrak63

      “Herbal Tea Party” ^_^

      Did you coin that term?

      • Renee E. Babcock

        No, I can’t claim credit for this. I’ve seen it floating around on Ye Olde Interwebs for some time now.

  • Finnibar87

    Fuck Jill Stein.

    She represents to isolantionist and really stupid wing of the some on the Left.

  • Lyly Sirivong

    The (far-)left doesn’t always have bad ideas, but they always have that weird complacency towards authoritarian regimes that is very disturbing.

    • (((fka_donnie_d)))

      They are enemies of USA! USA bad! Enemies Good!

      Extremists and deep critical analysis generally do not go well together.

    • Finnibar87

      Quite true.

      The Nation still rarely criticizes Russia, for example.

    • Zippy W Pinhead

      When you reach the fringe of a belief or philosophical system, it becomes more important to differentiate yourself from the mainstream of that thought or belief system by shitting all over it, than it is to actually concern yourself with your ideological adversaries, Not to mention, the annoying habit of adopting so many of that adversaries tactics that you start to become a mirror image of them, which makes it a tad awkward to criticize them.

      • Lyly Sirivong

        True. In France, people discovered that Mélenchon and Le Pen’s agendas for the presidential election were very similar. They both had the anti-elite and anti-system discourse. The only thing that was really different was that Mélenchon wasn’t anti-immigration like Le Pen was.

        Mélenchon’s agenda had some attractive ideas and some terrible ones. For example, He wanted France to be out of the EU, NATO and the WTO and join the ALBA, the bolivarian alliance. Which is just… I mean, WTF.

    • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

      May have something to do with self-righteousness, and the sense of entitlement therefrom, which is essentially authoritarian.

    • JMP

      Hell, some of them right now are loudly supporting Venezuela’s degradation into dictatorship, because elimination of democracy is OK if done by socialists apparently.

    • BigCSouthside

      Some of it is the “can’t we all just get along” mentality. In the real world, we can’t. It sucks, but that’s how shit works

    • peteywheats

      Blanket statement, and quite silly when you look at who is president.

  • In ’16 Jill Stein ran as Green
    Twas the craziest thing I have seen
    All that fiber in the party
    Made her voters quite farty
    Like steak fried by Ms Paula Deen

    • kareemachan

      Kudos.

  • Finnibar87

    Whack job Jill Stein always has a supercilious smile on her mug, which adds to her crazy lady persona.

  • Doug Langley

    “South Korea has lived under the threat of war for decades . . .”

    As I recall, it was a tad more than a “threat” in the early ’50s.

  • Resistance Fighter Callyson

    I’ll have to remember to come back later to fuck with the LWNJ trolls that will inevitably come by…

    • dshwa

      There’s one about 10 comments down if you’re bored.

      • kareemachan

        Now I feel HORRIBLE for dissing NK. Jill showed me the light of day…..

        • dshwa

          Everything she said about NK is plausible, except under the consideration that their leader is clearly a sociopath or psychopath. Now, maybe the generals below him would pull the plug on him if he tried initiating a strike, but do we really want to bet the planet on that?

        • amrak63

          K-chan, you forgot the snark tags. ;)

    • Finnibar87

      Just keep calling Jill Stein a whack job. For that is precisely what she is.

  • Cat Cafe for the Prosecution

    Now I’m actually beginning to believe that theory about the Russians helping Bernie win in Michigan.

  • JustPixelz (((Ω)))

    So this is very frightening to them! They’ve been basically cornered into feeling like they have to develop a nuclear weapon.

    For the same reason, with Little Babby Donnie in the Very Famous Non-Chaotic White House, I am also building my own nuclear weapon. DOH! That was supposed to be a secret. As long as no one tells Fox “News” I should be OK.

    • Finnibar87

      I think living an entire life in a NK labor camp is far more frightening, but hey, I’m kinda lazy about being in forced labor camps.

  • Finnibar87

    Whack job Jill Stein hasn’t a very good grasp on geography, I’ve noticed.

  • Fartknocker

    “Whack Jobs With the Jill Stein” is the new name of heavy metal Christian music band, now with cow bells.

  • Nick Barnes

    #OldWonketteYellsAtCloud.

  • Dutchman

    Posted this below in response to What, me worry but I’m putting it up here at the top for any others of that ilk that may wander through here in defense of Tofu Palin:
    *******************************

    It’s quite simple, all of you BernieBros, Jillies and Purity Pony riders got your wish. You voted for irrelevant candidates and convinced enough people that Hillary was Beelzebub in female form and that they should stay home rather than vote for her.

    You got your wish and she lost. Now that you’re discovering that pragmatism might not be such a bad idea you’re all trying to rationalize your actions.

    There can be no mea culpa, rationalization or obfuscation. You own the fact that Trump is residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Just own it.

    • Aaron Wise

      No way a liberal could in their right mind could vote for a pro-war, pro wall Street neoliberal serial liar.

      Ain’t gonna happen in 2020 either.

      • Dutchman

        ^^^^^^^^
        If you look up Purity Pony rider in the dictionary Aaron Wise’s photo appears beside it.

        • amrak63

          I thought that was WMW’s pic–but then, it is difficult to distinguish them from each other.

          • Zippy W Pinhead

            they sound equally kool aid drenched

          • amrak63

            [snark] Good thing we have the Purity Patrol to remind us that there are no important differences between HRC and this asshole:

            http://i.imgur.com/TCi33eE.jpg

          • JMP

            Nah, WMW is a Russian right-winger pretending to be a purity pony; he’s had enough tells, like claiming that Putin never had anyone assassinated, to prove it’s a pretense.

          • amrak63

            I didn’t know he ever said that. Yeah, that’s a MAJOR tell.

          • So many people don’t understand how deep and sophisticated the Russian social media troll army strategy is. They’ve pretty much taken over Left Facebook. People who used to be sincere fighters for justice are now reposting Joe Stalin memes and telling everyone that they’re going to the Gulag (also, Bashar al-Assad is a pretty cool guy).

          • disqus_DCiinn37br

            On this thread a tell I saw was him gloating about how many people he had ‘triggered.’ I wouldn’t be surprised at all if he was a Trumper or alt-righter.

      • Debbie the Unpaid Protester

        ok, I’ll bite. My political views are a little to the left of Paul Wellstone, may he rest in peace. My family, friends, and neighbors are all liberal as the day is long.
        Yet, we all voted for Hillary. Huh, how could that be?
        maybe because we are all sane, and we know there is no candidate we will agree with 100% of the time, and that Hillary, while not perfect, is eleventy-billion times better, more honest, and smarter than Trump.

        • what, me worry?

          When your litmus test is “better than Trump” you’ve set the bar so low, anyone could sail over it.

          But my question would be, if you’re to the left of Wellstone, I’d imagine your policy preferences would be along the lines of Single Payer, regulatory reform of wall st, reform of the predatory lending in student loans and in poor communities, restrictions on fracking, union protections and a more benevolent foreign policy. If that’s true – if that’s where your priorities lie, why were you supporting a candidate that actively campaigned against all of it?

          There’s an honest answer to that question that so far no one will utter, because it calls the lie to every argument Clinton supporters have made so far. You supported Clinton because you were convinced by the media that Sanders was a crank, that he didn’t have a chance to win. Even though his platform was far closer to your own preferences, you went with the candidate who called your priorities “rainbows & unicorns”. You were convinced to vote against your own interests.

          How’d it work out?

      • Zippy W Pinhead

        Good Lord, just STFU with that dumb shit. Hillary is not pro war and she wasn’t particularly pro Wall Street, especially given that she was the Senator from NY and would be expected to be. Way to prove that you are EXACTLY the idjit that Dutchman was talking about, spewing obvious bullshit spoon fed to you by RWNJs and Russian hackers, and too fucking dumb and full of yourself to even realize how idiotic you sound

        • amrak63

          He can’t STFU with it; it’s the only “argument” he has.

      • Manders

        Well, this liberal was not interested in voting for a pro-Russia, snake oil-peddling doctor who should know better, who hasn’t been able to get herself elected to anything more than town council.

        As for Bernie: he seems like a decent guy (though he’s now under investigation by the FBI for bank fraud, so maybe he ain’t that much of an honest broker either), but he’s voted for military action, he’s taken money from corporations, he made his own campaign mistakes (including money ones, which is not great) and if he’d made it to the general I’m pretty confident the oppo would have been fierce and hideous.

        This liberal is a practical human being who hates seeing what DT is doing to this country, knew he would be a horrible president before he was elected, and was frankly a lot more concerned about the lack of Democrats in office all over the country than the purity of the person holding the office, and the fact that way too many people just don’t vote. I don’t care if you don’t want to take responsibility for fucking up this election. I’m giving it to you anyway.

      • Les Appentis De la résistance

        Tell that to the refugees from centarl american violence taht are being sent back to their probable deaths. Good job, pure one.

      • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

        GO FUCK YOURSELF

      • sgt. jmk of the résistance

        It’s so cute that you outed yourself as a gullible asshat so I didn’t have to look at your profile.

      • pussygrabber in chief

        Hey, if you purity ponies play your cards right, we can have Trump until 2024! After which there’ll be nothing left to save, of course.

        (Also, do you even know what you mean by neoliberal?)

    • renegade500

      Still good on a second reading.

    • Natalie Au Natural Hedonist

      I think Tofu Palin is genius. I am so stealing it. I will try to remember to credit you.

  • Aaron Wise

    I blame Jill Stein and Bernie for the DNC’s promotion of one of the most unlikable presidential candidates in recent history.

    Oh, and Sarandon too.

    And The Russians, don’t for get that excuse!

    Maybe there is another reason that Hillary was beaten by the mangled apricot hellbeast?

    Maybe because she was as likeable, but not as likeable than Donald Trump?

    • HazooToo

      You should probably clarify this post, because it sounds like you’re saying Hillary was unlikable, and that’s why she lost. When she won 3 million more votes than Trump.

      • Aaron Wise

        A plastic soap dish could have beaten the orange clown.

        Face it, the more she talked, the lower her poll numbers went.

        • HazooToo

          Thank you. That’s all the confirmation I needed that I want no more of your foolishness cluttering up my view of the comments. Goodbye.

        • Electric Ukulele Land

          Yes, I remember how clearly her poll numbers tanked after the debates… oh wait, no, that was not the case at all.

        • bbayliss

          “Clinton has an 84 percent chance of winning the election, while Trump has a 16 percent chance, according to The Upshot. Those odds have not changed over the past several days.”
          http://www.newsweek.com/polls-2016-presidential-election-trump-clinton-518280

          • amrak63

            Yeah, that’s one reason why so many of us don’t believe Covfefe actually won enough EVs fair and square.

        • pussygrabber in chief

          Gonna need some polling numbers to back up that claim.

    • renegade500

      I don’t actually consider likability an important consideration for who becomes President. Sure, it’s icing if you like the person, but heck, I thought W seemed perfectly likable, and he was a terrible president. (FWIW, I’ve never found Trump to be likable, but even if he were the most charming man on the planet, he’d still be an awful President.)

      I’m far more interested in is the person qualified and experienced on the world stage? Will they work for the best interests of the people? Will they uphold the US Constitution as it’s written, not as they wish it were written?

      By my far more important measures, there was only one choice to be made (and it wasn’t the former reality show “star”). Being president isn’t a popularity contest. I wish our society weren’t so shallow that that was an important metric.

      • Natalie Au Natural Hedonist

        That is what I don’t understand. Since when do you elect someone who is supremely unqualified to run the country? You have the most qualified candidate in the race, and you decide to vote for the guy you’d like to party with? I knew it could happen after Bush/Gore though. Same thing.

        • renegade500

          I have generally found that fun party friends =/= ready to be leader of the free world.

    • amrak63

      Aaron, so you won’t get confused like your comrade, er, colleague WMW, this is contempt, not anger:

      http://i.imgur.com/sd38rlJ.jpg

    • kaylumus

      So a man can be boorish, bullying, and inexperienced in political leadership and still be elected, but a woman has to be “likable”? I know Hillary had many other issues, but don’t tell me that sexism wasn’t a major factor in this election.

    • Electric Ukulele Land

      People keep using that word “unlikable” — I do not think they know what it means.

    • Jenny

      Nah man, the only excuse to why she lost is you, and people like you. Thanks for Trump. You sure showed everyone, huh?

    • teele

      If you like Donald Trump, there’s sumpin’ wrong witch ya, boy. “…not as likeable than..”??? I think I know what’s wrong with you — a serious lack of some edumacashun.

    • JMP

      Moron, Hillary Clinton was not at all unlikable; just because you have irrational hatred of her for daring to run for President while being a woman doesn’t mean everybody does. Tons of people really, really liked her, you useless tool of the right-wing.

      And Trump is not likeable at all.

    • bbayliss

      Pantsuits, don’t forget pantsuits.
      It was easy enough to forget two term Senator, former Secretary of State so I guess i can’t blame you for forgetting pantsuits, oh and that she’s dying, and murder, you do know she’s a killer right?
      pedophilia?
      Leprosy?
      open running wounds?
      maggots?

  • Aannddyy

    What a fucking idiot.
    Another idiot tool of Putin.

    • Cliff Webb

      Your response to this propaganda show you to be the fucking idiot actually. Only a complete fucking moron believes Putin ordered Guccifer to hack the DNC and pass the info to Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy to publish in wikkileaks to help Trump beat Clinton…. If you buy that nonsense you are a complete simpleton… I got a real nice bridge here i would like to sell you…

      • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

        Go fuck yourself, you worthless pile of shit, and fuck the fuck off. We don’t care for your kind round these parts.

        • bbayliss

          To be fair “Cliff” has 96 whole comments and is just trying to make his quota or he won’t get paid.

      • But can you reply without using logical fallacies?

      • sgt. jmk of the résistance

        Pffft don’t be ridiculous. Nazis don’t have bridges.

  • chortlingdingo

    Given what I’ve read and heard from people who have escaped from NK, I’m pretty sure they’re doing a damn good job demonizing themselves, without us needing to do it for them.

    EDIT: For reference:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufhKWfPSQOw

    • Le Chapeau

      A highly informative book on the subject is “Nothing To Envy: Ordinary Lives in North Korea” by Barbara Demick

      • ahughes798

        That is a great book. Definitely heart and gut wrenching.

        • Le Chapeau

          I’ll never think of mud pies and clay cookies the same way again. In the book Demick recounts the national orgy of “mourning” over the death of Kim Il Sung, and the tragic end of anyone who failed to show prostrate grief. Then, I watched the
          exact thing happen again with the death of Kim Jong Il.

      • chortlingdingo

        Thanks, I’ll add it to my list.

    • Hardly Ideal

      The average person in North Korea has to get by with stuff like grass soup and using beer bottles for IV bags. Meanwhile, the Dear Leader enjoys imported cognac while railing against everything foreign. Look at the country from space, and you’d think South Korea was an island because the North is completely dark except for Pyongyang.

      As far as demonizing North Korea goes, North Korea’s done the heavy lifting.

  • SadDemInTex

    I thought we were never going to talk about her.

    • bbayliss

      Who?

  • Gregory Purcell

    Actually everything she said make perfect sense.

  • Les Appentis De la résistance

    Remeber all that vote recount money she was collecting? I wonder where that went?

  • Msgr_MΩment

    Cosign on the paper ballots and the cyber security.

    Trigonometry as a poll test? I can’t sine off on that.

    • ahughes798

      Just ‘cos?

    • sgt. jmk of the résistance

      Now don’t go off on a tangent…

  • 73angelD

    Jill is pretty harmless. She’s not the reason why Clinton lost the election. Jill also ran in 08′ and 12′. Obama won both times. Stop making excuses for Clinton’s completely uninspiring Presidential race. The only one to blame is Clinton herself.

    • John S

      I wouldn’t say she was ‘the reason’ but it’s silly to pretend it didn’t make a difference in some incredibly tight state races.

      • 73angelD

        Its even more silly that Clinton lost states that have voted Democrat for 30+ years. But yeah, it’s all Jill’s fault.

        • amrak63

          Oh, not all. She definitely takes a back seat to her master Putin.

    • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy
    • amrak63

      The Supreme Joke gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013, and the GOP state legislatures swung into action to take advantage of that. If Obama in 2008 had been forced to run against the same level of voter suppression that Clinton ran against in 2016, we would be talking about the cancer afflicting “former President McCain”.

      Also, never forget Mommie Dearest Russia.

    • Grokenstein

      “Why didn’t she work harder to convince people like me to vote for her after I swore I’d rather die first? It’s all her fault! Wisconsin!!”

    • sgt. jmk of the résistance

      How nuanced.

    • phoenix00

      Hi there!

      Math quiz time: What is 1,382,210 + 30,980= ? Is it greater than 1,409,467?

      http://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president/wisconsin/

      • 73angelD

        What about the states that have always voted Dem (PA, OH, MI) that she lost to Chump? It’s her fault.

        I once was involved with an alcoholic. Whenever unsavory things happened in his life he always blamed everyone and everything else. It was never his drinking or his poor decisions. I’m a Democrat and you all sound like a bunch of addicts in active addiction.

        • phoenix00

          1) Clinton DID take responsibility for her electoral failure.
          2) If your best argument is “I voted for one of two or more loons when there was a sane, rational person because sane rational person wouldn’t visit”, does that not sound a wee bit petulant?
          3) I’ll admit the math doesn’t hold for PA and OH, but Stein did steal MI away from Clinton (2,268,193 + 50,700 > 2,279,805) for 26 EVs between WI and MI. Fine it didn’t take the undisputed EC win away from DT, but would have made for a different story post-election, no?
          4) That behaviour is not confined to alcoholics. Doesn’t make it any less devastating to deal with however.

          At the end of the day, Jill Stein is still a whackadoodle loon.

          • 73angelD

            No one steals anything. You win or you lose. They are ALL whackadoodle loons. If you can’t win an election with more than two names on the ballot, you have no business running for public office.

          • amrak63

            “No one steals anything.”

            What parallel Earth do you come from?

          • 73angelD

            I get it. You backed a candidate that lost an election and are now butt hurt.

          • amrak63

            Close, but no cigar.

            I backed a candidate who had the election stolen from her by a hostile foreign power and am now righteously angry.

            I hope, within my lifetime, Russia breaks into 100 fiefdoms.

          • phoenix00

            You have no idea what vote splitting means now, do you?

            Start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote_splitting

          • 73angelD

            So the Greens also stole the election from the Republicans in 08′ and 12′. Or does that only happen when your preferred party loses?

          • phoenix00

            1) The Republicans don’t need help losing. And the Libertarians aren’t that good.
            2) The Greens vote-split the Demos much more than the Repubs.

          • 73angelD

            I see. An election is stolen only when your candidate loses. Look, I’ve voted Dem my entire life but that doesn’t mean that I can’t be critical of the party and their candidates. Otherwise I would be no different from the people who consider themselves conservatives and keep making excuses for Chump.

            Had Clinton won, we wouldn’t have the Democratic party talking about a single payer healthcare system either. It would just be the same old, same old.

          • phoenix00

            …. and you prefer the current tire fire that is the administration, eh? No single-payer either way.

          • 73angelD

            At least the Democratic party is discussing single payer. Had Clinton won, it wouldn’t even be part of the conversation. If you want to make a difference, bitching about the 2016 election gets you nowhere. Research who is running on the Dem ticket in your local gov’t and provide them with support. Volunteer and canvas. Stein isn’t the reason Clinton lost. Clinton is the reason Clinton lost. Have a good day.

          • phoenix00

            1) I’m Canadian, so I’ve already got single-payer healthcare.
            2) So you do prefer GOPeepeeputin dismantling every single civil, voting, and legal right plus pulling their pants and shitting on at least 4 constitutional amendments, but hey SINGLE-PAYER IS IN THE CONVERSATION AMIRITE?!?!
            3) Yes I do agree petition and support all your local Dems! It would also help TONS if the DNC actually incorporated a 50-state strategy!
            3) But hey, please continue bleating about Clinton if it makes you sleep better at night…..

            A good day to you as well.

          • 73angelD

            If we (us Americans) don’t get local Dems elected, it doesn’t matter who the President is. Do also keep in mind if Clinton had been elected she wouldn’t be able to accomplish much with a Republican controlled House and Senate. We need real Democratic leadership. Not someone who thought it was owed to her and didn’t put much effort into connecting with voters.

        • amrak63

          “I’m a Democrat”

          Riiiiiight. And I’m the motherfucking Emperor of Japan.

          • 73angelD

            I don’t give a fuck if you believe me or not. I’m a Democrat and have been the entire time I’ve been eligible to vote.

          • amrak63
          • 73angelD

            I know my truth. I don’t care about your trolling.

          • amrak63

            While I am new here, I have been accepted by the community. You are the troll.

          • 73angelD

            I’ve been coming to this site for years. I’m a free thinker. I have no problem criticizing my party when I think what they are doing is wrong. You are a troll and a no nothing stooge.

          • 73angelD

            You have ZERO followers. You think a little too much of yourself. Troll.

  • AndABagOfChipsToo!

    I like your story but ‘eated dinner with Vladimir Putin ” Eated?

    • BeverlyCrusher’sWig

      Would you prefer “ated” instead?

    • Tofu Killer

      You are correct, this is an obvious proofreading error. The past pluperfect is, correctly, “eateded”

    • unionthuggery

      Isn’t it supposed to be “who ett dinner”?

    • HazooToo

      Yes, Wonkette writes like this sometimes. It may take a bit to get used to the style, but it’s worth it. Where else are you virtually guaranteed a dick joke in almost every article, without sacrificing accuracy and integrity?

      • bbayliss

        The white house?

        • amrak63

          The WH can’t sacrifice accuracy and integrity because it has none.

        • HazooToo

          No, I said WITHOUT sacrificing accuracy and integrity. The White House sacrifices them every day.

      • (((Aron)))

        I’m still waiting for that last clause in a written guarantee.

        It’s not too much to ask, dammit!

    • Shoulda been eattedski

    • What? Everybody knows it’s actually “ate-en-ed” as my English teacher, Ralph Wiggim, learned me

  • Tofu Killer

    So, funny story. Maryland is one of the few places that allows Green Party voter registrations. When I moved here I was all like, “Neato! I get to make an empty administrative gesture towards building another party!” So I did.

    Fast forward to 2016 and the dawning realization that my registration was empowering an antivaxer (allegedly) pro-Russia (appears true) nutcase (totes true) who was dumber than the third string of the GOP bench. So I switched to the Dems, just like everybody else in this one-party state. Why is doing the right thing so damn hard??????

    • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

      I stopped voting third party in 2008. It wasn’t that hard then, and it hasn’t gotten harder since.

      • I wish our greens were like other greens elsewhere. You know…actually liberal

      • Tofu Killer

        Oh yeah, I should have made it clear: My registration was always a gestural decision to keep another party viable (because I like the idea of a third party if not the reality). I was only a Green voter in the local elections where I knew the candidate (some few were really the better choices). I have never voted Green above local except in the cases where the outcome was either meaningless (no GOP candidate) or over-determined (Both of my most recent residences, Maryland and Rhode Island, determine their elections in the primary process and even those candidates are curated by the party).

    • Cliff Webb

      I am pro Russia. They have caused the USA no insult. What they have done is derail Israel’s Syrian coup enterprise, and fuck aparthied Israel anyway… pernicious parasite state that it is…. Enjoy selling out the USA to the Jewish cause rabbi….

      • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy

        I smell some DSFB . . . .

      • Enjoy sellin out the us to a despotic autocrat there sparky! Oh and pooty likes the isreali backed syrian so…..

      • Tofu Killer

        S’cool. I’m into gardening and lazy Sunday walks by the lake. What’s your sign? Maybe we can hang out sometime and discuss chemtrails or something.

        • Zen Diesel

          It’s the lizard people, Raytheon and the chemicals in the water that is turning frogs gay.

        • Cliff Webb

          No thanks, i don’t hang out with ziotrash.

          • Tofu Killer

            Aren’t you a TEASE!!!

          • Carole

            Leroy’s Mama was looking for you a while ago.

          • JMP

            It’s such a shocker to see that this troll’s history is filled with promoting insane conspiracy theories and lots of antisemitic bullshit. Fuck off, you Nazi creep.

      • sgt. jmk of the résistance

        Piss off, Nazi douche.

      • amrak63

        Lemme guess–you condemn apartheid in Israel, but would like to restore it in the USA?

      • Resistance Fighter Callyson

        Well, if one agrees that hacking into our election counts as more than an insult, your first two sentences are true enough. Dafuq Israel has to do with anything mentioned in this post, OTOH…

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/763e848ff4d581463f85324e9a50d32fd47bcadeb2cbb19b5da9502ef0935e31.jpg

        • Zen Diesel

          He lost me with Pro-Russia, I was like WTF.

        • Cliff Webb

          What hacking? Grow a brain…

      • Le Chapeau

        The Russians have done nothing more than to saddle our republic with an orange manbaby who doesn’t know shit from shinola, which, apparently is also an educational deficit you share with him.

        • Cliff Webb

          Oh yea dummy? How is it in your imagination they did that? RT hardly mentioned the campaign during the last election….

  • Cliff Webb

    This is some of the lamest propaganda i have seen in a while. Sure, Stein is a bolshevik piece of shit, but not for the fake ass CIA approved narrative being pushed by the Israeli douchenozzle who inked this drivel.

    • Whoa. You forgot your ((())) tho

    • ChiefOfStaffCaptainHowdy
      • Cliff Webb

        The nazis were your fellow cultists douchenozzle… Jello Biafra, that fake ass bitch supports apartheid Israel too, so you got that going for you.

        • amrak63

          My, the trolls are thick on the ground today.

          Also thick between their ears, but that’s every day. ;)

    • sgt. jmk of the résistance

      Thanks for your input!

      I can assure you I’ll give it the respect it deserves!

      None.

    • (((Aron)))

      WAKE UP, SHEEEEEPLE!!!1!1!1!1

      Now why don’t you tell us more about what you think of ‘duh Jooooooz.’

    • Resistance Fighter Callyson
      • JMP

        Looking at this one’s history, I’m pretty sure that they’re a real neo-Nazi asshole; it’s all just ranting about “zionists” and “the Jews”.

      • Cliff Webb

        make aliya already fruitcake.

    • Bemused

      1. Jill Stein is, herself, the one they are quoting. How is Jill Stein saying stupid stuff a CIA narrative?

      2. Do you not know which contributor is which? Evan is clearly the wrong one to accuse of being an Israeli douchenozzle.

    • Le Chapeau

      A couple of things you need to know: a) Evan is not an Israeli douchnozzle, and b) You are a douchecanoe, and c) you look like you are itching for a neo Holocaust.

      • Cliff Webb

        make aliya already tribal freak

  • Zyxomma

    Co-sign on the cybersecurity and paper ballots, also, too.

  • Zen Diesel

    Three words: Fuck Jill Stein!!!!

    • amrak63

      Eeeuuww, who would want to?

      • Zen Diesel

        Good point, should have gone with

        Five words: The Hell with Jill Stein!!!!

    • (((Aron)))

      She makes me embarrassed to call Lexington, MA my hometown.

    • GRH

      can you add 3 more?
      “and Susan Sarandon”

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=DdvAfsNImWU

    • Natalie Au Natural Hedonist

      RAMEN!

  • whitroth

    I actually may somewhat agree with Stein. Trumpoli’s been ratcheting up tension with NK almost from Day 1, because He’s Tough, not like that wimp Obama, or Dick Cheney, or….

    The SK’s new liberal (in the older definition of “liberal”) President is trying to ratchet them down. Trump, of course, is helping *ever* so much….

  • LithiumION

    Why oh why are they demonizing actual, real-life demons? WHY?

  • Upright Ape

    “That voice.,…it’s like a fuckin’ dagger in my heart”.

    Cheech (Chazz Palminteri), Bullets Over Broadway

  • Dg Hacket

    Just a gut feeling, but she’s seems part of the election clusterfuck. Seems like she came out of nowhere quite suddenly.

    • Zen Diesel

      She pops up every 4 yrs during the Presidental elections to spew her bullshit, then quietly disappear until the next 4 yrs.

      • ConnieHinesDorothyProvine

        Personally, I wish that there were no political parties. Replace them with laws requiring IQ tests and sanity tests for candidates.

        • SDGeoff3

          At the very least, please.

        • Le Chapeau

          Put each potential voter in a room in which there is a chair. Come back an hour later, and if the potential voter is sitting on the floor — No Votes for You!

        • Kitty Smith

          Funny enough, the people who founded the country didn’t want political parties either.

          But parties appeared, anyways.

    • 73angelD

      She ran in 08′ and 12′ but no one gives a shit because Obama won.

      • Dg Hacket

        Had you heard of her before 2016?

        • 73angelD

          Yes. She ran in 08′ and 12′ on the Green ticket.

    • Manders

      She’s been around. She ran for a few offices in Massachusetts, but so far had only managed to win a seat on the town council in Lexington, an affluent place. And she’s been re-elected. To me that says she has found her level, and should stay there.

  • Stephen Ray Kutos

    She went from marginally irritating to useless in lightning speed. She has been the reason that the Green Party no longer has one ounce of clout.

    • disqus_DCiinn37br

      It is a massive shame that people like Jill Stein represent the Greens. Countries like my home, Britain, have brilliant Green Parties who truly care about the world and all that live in it, while Americans have Greens presented to them in the form of Stein.

      (I’d not vote for the Greens in my country, but I like them a lot.)

  • Stephen Ray Kutos

    I wonder what she’s a doctor of? She sounds like a graduate of Wusamatta U.

    • ConnieHinesDorothyProvine

      I can’t read the first sentence without hearing Walter Peck in Ghostbusters. I can’t read the second sentence without thinking of Rocky and Bullwinkle.

      In fact, Rocky’s voice artist June Foray died last week.

      • Stephen Ray Kutos

        “Rocky and Bullwinkle” is exactly where I got the University name

  • ConnieHinesDorothyProvine

    Trump’s 400-pound hacker in New Jersey

    I believe that his name is Chris Christie

    • clairence

      hacker, not hack

    • Le Chapeau

      Well played!

  • Keith Babberney

    Hey! As an ultra-liberal, I resent this description. I fully support the Green Party platform as written, but Stein is just a loon. A doctor who believes vaccines are fine, but won’t mention them without implying they are dangerous. A woman (doc) who apparently doesn’t think abortion rights are important enough to compromise whatever principles she held against Clinton. A narcissist who spouts nonsense to get attention. Proof that the Greens need to work on local politics awhile before pulling someone out of their ass to run for president again.

    • SDGeoff3

      I left the Greens because I wanted to vote for Bernie/support Hillary, and because the leadership is pathetic. In SoCal, we have nothing but loons running on the Green ticket.
      The Green platform is a lovely sop to throw around as a handout. It’s why people join a religion: “I want to believe that.” It’s a great platform, but too many Greens take it as fundamentalist scripture, and use it to judge peoples’ consciousness.

    • Stulexington

      Agreed, there’s a difference between ultra liberal and LWNJ.

  • SadDemInTex

    In the interest that a stopped clock is correct twice in 24 hours I wish to say something I learned about North Korea after listening to a professor of Asian Studies (UCSantaCruz, I think). She was interviewed on Sirius Progress radio station about a month ago. During the course of the interview she made a compelling case about why North Korea is so paranoid. Fact 1. Korea was a non-combatant country during WWII (it was occupied by Japan…and it was horrific what was done by the Japanese to them) and yet was treated to the same crap as Germany…it was divided between the Soviet Union and the US/Western Allies. It was not China who had their fingers in the pie at that time. Fact 2. MacArthur put forth a plan to create a “Carbonized Zone” (It might have been called something else but this was the idea) by nuking the entire border with China to create a zone where nothing would ever live again. Apparently the idea was that China needed to be contained at all costs. One of the main ideas was to surround China on every border. Fact 3. After MacArthur and in later State Department “diplomacy” North Korea was consistently threatened with nuclear annihilation.

    It was the contention of this professor that North Korea was not actually paranoid but was responding to the very real threats of the United States by endeavoring to have nuclear weapons. It also makes sense that Iran feels the same way.

    Given that we have 45 I have to agree (NOOOOOOOOOOO!) with Stein that South Korea must pursue its own diplomacy with the North. And, perhaps, we need to get our troops out of the region. Seriously, we have conceded everything else to China. But, of course, I could be completely wrong and we are being manipulated by Putin. (Although I think he is just a provocateur kleptocrat looking to get more money for himself).

    • SDGeoff3

      It demonstrates how little most of us know about history. WWII and the Korean War are glossed over because it is so recent, and we have veterans around to tell the story, or so it goes…
      No one discusses Vietnam, Iraq is a thing of the past, and it looks like Iran is in our future.
      I completely agree with your last paragraph.

    • Le Chapeau

      Several good points there, but bearing in mind that North Korea has a million soldiers under arms, I’d say that moving U.S. forces out of the peninsula would be inviting a new and deadlier Korean war. Also bear in mind that the Stalinist thinking of the NK rulers has produced a country that is unbearably poor and can barely feed itself. This is not just a matter of a poor bunch of Asians bullied by the west, but a doctrinaire police state that isolated its people from every other country, including China. The paranoia may be real, but its roots can not entirely be placed at the feet of Western interests.

      • SadDemInTex

        I agree. It is not entirely Western influence that has created this terrible mess. But we have consistently made it worse with our rhetoric and threats. We have also lost every land war we have had in Asia since the end of WWII. Shouldn’t we stop beating ourselves to a pulp?

        • Le Chapeau

          No argument there. In fact, we should be heeding “The Princess Bride” more in our Asian diplomacy, not to mention Sicilians when blood is on the line.

    • Bill Diaz

      I hate left wing ‘head in the sand’ ignorance as much as ‘A IDIOT’ Trumpanzees. There are reasons we have a military force in Korea, you are aware we are at war with North Korea and that only an armistice is in place? You know that North Korea regularly kills and kidnaps South Koreans? You understand that a great deal of the South Korean population lives within artillery range of the DMZ and that North Korea has previously announced their intent to target civilians in case of war?

      The first peaceful transition of political power in South Korean history didnt happen until 1998. The North Koreans have shown themselves willing to attack without provocation, to engage in terrorism on an international scale and a kleptocracy without equal. Did you know that the largest producer of crystal meth and the largest counterfeiters in the world are the same people?

      We are long past time to have resolved this, it should have been taken care of in 2006, but we were tied up in two wars precipitated by lies and ignorance and so missed the fight against a true danger to this nation.

      Look at a satellite picture of the Korean peninsula at night and you will see a real life example of US troops protecting democracy, freedom and US interests.

      We are long past the time to put an end to Lil’ Kim and it pleases me greatly that he lives in constant fear of a ‘decapitation’ strike. It makes me sad to be too old and crippled to help remove that evil and dangerous creature.

      2/505 PIR, H-Minus
      Have a great day!

      • SadDemInTex

        I did not say they were a delightful country with wonderful leaders. I said that their paranoia has real roots that were sown by the US and its allies. Your rhetoric is a case in point. 1. Every dictatorship is a kleptocracy by its nature. 2. Somehow (for the first time?) North Korea becomes a “true danger” to the US in 2006? 3. Let’s go back a second: MacArthur wanted to CARBONIZE part of a sovreign (will sort of…the Soviets were playing with it) country because ….it was necessary for our national safety? 4. Are you saying we are now getting our crystal meth from North Korea…I find that a bit over the top…we can make it so easily at home. 5. Counterfeiting has been in existence since someone started making paper money…it is hard to say who are the best and the most but my bet would be China. 6. You seem to have a very jaundiced view of the government of South Korea…fine….IT IS NOT OUR COUNTRY and we have no right to dictate their policies. We can decry those policies and use diplomacy to try to change them but military threats are so 20th century, n’est pas? 7. Have a nice day

  • azeyote

    this has to do with money somehow – i just don”t see how she loves the ruskies – no one does

  • pussygrabber in chief

    Regardless of whether or not Jill cost Hillary the election, the good doctor doesn’t know fuck-all about shit, just like the orange excrescence currently infesting the white house.

    • Le Chapeau

      Definitely upvoted for “excrescence,” a wonderfully descriptive old word.

      • pussygrabber in chief

        It’s one of my favorite words that I don’t get the opportunity to use often enough.

        • Le Chapeau

          I have another that I like very much — execrable, as in “this execrable clusterfuck of an administration.”

    • Komsumverweigerer Ron

      You had one candidate who was intelligent and knowledgeable, and three who were more or less idiots.
      It really wasn’t that hard a choice.

  • clairence

    I never noticed before, but that dinner picture looks a lot like Trump at the WHCD when Obama tore him up. Note all the standing guys in back are anxious looking, the diners are for the most part unsure that they should be clapping at *whatever*. So many expressions seem to be asking, ‘did he just say that?’ Putin’s got the piercing stare going on. And Flynn’s checking Putin’s state to see if he needs to duck for cover.

  • Weißwurst Supreme

    Has anyone checked on her former patients to make sure they survived her “treatment”?

    • TX Dept. of Space Tacos

      well, luckily acupuncture and going without wi-fi dont’ do much of anything.

      • eka

        they deprive us of having to deal with them on facebook, so that’s one thing I will thank jill stein for.

        or, for which i will thank jill stein. I can’t remember if we’ve decided for or against dangling prepositions.

        • julianenglish

          Dingling is ok, dangling is not.

  • Komsumverweigerer Ron

    It’s charming how she thinks she’s still relevant. Stupid, but charming.
    Go home, Jill, you’re unnecessary.

  • James Burns

    well we know she loves her some putin

  • Jeff Mc Donald

    How come she didn’t get elected? She is at least as stupid and venal as the got that did.

  • Windell Cotton

    She is a damn Russian mole whose job it was to bleed vots from Hillary. Hope she goes to jail some day.

  • Mark Mark Mark

    Stein was in all likelihood on Putin’s payroll.

    Putin funds candidates and movements from all over the map to destabilize the countries they are in.

    • Naw, because Stein is dumb enough to do it pro bono (well maybe for a bear-doing-the-cossack-dance postcard)

      • Petunia Cat

        HEY! It’s illegal if it’s “something of value”. Are you claiming dancing bear postcards are NOT?! 💰🐻📩

  • You know nothing, Jill Stein.

  • Petunia Cat

    Spy. 🇷🇺 Assange-nik. <- new word! Let's all use it. 😬

    The 'sanctions strengthen the Dear Leader' of a country idea I think would come as a surprise to, I have totally forgotten what his name was, who was the head of South Africa. Was it Botha? Or was he just the secret police guy? Anyway he got thrown out by his party and they put in deKlerk, and deKlerk's brother persuaded him to end apartheid. Because of why? SANCTIONS! Also the embarrassing super-wrongness of apartheid.

  • Jgb979

    “First of all the evidence is not definitive, it’s circumstantial that it’s the Russians …”

    Yeah she 100% was in on it.

    She might not have the same degree of petulant, whiny, man child narcissism, but she’s arguably as deeply stupid and willfully ignorant as #45. Even if she wasn’t in on the RUSSURE conspiracy, she’s just as responsible for the result.

    My favorite position of hers is a belief that she can just cancel all student loan debt without consequence.
    https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2016/9/9/1568286/-Jill-Stein-s-fairy-tale-plan-to-abolish-student-debt

    • NellCote71

      Sometimes the far left can be as embarrassing as the far right.

      • proudgrampa

        Indeed.

  • Like Drumpf’s 400-pound hacker in New Jersey?

    Sorry, but Christie is no computer hacker. He only hacked his Lap Band.

  • Gum_ball_death

    Meanwhile, millennial and Gen Z liberal voters are flocking from swing states to hipster towns in droves…packing as many progressives into small metro areas that were already blue….and then complaining about how the Electoral College Voting System doesn’t work. THIS IS WHAT LOST HILLARY THAT ELECTION. Hey hipsters…maybe instead of taking your Blue vote out of a Red state and into an already Blue state…you should at least scatter the flock into Swing States instead!!!! That would actually be productive protest, and thus making the Electoral College work for you. But sure…let’s just complain about 3rd party candidates instead. …and wait, weren’t you complaining about the 2-party system not too long ago? SO WHICH IS IT? WTF? There’s so many contradicting statements and double-standards going on in the FAR LEFT these days. I’m a Left-Leaning Moderate and it makes me sick observing the growing number of idiots on the Left these days…and even worse, observing most of the Left shifting to the FAR LEFT, where the nuts are. The Far Left is just as crazy as the Far Right….and anti-1st Amendment…not to mention, just as hateful. Get it together, Left. You’re blowing it for the rest of us.

    • NellCote71

      Preach.

    • Boko999

      Are you criticizing people for where they choose to live?
      WTF?

      • Gum_ball_death

        Nope. I’m just pointing out the people who migrated to those concentrated states and are complaining about how the Electoral College System failed them. Reading and comprehension goes a long way. Give it a shot. You’re welcome.

    • …anti first ammendment? You mean because of PC? Because they don’t want to listen to hate speeches and racists?

      • Gum_ball_death

        Well you’re clearly selecting the extremes here. It’s not only race and hate those people are silencing. It’s ALL conflicting views to theirs. I lived in Portland, OR and experienced it first hand.
        But let’s just focus on those two extremes you used. Even if it’s hate speech, those ignorant, hate-mongers are still protected by the First Amendment. If those of us whom oppose those hateful ideologies don’t want to hear it…then we won’t listen. But to honor our First Amendment rights we can’t just attempt to shut them up…because it’s their right to speak as well as it is our right to speak. Do you actually disagree with this?
        Just curious…did you serve your country?

    • julianenglish

      You’ve got to be kidding. Would you move to an area in which your work skill set is under valued, none if your neighbors see eye to eye with you on anything except which greasy spoon has the best peach cobbler, and the cultural resources hold no interest for you (who needs the ballet when you can shoot deer and watch ’em dance), and you fear raising your kids exclusively among others with whom you fundamentally disagree on major moral, political and spiritual issues, just so you can do your civic duty every four years? Would you? Besides, it is a classic free rider issue, as well as individual vs collective rationality.

      • Gum_ball_death

        Nothing wrong with diversity. …and to answer your question of “would you?”….Yes…and I have. It’s proactive. ….and….you’re welcome.

        • julianenglish

          GBD: I don’t know you, and whatever you or I do, or think, isn’t especially important in terms of the positions we take. Iut of 340,000,000 American people, someone believed everything, and tried it twice. But if you really did pick up your spouse and kids and move to a place as I described just so that you could cast your one single vote that would not change the outcome of an election, I can only say that you are a very unusual person. You are probably in a minority of a dozen people.

          If you actually did that, I don’t thank you for it. It made no difference in the election — regardless of which election. One vote has never changed the outcome of a presidential election. I guess you got something meaningful out if it.Giid for you.

          • Gum_ball_death

            Have you ever lived in a swing state? If you understand what that is, it’d be obvious to you that it’s not at all what you described. You’re using the absolute extreme to try to make your point with…which isn’t accurate in many cases…at least not mine. Also, sheltering kids from opposing thought isn’t necessarily good for their social development. You might as well homeschool them.

          • julianenglish

            I understand what a swing state is. Thanks for asking.

            I wasn’t trying to say everyone in a blue state has such a diametrically opposed relationship with those in a red state, or a swing state. I intentionally make the case extreme for clarity. If you were describing the possible problems with a car engine breaking down, you wouldn’t tell someone, “you might hear a knocking sound.” You would tell them about blowing the engine and needing to rebuild or replace it. Such was my intent. I wasn’t really trying to fully sketch out your personal experience, about which I know nothing. Pardon the misunderstanding.

            Most people have a multitude of reasons to live wherever they live. To suggest that they to move to a swing state do they can help turn it blue is a lot to ask. Especially if you follow up by hanging an election loss around their necks I’m pretty sure my wife would consider even the questions to be grounds for divorce.

            We didn’t shelter our kids, by any means. Diversity is wonderful. That’s one reason we wanted to raise them in a blue urban area — the real divide is urban/rural, not so much by states, but the nature of our winner take all by state elections make the states more relevant. Right? In some rural areas of our state it is not uncommon to still have defacto segregated schools. And the homogeneity of the populations in some such areas can be stifling.

            Our kids went to school with kids from a dozen different countries. They had black, white, Asian and Hispanic friends that I recall, and one of our daughter’s best friends was from India. I think they had Muslim friends, but don’t recall, and a Hindi teacher.They had openly gay friends (being openly gay could get you killed in some areas not far from where I sit). I doubt this would be easy to replicate. It would be almost impossible to find in most rural areas.

            We don’t believe in home schools, unless paid for entirely without tax dollars. The state should pay for a good education, not assist everyone educating their kids to believe Adam and Eve road dinasaurs and climate change is a hoax. Mostly, though, it’s important for kids to have a shared civic education so that it is possible for them, as adults some day, to speak a common language.

            It is admirable for people to move to a swing state do they can help it swing, but as a practical matter, I don’t think a single election will be changed that way. I recall the “bathroom bill” here in NC. I don’t recall any influx of sympathetic liberals moving here, clapping us on the backs and saying, “we’re here for you, brother.”

  • Xylem

    This is why the so-called Protest Voters make me sick. Anyone who’ll admit to voting for Jill $tein should shut the f*ck up. They’re as responsible for this mess as the Trump voters.

  • catbyte

    Oh, dear god. In the immortal words of Bugs Bunny, “What a maroon.” And as a still pissed off Michigander, may I also add, FUCK YOU, Jill $tein.

  • persistently_resistant_gayby
  • John Frum

    Slightly off topic, but hey –

    What’s to stop Iran from helping North Korea build a Bomb in return for a discount on buying some? They have good relations.

    So they’re “choosing” not to build the thing that makes nukes anymore,
    even though they still want them. And all of a sudden they have this
    “space program”, with rockets that can reach orbit, WTF? “For duck
    huntin”, wink wink. And all this research and stuff they’re not using
    anymore, and this friend who IS building nukes and gives zero fucks if
    people complain.

    And here comes President Fuckwit, whose policy on Iran, North Korea AND nuclear war is basically the same as his approach to healthcare. You gotta wonder if Trump’s Grand Vision is kill millions of people one way or another.

  • what, me worry?

    It’s all just too poetic. Remember when Clinton supporters accused the Left of being purity ponies unwilling to compromise? And then feigned outrage about Sanders’ support of Heath Mello, because he was insufficiently orthodox in his support of abortion rights, thus smearing Sanders as insufficiently orthodox on abortion rights, even though he has a A rating from NARAL?

    Those were good times, huh? To be able to castigate others as being both too pure, and too compromised, all in one breath.

    Well, get ready to compromise, centrists. Your establishment is announcing that being anti-abortion is NBD now.

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/7/31/16070490/democrats-2018-strategy-candidates-oppose-abortion

    Funny, I predicted this about a month ago.

    • DarleenMB

      As a Hillary supporter I find your post to be full of nonsense. What are you? A putinbot?

      • what, me worry?

        Could you be more specific please? Are you objecting to the idea that Centrists call the left inflexible purity ponies? Or maybe you’re objecting the the idea that centrists feigned outrage at Sanders’ support of Heath Mello’s candidacy for mayor?

        Or maybe you’re objecting to the story I linked to, in which the chair of the DCCC said that being anti-abortion isn’t incompatible with being a Democrat, and of course the establishment will support them. NBD! Which, of course, makes the Democrats outrage at Sanders for his advocacy of Mello a running joke. The DCCC just said they’d support such a candidate too.

        Because I can give you examples of the first two – right from this thread. And the last one is in the link I provided.

        So, what, precisely, is nonsense?

        • 73angelD

          There is no use trying to argue with them. They are as dimwitted as the Trump supporter who believes he will bring back coal mining jobs. They just sit around in a circle jerk, stroking each other to completion. Complete fucking buffoons.

      • amrak63

        @Darleen: Several of us here suspect him of being a troll for the GOP or the Russians (but I repeat myself), rather than a sincere, if unrealistic, hard-leftist.

  • kagi

    “eated dinner”?

    • disqus_DCiinn37br

      Its the way Our Editrix types, a little humorous spice here and there to keep Jill Stein and other sillies from being as boring as drying paint.

      • DarleenMB

        Sorry but it’s truly off-putting. I do not find anything regarding potential treasonous behavior from Stein or anyone else to be boring. Neither should you.

        • disqus_DCiinn37br

          Well, whatever. Wonkette is supposed to be a humorous website, and as such makes things a little more interesting. Boring does not mean ignored, ya know.

        • Le Chapeau

          I was a newspaper editor for 30 years, and fixed more fucked up copy than you will ever take exception to should you live to be 100, and yet I find this site delightful, with all of its deliberate quirks.

  • Bill Patterson

    “Does Stein think Trump should sign that sanctions bill that 948% of Congress voted for, minus Bernie Sanders, Rand Paul and a handful of twats in the House?
    First, isn’t Sen. Sanders also a “twat”?
    Second, why you are stoning Dr. Stein but not Sen. Sanders for voting against the sanctions legislation?
    Third, why would “these new sanctions” “endanger the very important nuclear agreement that was signed between the United States, its partners and Iran in 2015” given that Sen. Sanders believes “sanctions were an important tool for bringing Iran to the negotiating table”?
    “I am strongly supportive of the sanctions on Russia included in this bill. It is unacceptable for Russia to interfere in our elections here in the United States, or anywhere around the world. There must be consequences for such actions. I also have deep concerns about the policies and activities of the Iranian government, especially their support for the brutal Assad regime in Syria. I have voted for sanctions on Iran in the past, and I believe sanctions were an important tool for bringing Iran to the negotiating table. But I believe that these new sanctions could endanger the very important nuclear agreement that was signed between the United States, its partners and Iran in 2015. That is not a risk worth taking, particularly at a time of heightened tension between Iran and Saudi Arabia and its allies. I think the United States must play a more even-handed role in the Middle East, and find ways to address not only Iran’s activities, but also Saudi Arabia’s decades-long support for radical extremism.”
    This statement is doublespeak which proves, once again, that: (a) he is not, in any rational sense, a Democrat, (b) he is a self-serving egomaniac and (c) he is an insufferably self-righteous hypocrite.
    Dr. Stein has the saving graces of simply being incredibly naive, childishly gullible and profoundly ignorant of all things political.

  • DarleenMB

    When you write stuff like this: “… Stein eated dinner with Vladimir Putin …” I have to question the veracity of your “reporting.” Plus I cannot find any links to an “about” page that will tell me (or not) who you really are.

    • Morningside

      This is a humor site. It should be obvious.

      • Nick Slaughter

        it is to anyone who’s not a Stein voter

        • marcus816

          Like their “candidate’ those people don’t have a sense of humor anyway and wouldn’t know a joke (e.g. their ‘candidate’) if it bit them on their collective asses (which it did).

          • Nick Slaughter

            What’s worse is they’re too hardheaded to admit they screwed themselves, at least the Steintards I know. In fact they’ve just stopped talking about politics altogether after last July and went back to just talking about themselves.

    • Le Chapeau

      Did you come here thinking this was a journalism site? This is a site about journalism. A humor site, to be specific.

    • veracity? Really?

  • Bill Patterson

    “In Michigan and Wisconsin, two of the Rust Belt states where Trump surprisingly beat Hillary and thus sealed his weak “win,” Jill Stein got more votes than the difference between Trump and Hillary, so go fuck yourself, Dr. Stein.”
    Ask yourself why Dr. Stein received those votes when she was almost totally unknown.
    Could Sen. Sanders’ relentless bashing of everything regarding HRC for a sold year have been the primary reason for voters voting for her as a statement of “none of the above”?
    The Russians played a much less consequential role in HRC’s defeat than Sen. Sanders’,
    his surrogates and his supporters.
    The damage inflicted by their constant misinformation, disinformation and outright lies were the fatal blow because to the average voter her fellow Democrats were telling them not to vote for her because she was totally financially corrupt, ethically bankrupt and politically deceitful.
    It’s ridiculous to savage Dr. Stein while ignoring the betrayal of HRC by Sen. Sanders.

    • julianenglish

      The author can’t reasonably be expected to run down every factor in Clinton’s loss to Trump. As to the subject of this article, thre can be little doubt that Stein’s presence on the ballot siphoned off mostly Clinton voters. Had she stayed out of a race she could not possibly have won, we might have Clinton in the White House now instead of Trump. No one with half a brain could possibly believe, now, that it wouldn’t be a vast improvement iver Trump.

      • Bill Patterson

        I regret to inform you that you you have very obviously missed my point.

        • julianenglish

          No need to regret letting me know you think I’m off base. I reread your comments and cannot see how I have missed the point based upon what you have written. I didn’t, of course, try to address everything you wrote. I spoke only to the relatively narrow matter of your instance that it’s “ridiculous to savage Dr. Stein” without also considering the role Sanders played. I see no logical reason the two must be linked in any and all discussions of one or the other. Does this help?

          If I still seem to have missed the point, it would be much appreciated if you’d clarify the point that I seem to have missed. Thanks.

          • Bill Patterson

            “In Michigan and Wisconsin, two of the Rust Belt states where Trump surprisingly beat Hillary and thus sealed his weak “win,” Jill Stein got more votes than the difference between Trump and Hillary, so go fuck yourself, Dr. Stein.”
            First, Mr. Hurst’s argument is fatally flawed because correlation is not causation.
            Second, that is not the primary reason for HRC losing to Trump.
            Sen. Sanders’ highly televised and relentless bashing of everything regarding HRC for a solid year was the primary reason that DNC voters voted for Dr. Stein as a statement of “none of the above”, meaning HRC and Trump, or considered Trump the lesser of two evils.
            Thus, Dr. Stein, from Russia with malice or not, played almost no role in HRC’s defeat compared to Sen. Sanders’ speeches, his surrogates harsh words and his supporters vicious attacks, especially in countless internet comments sections.
            The damage inflicted by their constant misinformation, disinformation and outright lies were the fatal blows because to the average voter a fellow Democrat of HRC was telling them that, compared to any Republican candidate, including Trump, she was financially corrupt, morally bankrupt and politically deceitful. Only Sen. Sanders was pure enough to defeat the GOP candidate.
            “As Bernie Sanders said, Hillary Clinton ‘voted for virtually every trade agreement that has cost the workers of this country millions, millions of jobs.’ ”
            — Donald Trump on Tuesday, June 28th, 2016 in a speech in Monessen, Penn
            Click on this link:
            http://fortune.com/2016/02/24/bernie-sanders-donald-trump-quotes-quiz/
            Sen. Sanders was, for all practical purposes, a surrogate for Trump within the Democratic Party and, therefore, was the critical factor in turning DNC votes to Dr. Stein in the DNC “safe” states of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin and also turned HRC votes into Trump votes in those state and swing states.
            “I see no logical reason the two must be linked in any and all discussions of one or the other.”
            That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it.

    • what, me worry?

      “Could Sen. Sanders’ relentless bashing of everything regarding HRC for a sold year have been the primary reason for voters voting for her as a statement of “none of the above”?”

      When you compare Sanders’ insistence on running a policy-based campaign with the scorched earth campaigns of the past (even HRC’s 08 campaign was far dirtier), and the circus of the general, you would be hard pressed to call it anything worse than congenial.

      If Sanders pointed out the fact that HRC advocated or voted for policies that appears to be morally dubious, such as bankruptcy reform, or a triple layer fence along the Mexican border, or sending child refugees back to violence fomented by the policies she favored, that’s not an attack. It was a clear identification of her record. It is a disagreement on policy with her historic positions.

      If those feel like an attack, perhaps her record is poor. If those facts damaged her candidacy, I think your ire would be better aimed at that advocacy, rather than shooting the messenger.

      And she had every right to add context to those decisions. Clinton supporters gleefully reminded us that Sanders voted for the 96 crime bill, even though he’s on record – and on video – calling it the “incarceration of a generation” There is context to that vote, and we were happy to provide it.

      She could do the same when confronted with her vote for bankruptcy reform that screwed minorities, the poor and students with draconian laws meant to prevent the discharge of often predatory debt.

      The problem was, she couldn’t.

  • TJ Pierce

    I believe the number of votes Stein got in Pennsylvania also exceeded Trump’s win margin there, by about 3,000 votes. If so, that would account for his being president.

    • what, me worry?

      Except you don’t get to decide for those voters whom they would have otherwise voted for. Those votes don’t belong to you or your candidate. They have to be earned.

      There is a much better case to be made, that the vast majority of those people, noting how historically unpopular the two major candidates were, would have stayed home if Stein wasn’t on offer, rendering your “observation” a lot of twaddle.

      • They would not have stayed home. The ones who stayed home stayed home.

        • what, me worry?

          That speculation is ignorant of every exit poll taken, in which Stein supporters said that they could not support either of the major party candidates. Had Stein not run, they would not have voted at all.

          • amrak63

            More alleged facts. Aaaand the Gish Gallop continues…

          • what, me worry?

            The fact that you don’t believe it, and the fact that you haven’t read it, doesn’t make it untrue. According to Nate Silver, as printed in fivethirtyeight.com:

            “both pre-election polls and the national exit poll suggests that a lot of them wouldn’t have voted at all, if they’d been forced to pick between the two major candidates.”

            I believe Nate is one of your own folks, is he not?

          • amrak63

            The fact that you say it’s true doesn’t mean it’s true, or that Silver was reported correctly. For that matter, just because Silver honestly thinks something is true does not necessarily mean that it is true.

          • what, me worry?

            In the internet age, when all of the world’s accumulated knowledge is literally at your fingertips all the time, ignorance is a choice. You choose to not believe what’s put in front of you, that’s fine. But don’t reply to me and call me a liar if you won’t even be bothered to research the topic yourself.

          • amrak63

            Those accumlated bits of knowledge are diamonds in a dunghill of lies and myths and legends. (h/t Thomas Jefferson for the metaphor) I don’t feel like making the effort to separate them just to argue with you.

            I submit to you that such effort is work, for which I will not be paid, and unpaid work is slavery, and the work ethic is a myth invented to make people feel guilty about not wanting to be slaves.

          • what, me worry?

            Citizenship in an open democracy requires effort, to avail one’s self of information on the issues, the polices one endorses, the candidate’s position, and most importantly, the candidates’ history of advocacy and votes, to determine if their rhetoric matches their actions.

            If you make the choice to avoid investing that effort, you’re choosing to come to democracy unprepared to make decisions in favor of the things that are important to you. You leave your decision making to the talking heads on TV, who are in turn told what to say by corporate heads who have their own agenda, which, assuredly, doesn’t match your own priorities.

            The conversation (I won’t call it an argument) we’re having is an outcropping of that paradigm. Many, many people here will assert, aggressively, that things that were said and emails that were published during the campaign, that are available online for anyone to read, don’t really exist. They are certain of their belief, because someone told them that. But they never looked for themselves, because that’s work.

            The payment for the effort you put into understanding the politics surrounding the policies we’re talking about here is the ability to come to the next election armed with enough information to make an informed choice.

            If that isn’t payment enough for you, I would suggest, sincerely, that you avoid voting at all. You aren’t doing yourself any favors.

      • And yet they voted for a complete idiot, anti-vaxxer, anti-science jackass who’s only around when an election’s on. Seriously, how anyone can defend such an idiot is beyond me, but so are most of these twaddly waddly comments.

        • what, me worry?

          Yeah, I’m not going to engage this reactionary nonsense again. These insults have already been thrown around here. You’re late to the party.

        • laughatbabyboomers

          Anything to stop Hillary.

    • Bill Patterson

      Correlation is not causation.

      • julianenglish

        True, but correlation is often the thing that catches one’s eye, calling for further examination, ultimately revealing a causal link.

  • uniquename72

    It’s important to realize that the “Russian” sanctions were actually sanctions against multiple nations, including Iran. In fact, it was originally a bill creating sanctions against Iran and North Korea, and Russia was tacked on later.

    Passing the bill basically destroys the nuclear agreement Obama made with Iran, and guarantees a closer nuclear relationship between Russia and Iran, and between Russia and North Korea.

    Why the left pretends that it’s only retribution for Russian election hacking is a mystery. Congressional Dems got played.

    • Ron Bo

      The sanctions bill does not undo the Iran nuclear agreement.

    • laughatbabyboomers

      …. Trump did not even want to support this bill. It wasnt a bill from his desk.

    • laughatbabyboomers

      wonkettes are cheering because most are neoliberal idiots that get a hard on when anything anti russia gets brought up. You are dealing with school children.

  • HerrinSchadenfreude

    How’s about YOU get bent you numb establishment titmice? Where’s the uranium, and why doesn’t the senate committee want to see THAT paperwork? Huh? Are you really stupid enough to ask why they want to perpetuate lies with documentation that would support lies? Stupid enough to take a 13 page best practices document as proof positive of some kind of hack when the only two state agencies shown to have ACTUALLY been in the election system or influencing it are the DNC and DHS?

    And really. Let’s get down to brass tacks about that NPT. You have a problem with countries pulling out of it after America antagonizes them? After America tries to tell a sovereign nation it can’t have nuclear power without their permission like it told Iran – yet ANOTHER signor of the NPT? Where’s your mouth on Israel, who refuses to sign it, refuses inspections at Dimona, and went BEHIND AMERICA’S BACK to France to get Dimona built? A country that has threatened its own “allies” in the US and Europe with the Sampson Option as part of a broader threat against “any who would attack it”?

    No YOU get f-ked Wonkette you spineless neocon SHILLS. My father fought in Korea when we reduced the North to a flaming pile of garbage. He second guesses what we did there every day. WTF do you know about it?

    • what, me worry?

      The Democratic support of the anti-BDS gag laws are a smack in the face to the first amendment. Israel is running an apartheid state, openly restricting Palestinians to smaller and smaller reservations separated from each other specifically to prevent any ability of self governance, and then proclaims that Palestinians are unable to govern themselves, while slaughtering thousands of them if any one of them dares to lose it from all the abuse and shoot off a mortar.

      It’s genocide by attrition, and it is depressing to watch our nation be co-conspirators. Especially with our history of doing the same thing to our native people.

      • You are right about Isreal! But this here is about Jill Stein and not about Isreal and how it treats Palestine so….there is that!

        • what, me worry?

          I responded to the comment, not the article. Do try to keep up, dear.

      • I’ve been to Israel. In most parts of the country, Palestinians and Israelis lives side by side – something your two bit bloggers won’t tell you.

        • what, me worry?

          The areas that’s not true are the areas where settlements are still, today, building on Palestinian land in violation of international law.

          But you had a nice vacation in Haifa, so everything is peachy in Israel! Good to know!

        • laughatbabyboomers

          This is a disgusting lie

    • Bill Patterson

      You need to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over.

      • laughatbabyboomers

        Nope. Exactly the kind of individual I support and needs to take over the left.

        All Neoliberals must leave the party.

    • Ron Bo

      Lol the uranium that can’t be exported?
      Thanks for letting us know right off the top you’re batshit crazy, before we have to wade in to that wall of text.

      • Martina Dinale

        Thankyou for that.These cretins are LIKE KUDZU .
        Crazy as shithouse rat KUDZU.

    • Bill Patterson

      “My father fought in Korea when we reduced the North to a flaming pile of garbage. He second guesses what we did there every day. WTF do you know about it?”
      The facts:
      After the first two months of war, South Korean and U.S. forces rapidly dispatched to Korea were on the point of defeat, forced back to a small area in the south known as the Pusan Perimeter. In September 1950, an amphibious UN counter-offensive was launched at Incheon, and cut off many North Korean troops. Those who escaped envelopment and capture were forced back north. UN forces rapidly approached the Yalu River—the border with China—but in October 1950, mass Chinese forces crossed the Yalu and entered the war.[41] The surprise Chinese intervention triggered a retreat of UN forces which continued until mid-1951.
      After these reversals of fortune, which saw Seoul change hands four times, the last two years of fighting became a war of attrition, with the front line close to the 38th parallel. The war in the air, however, was never a stalemate. North Korea was subject to a massive bombing campaign. Jet fighters confronted each other in air-to-air combat for the first time in history, and Soviet pilots covertly flew in defense of their communist allies.
      The fighting ended on 27 July 1953, when an armistice was signed. The agreement created the Korean Demilitarized Zone to separate North and South Korea, and allowed the return of prisoners. However, no peace treaty has been signed, and the two Koreas are technically still at war.[43][44]
      As a war undeclared by all participants, the conflict helped bring the term “police action” into common use. It also led to the permanent alteration of the balance of power within the United Nations, where Resolution 377—passed in 1950 to allow a bypassing of the Security Council if that body could not reach an agreement—led to the General Assembly displacing the Security Council as the primary organ of the UN.[45]
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War

  • okiejoe100

    Jill Stein, Putin has her pussy in his pocket. Money can buy a lot of treason. She’ll be burned in the end by her Russian handlers.

    • Lily412

      I kinda doubt she’s a Russian shill. I think she’s just a LWNJ trying to stay relevant.
      Also,
      >Putin has her pussy in his pocket
      is really sexist. There were plenty of ways to express that without bringing vaginas into it.

    • laughatbabyboomers

      The scary russians giving you nightmares sweetie?

  • bardgal

    She is on Putin payroll. Likely Bernie too – especially after voting NO w/Rand Paul on the Russia Sanctions Bill. I always wondered why he never released his tax returns…. but no one seemed to care, and now his wife is under investigation for Bank Fraud.

    • Lily412

      A) Sanders released his returns in April of 2016
      B) I love that your first thought about the vote against Russian sanctions was “HE SERVES PUTIN!!1”
      C) I don’t agree with his vote, but here’s why he did it: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/6/15/1672214/-Why-did-Sanders-vote-against-Russian-sanctions
      D) What does his wife have to do with anything? That’s the same nonsense as people bringing up Bill’s mistakes in order to criticize Hillary.

      • No. He didn’t. He released partial returns.

        • CO

          Of one year as well. Not dating back however long for Hillary.

        • Lily412

          You’re right. My bad.

      • laughatbabyboomers

        You are arguing with a Neoliberal. They are not good at understanding Politics ; in even the SLIGHTEST capability.

    • laughatbabyboomers

      You are just a warmongering clown.

    • laughatbabyboomers

      I also bet you don’t support the bill that allows charges against Saudi Arabia ( behind 9/11) ; and gives justice to those families that lost their loved ones.

      Obama hated it ( being the warmongering imperialist dog he was) .

      and I bet you just loved Obama

  • Myths

    A woman of integrity that actually knows her history as well as a possible future in which we don’t blow ourselves up before going extinct as we’re homeless and have no healthcare. #ItsInOurHands, it’s Always been in our hands, let’s build the alternative!

    • Lily412

      Apparently, she DOESN’T know her history that well, because North Korea has had aspirations of becoming a nuclear power since the 50’s, which is the reason WHY the U.S. moved missiles into South Korea in the first place. Were the US motivations totally pure? Probably not. They knew North Korea was asking the Soviets to share knowledge of nuclear weapons and we didn’t want “them commies” joining forces. But to suggest that N.K. built up their nuclear arsenal because they were SO AFRAID of big, bad oppressive America is bullshit. They have been focused on militarization for decades. It’s one of the reasons why their people are starving to death.

      My point is not that we should nuke North Korea, but that Jill Stein is a moron and a shit-stirrer, and she has no business pretending that this conflict could be resolved tomorrow if only we would seek peace!1
      If that were the case, it would have already happened. The North Korean demands for even beginning negotiations are that we remove all US military weapons and personnel from South Korea, while they get to keep their current nuclear stash. That would be insane to agree to.

      source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_North_Korean_nuclear_program

    • When I see third-party voters actually build something besides an organic, tofu sandwich, I might buy that, but you haven’t shown me anything more compelling than going to rallies where free beer is being given away.

  • V Santa Cruz

    F this B

  • Kathryn A. Irwin

    What the hell is this article trying to tout? What a bunch of crap writing!

    • Nik Davis

      Are you new here? You must be new here…

  • Leland Whitehouse

    Why not promote the S. Korea who does not kill people in their prisons. ? Jill Stein is way off base.

    • So weird that a buncha Greenies would be so protective and loving to a ruthless dictator who pollutes so much. But I guess at least Putin isn’t a neo con who talked to bankers.

  • SLA

    Does anyone proofread these tirades? The grammar is horrendous.

    • I believe you meant to say the grammar are horrendous.

      • bologna

        I believe you meant to say our grammar are horrendous

      • SLA

        What I wrote IS correct: The grammar IS horrendous. Show me definitive proof that my grammar is incorrect.

  • Lily412

    How do the Jill Stein crazies make it here so fast?!

    • amrak63

      I also would like to know that.

      • laughatbabyboomers

        ” The Russians”

        a baby boomer! look!

        Nobody else says stupid things like that.

      • laughatbabyboomers

        Renew your prescription to TIME magazine; looks like you need some fresh propaganda.

  • amrak63

    Note that none of the denouncers of “corruption” who swarm in here to condemn Those Awful Democrats have yet explained to us how they think candidates who are sufficiently “pure” in their eyes–who won’t take money from sources which the puritans (or trolls pretending to be sincere puritans) consider “tainted”–can raise enough funds to run a successful campaign.

    Nor have they explained how they think the pure candidates can win elections without large sums of money.

    Nor have they explained how they think the candidates can do anything to help the less fortunate citizens of this country if they can’t win elections.

    I won’t hold my breath waiting for the puritans to explain any of these things.

  • JayGoldenBeach

    Stein is right about N. Korea perceiving the US as a threat to be deterred by boasting about weapons progress.

    Stein is right about sanctions being pointless. There is not one example of sanctions inducing leadership change. Indeed, the US-led sanctions imposed on Iraq in the decade prior to the 2003 Iraq war killed 500,000-plus infants/children. Current sanctions on Syria deny certain cancer treatment medicines from being shipped into the country. How many children might be dying from sanctions imposed on N. Korea?

    • Bill ShyJr

      Jill is right, spot on, and btw Hill is less evil than Trump

  • Hazel Blumberg

    Stein is an idjit.

  • elrancho2

    And to think, people actually voted for this confused mess of a woman…! Whatever drugs she’s self-prescribing, it’s showing badly.

    • Believe me, I know one and she IS on drugs.

    • laughatbabyboomers

      multiply the filth and disgust for those that voted Clinton

  • amrak63

    I finally wised up and blocked the troll. I might have done it earlier, but I only learned how to do it yesterday. ;)

    EDIT: And I blocked one of his sycophants as well. This is kewl! I wish I had learned how to do it earlier.

  • I am proud to have voted for Jill Stein.

    There is no way Hillary had access to my vote.

    • Maree Martin

      Thank you for President Trump. Where do I send the dead flowers?

  • laughatbabyboomers

    ” as an uber-liberal Green Party person who knew Hillary Clinton would be just as bad as Donald Trump ”

    What an idiot. Everyone knows Clinton was a far worse choice than Trump. That is why she lost.

    • Kirk McAllister

      Your definition of “everyone” does fit will with the “alternative facts” theme of the 45 administration. I guess it was a different group of “everyone” that gave Clinton a 3 million popular vote majority, not enough to win the EC, but hardly the landslide win that 45 seems to absurdly claim based on data from his alternative universe.

      • laughatbabyboomers

        No. It was proven the DNC lied and cheated to push the actual winner ( Bernie Sanders) out of the running. The DNC and Hillary Clinton won nothing; except a lifetime of contempt.

        • CO

          Lol Bernie didn’t win.

          • laughatbabyboomers

            Of course. Hillary did. Right.

          • CO

            She beat St Bernard yes

  • Bill Patterson

    In Michigan and Wisconsin, two of the Rust Belt states where Trump surprisingly beat Hillary and thus sealed his weak “win,” Jill Stein got more votes than the difference between Trump and Hillary, so go fuck yourself, Dr. Stein.”
    First, “Post hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin: “after this, therefore because of this”) is a logical fallacy that states “Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X.””
    Second, Ask yourself why Dr. Stein received those votes when she was almost totally unknown.
    Could Sen. Sanders’ relentless bashing of everything regarding HRC for a sold year have been the primary reason for voters voting for her as a statement of “none of the above”?
    Answer:
    The Russians played a much less consequential role in HRC’s defeat than Sen. Sanders’, his surrogates and his supporters.
    The damage inflicted by their constant misinformation, disinformation and outright lies were the fatal blow because to the average voter her fellow Democrats were telling them not to vote for her because she was totally financially corrupt, ethically bankrupt and politically deceitful.
    It’s ridiculous to savage Dr. Stein while ignoring the betrayal of HRC by Sen. Sanders.
    “In Michigan and Wisconsin, two of the Rust Belt states where Trump surprisingly beat Hillary and thus sealed his weak “win,” Jill Stein got more votes than the difference between Trump and Hillary, so go fuck yourself, Dr. Stein.”
    First, Mr. Hurst’s argument is fatally flawed because correlation is not causation.
    Second, that is not the primary reason for HRC losing to Trump.
    Sen. Sanders’ highly televised and relentless bashing of everything regarding HRC for a solid year was the primary reason that DNC voters voted for Dr. Stein as a statement of “none of the above”, meaning HRC and Trump, or considered Trump the lesser of two evils.
    Thus, Dr. Stein, from Russia with malice or not, played almost no role in HRC’s defeat compared to Sen. Sanders’ speeches, his surrogates harsh words and his supporters vicious attacks, especially in countless internet comments sections.
    The damage inflicted by their constant misinformation, disinformation and outright lies were the fatal blows because to the average voter a fellow Democrat of HRC was telling them that, compared to any Republican candidate, including Trump, she was financially corrupt, morally bankrupt and politically deceitful. Only Sen. Sanders was pure enough to defeat the GOP candidate.
    “As Bernie Sanders said, Hillary Clinton ‘voted for virtually every trade agreement that has cost the workers of this country millions, millions of jobs.’ ”
    — Donald Trump on Tuesday, June 28th, 2016 in a speech in Monessen, Penn
    Click on this link:
    http://fortune.com/2016/02/24/bernie-sanders-donald-trump-quotes-quiz/
    Sen. Sanders was, for all practical purposes, a surrogate for Trump within the Democratic Party and, therefore, was the critical factor in turning DNC votes to Dr. Stein in the DNC “safe” states of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin and also turned HRC votes into Trump votes in those states and swing states.

  • Steve_I_Am

    Stein was spot on in everything she said. I am anti-war! And I vote.

    I am also a veteran for Peace! I’ll bet Evan Hurst never served! The biggest Chickenhawks never do.

  • OrionJeriko

    Dr Stein is right as usual. So continue calling her names since you can’t refute her rational analysis.

Previous articleChris Cillizza Should STFU About Nancy Pelosi, And SO CAN YOU!
Next articleSam Brownback Gets The Hell Out Of Dodge