Skip to main content

This is going to be a short and sweet diary, because there is no point behind it beyond the obvious.

Three days ago, diaries began going up about HRC running in 2016.
In the days since, several of these "NO NO HRC" type diaries have appeared on the Rec list.  At the moment I right this, there are three on the Rec List.   There are numerous in the newly written.  I have no problem with it.. but can we give it a break for a while?  Take a pledge to say no more?

So, I just want to say this:   We are in an election cycle for 2014.   In the states I care about directly (because of residence) we have 3 Democrats who will put up real races in Kansas for the first time in.. well, decades.   And I'm telling you now don't be shocked if 1 or 2 of them -win-.  

In Missouri, we have several races that matter and I think there are a lot of opportunities there, especially at the state level for the state house of representatives.

In Arkansas, you have one of the best response campaigns I've seen with Mark Pryor.

Republicans are running a nutcase in Iowa in Ernst, giving Democrats a solid chance to grab that seat.

Mississippi may end up running McDaniels, and Democrats have a chance for a real 'Akin' moment there if that happens.

We talk about why Cantor lost, etc. but we have a historic opportunity to pick up a seat in a bright red republican district that was previously held by the house MAJORITY LEADER.

That's it.   This is 2014.   There are lots of races, events and candidates who need our attention.   Last I checked, HRC isn't running for anything from Dog Catcher to PTA President anywhere in the country this year.

But lots of Democrats are.   I would rather read a diary about any of the things above, about any Democrat actually running for something in a year where we can do something about it then waste a large debate one what is to like and not to like about HRC.

The day after elections in November, fine, we can all go there and debate it.

But at least for the next few months, give me more diaries like this one:

http://www.dailykos.com/...

On action in Idaho, or Utah

http://www.dailykos.com/...

Or yeah, I've written stuff on KS/Missouri (and so have others).   Diaries about a house race in Virginia, about Arkansas or Iowa.

There are big things at stake this year, and Republicans are handing us golden opportunities in states that a lot of the establishment would love to write off.  They are doing it at the state level, at the district level and at the federal level.  

Enough with debating HRC.   Get back to me when she's actually running for something.  Until then if you've got someone running a state-candidate in the most red area of Alaska, I am 1000% more interested in that then I am the ongoing HRC debate.

Do you know your local YDA (young Democrats?)   You're local HSDA (High School Democrats?)  You're local candidate?  Your local Veterans Groups, Union Organizations, County Chairs?   Had a chance to sit down and talk to your state and local party members?  

For at least the next 5 months, 5 months is all I ask.. can we focus on trying to win actual races for people actually running This Year instead of feeding the right wing machine and attacking each other?

JMHO, YMMV of course.

8:05 PM PT: Update  I'm going to update this diary with a link, yep, to a diary I did earlier in the day.   The reason why I'm doing that is because within the comments it gets pointed out that we have to do this by actually doing it rather than just go meta.  

That's true.   So, I want to take a chance to point out that every single candidate in Kansas spoke to young Democrats.  And the only place to find that content, anywhere on the internet is here.   And those candidates stayed around to excite voters and to motivate people for 2012.  

http://www.dailykos.com/...

Also, Missouri SoS gives one of the greatest statements about Medicaid Expansion I've heard:  "Medicaid Expansion is the greatest deal since the US bought your state for 3 cents on a dollar from the French."   Boom.   I love that line.   Will use it.

Originally posted to tmservo433 on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 04:05 PM PDT.

Also republished by PostHuffPost: Connection-Conversation-Community .

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  Yes. common sense at last. (61+ / 0-)

      May the FSM protect us if we have to have HRC campaign speculation diaries for the next two-plus years.

      2014 is now. If 2016 is your focus, then you're not paying attention to what matters now for any progressive progress. Turnout this fall is far, far more important than any 2016 speculation.

      Thanks tmservo433 for pulling focus back to reality.

      Time to clean up DeLay's petri dish! Help CNMI guest workers find justice! Learn more at Unheard No More.

      by dengre on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 06:37:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Amazing. (22+ / 0-)

        Half of HRC's supporters demand we ignore the next Presidential primaries for another six months, while the other half crow that it's too late for anyone to mount a challenge because they have no field operation in place.

        And ALL of you firmly believe noone is capable of walking and chewing gum simultaneously.

        You want high turnout for the midterms? Get the base excited about the possibility that a fresh face will arise in 2016 to challenge the disastrous status quo. This continued drum beat of "HRC's got it locked up" doesn't excite anyone to support the party's nominees at ANY level.

        I am one of the 8% who refuses to validate HRC's cynical decision to consign thousands of innocent Iraqis to death in order to score political points at home. Per kos, then, I am a "hater." So be it.

        by WisePiper on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:42:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Wow is this negative. (58+ / 0-)

          I'm OK with you having this viewpoint.  But if you're position is you have no interest in supporting any democrat on any level as long as HRC is the front running democrat for the 2016, then I'm not sure what I can say to you.

          Candidates who are running for everything from School Boards to State Houses to House of Rep and Senate need our support.

          There are great candidates out there.

          They are not HRC.   They aren't campaigning for the presidency.   But they all can make real and significant differences in your life.

          Governors?  Attorney Generals?  

          All of these races matter.

          Get the base excited about the possibility that a fresh face will arise in 2016 to challenge the disastrous status quo. This continued drum beat of "HRC's got it locked up" doesn't excite anyone to support the party's nominees at ANY level.
          This doesn't work.   In 20+ years I've never seen this work.  People don't go vote for a Governor or a State House Rep or a State Senator or a City Councilmen because they are pumped up about an election 2 years later for an unnknown candidate who is a 'fresh face'.  

          That doesn't happen.  It has never happened.   Ever.

          Instead, what happens is that you get the candidates who are running in rooms in front of people where they can talk to them.  You get out to a phone bank and you talk about that specific candidate.

          You increase turnout for your candidate, the person they can actually vote for, instead of a hypothetical non-named entity they can't vote for in this cycle and maybe not in the next.

          Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
          Follow @tmservo433

          by Chris Reeves on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 08:02:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It is not a zero sum game: (14+ / 0-)

            Everything I see here, presented in this diary, is common sense, one step at a time approach. As you explain, people need to understand that regardless of what is coming down the road in 2016, it is not a zero sum game and the more attention and vigor paid in the next 5 months, the more options afterward.

            And not for nothing. Keeping the Senate in Dem hands is critical, if for no other reason than to ensure that any SCOTUS opening is smooth sailing.

            I used to be here daily and decided my limited time would be better spent in the local newspaper where I might persuade more people in the races close to home. We should all be encouraging others to do more locally and report in on feedback and ideas.

            Blessed are the peacemakers, the poor, the meek and the sick: The "party of Jesus" wouldn't invite him to their convention - fearing his "platform."

            by 4CasandChlo on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 08:34:36 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  But every single moment of attention (15+ / 0-)

              paid to far future events is one less moment of attention being paid to closer, incredibly important events.  Fighting about a nominee for an election years in the future when something like the Senate is up for grabs, strikes me as a very want of a nail type situation.

              Even if it wasn't, there's absolutely nothing to win here right now but there is a lot to lose.  No candidate will look at Daily Kos and say 'Look, 25% of their users don't want a Clinton nomination so I'll run'.  That's just not going to happen.  The only thing that will happen are pie fights which do nothing.  Maybe after some candidates declare in the first quarter next year someone will emerge to rally around as an alternative and maybe if that candidates strong enough and supporters work their asses off on promoting that person then maybe Clinton will have to work for it and we'll all end up with a stronger nominee but that won't happen till after midterms.

              •  Well if it's "just not going to happen" (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                flowerfarmer, PhilJD, Laconic Lib

                Then why are you all so worried about shutting down opposition to Clinton on this site?

                Since you know there's no way it's going to happen, that there's no way that Clinton will be opposed by any other Democratic candidate, you should be feeling free to work on the midterms.

                So why aren't you? Why are you instead railing at people who you have said yourself will make no difference? Spend your energy on what YOU SAY IS IMPORTANT.

                And finally, why did Clinton supporters make such a big show of declaring her inevitability and are now acting "so shocked" that anyone might have anything to say about that?

                You've really been your own worse enemies in this whole thing. And i shudder to think that this is a sanctioned "strategy" of the Clinton campaign. I hope to God that is just a dumb idea by people not associated with the campaign.

                "I'm not a number" --84,414

                by BentLiberal on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 04:57:43 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  You assume I care about about shutting down (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Odysseus, Arilca Mockingbird

                  opposition to Hilary Clinton, I don't.  I do care about the pie that will erupt, I do care about wasted energy, I do care about getting more and better democrats elected which is why I'm here.

                  Since you know there's no way it's going to happen, that there's no way that Clinton will be opposed by any other Democratic candidate, you should be feeling free to work on the midterms.

                  So why aren't you? Why are you instead railing at people who you have said yourself will make no difference? Spend your energy on what YOU SAY IS IMPORTANT.

                  I am, spent a couple hours the past few weeks taking my elderly aunt around to collect signatures to get ballot access for local candidates, I'll door knock in the fall and deliver lawn signs if its needed.  I'd like to do more but other than a 20 here or there I can't really afford to donate and a generalized anxiety disorder makes phone banking a pretty painful process though I may put in an hour or two like I've done in 2010 and 2012.
                  And finally, why did Clinton supporters make such a big show of declaring her inevitability and are now acting "so shocked" that anyone might have anything to say about that?
                  Where was this big show?  It sure as hell hasn't been here.
                  You've really been your own worse enemies in this whole thing. And i shudder to think that this is a sanctioned "strategy" of the Clinton campaign. I hope to God that is just a dumb idea by people not associated with the campaign.
                  I don't know where to even begin with this.  Let's start with the you've.

                  There is no you've.  I pretty agnostic on Clinton.  I'm planning on voting for her in the primary unless someone declares and then proves they have the ability to win in the general.  The most active primary support I'll give to her candidacy is to call out unfair negativity, but I'm planning to do that for any candidate.

                  Now lets move on to the rest of the sentence:

                  really been your own worse enemies in this whole thing.
                  We've already dealt with the you've/your stuff so we'll focus on the rest.  What whole thing are you talking about?  Pointing out that fighting primary battles for the 2016 stupid when 2014 has barely started isn't a thing.  If you mean the glut of Clinton should be uncontested diaries.  There you may have a point, the 2 or 3 of those in the past month are an immense problem that needs immediate correction else we risk the very foundation of democracy crumbling.

                  Let's finish:

                  I hope to God that is just a dumb idea by people not associated with the campaign.
                  Well I hope to God that people don't seriously believe that the Clinton campaign sending surrogates to go to websites and tell everyone that the midterms are what's important now in order to silence attacks on Hillary.  
                  •  Here's your tell right here (0+ / 0-)
                    I do care about wasted energy, I do care about getting more and better democrats
                    No one is controlling what YOU DO with your time and energy.But what you are saying is you want to control what others do with their time and energy. And you are spending you time and energy on telling others what to do, when you could be doing your thing.

                    I also read that you are out doing things with your Aunt and that's great. It proves the case of the walk and chew gum argument. You can be out doing other stuff and still be here telling other people what to do.

                    Well the same goes for people who might not want HRC for President. They can multi-task as well.

                    Don't want to waste time on pie? Don't read those diaries then. And spend the time you'd be arguing in them on something else.

                    p.s. You apparently missed Markos and other front page stories declaring that Hillary is inevitable and people should like it or lump it. You also apparently missed Hillary Clinton arranging major media time for her book tour while it's midterm season. Regular posters did neither of those things.  You're attacking the reactions, not the root causes being reacted to. Same as the diarist.

                    "I'm not a number" --84,414

                    by BentLiberal on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 12:35:07 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  Didn't Democratic leadership say they weren't (4+ / 0-)

              going to pour money into the mid-terms?  Cannot recall which group, but I was appalled.  It won't matter who runs for President if we lose everything at the state level.

              •  Part of the reason I don't contribute to DCCC, DNC (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Heart of the Rockies, tardis10

                or DSCC.  They choose which races they want to support and which to ignore, which often leaves Republicans unchallenged and leads to races where no solid candidate is put up to challenge when a bagger wins a primary and has their "Akin moment" or when the incumbent is indicted.  The head of the DNC was given the position after she chose to not challenge her friends, Republican representatives in South Florida, by helping Democrats in potentially winnable races.  No way are they getting to decide where my money goes.

              •  It was Katzenberg's group (0+ / 0-)

                Priorities USA.  They're only spending in Kentucky.  It's not really a big deal because they were set up for Presidential elections not midterms.

          •  Where did I say I have no interest in (12+ / 0-)

            supporting any Democrats at any level?

            I merely opined that our traditional difficulty in turning out the base for the midterms likely could be ameliorated if the party was seen to be promoting an agenda the base could get excited about.

            Right now, the conventional wisdom is that HRC is going to be our nominee and the next President. For an America continuing to reel over retirement and job insecurity, declining purchasing power of both groceries and housing, the prospects of continued and renewed military entanglements overseas, the contemplation of four or eight more years of the same is not exactly motivational.

            Like it or not, for most Americans, the President (or the presumed next President) is the standard bearer and embodiment of the values of his/her political party.

            Again, I posit that generating enthusiasm for the bold, new direction our party is poised to embark upon is precisely what is needed to counter the usual midterm doldrums. And that needed enthusiasm is not helped by the attempts to quash discussion about alternatives to an HRC candidacy.

            I am one of the 8% who refuses to validate HRC's cynical decision to consign thousands of innocent Iraqis to death in order to score political points at home. Per kos, then, I am a "hater." So be it.

            by WisePiper on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 08:56:49 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Have you considered others may differ from you? (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            WisePiper, cybrestrike, Laconic Lib

            In 2006, I was excited about a fresh new face named Barack Obama. Because of this excitement, I voted in the midterm election, which I usually ignore. That was the election wherein Democrats took back the House, the Senate, and a majority of governorships.

            Obi Ben Ghazi to House Republicans: "Use the Farce."

            by edg on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 10:12:31 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  You missed the part about (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            cybrestrike

            walking and chewing gum at the same time.  You must have been blowing a bubble when you read that.  Accordingly, I understand your frustration.

            •  We can blow bubbles, chew gum, and watch tv (4+ / 0-)

              All at once.  The way I interpreted the comment however was: with Hillary as the front runner, you can't build excitement for lower races.

              If you can't build excitement it's not a matter of 'could you do x', it is in my mind that you aren't motivated to try, which is how I read it.

              We can all do many things at once, but if we aren't motivated to try and to those things, they don't get done.

              Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
              Follow @tmservo433

              by Chris Reeves on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 10:58:27 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You are railing against people who don't want (7+ / 0-)

                Clinton as the nominee in your diary. This is a mistake on your part. You should be railing against the people that declared that Clinton is the inevitable nominee. They are the ones that are responsible.

                You should have stayed neutral in your diary. You didn't. I don't understand why you didn't. Because I appreciate the things you've diaried about and are working on locally.

                "I'm not a number" --84,414

                by BentLiberal on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 05:03:16 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  No, I'm not... (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Diogenes2008, Onomastic

                  There is nothing above that says "I'm giant pro-hillary"  

                  In fact, the only thing I say is:

                  I have no problem with it..
                  That is with people not wanting Hillary.  I'm not 'railing' against anyone who is anti-Hillary at any point.  I'm saying all of this Hillary attention is a distraction, that's it.  If we were chocked with with pro-hillary diaries, the same would be true.

                  Just so we're clear.  Thus, my phrase: she's not even running for Dog Catcher.

                  Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
                  Follow @tmservo433

                  by Chris Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 06:31:25 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  The 2nd sentence in your diary ignored the truth (0+ / 0-)

                    I won't call it a lie, but I'll call it a very narrow and one-sided view of the situation.

                    Three days ago, diaries began going up about HRC running in 2016.
                    Nope. Maybe 3 days ago the side you don't like started reacting. But the Hillary diaries started this year with the front page's declarations in multiple diaries that HRC is inevitable and people should like it or lump it. This was followed up by lots and lots of regular diaries saying the same thing.

                    And now HRC is giving time to big media in conjunction with her book tour  DURNG THE MIDTERMS. The strategy appears to bo to suck the air out of the room media-wise. Regular people are making small attempts to counter that.

                    But all you see is "Three days ago .." all this started.

                    "I'm not a number" --84,414

                    by BentLiberal on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 12:41:11 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  Because You're a Partisan (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Laconic Lib

                You came right out and said they said something they didn't say, to argue against it. A strawman fallacy.

                At least you recognize that it's your own "interpretation", your own mind, that's coming up with these things. Not the person who you're saying did.

                You're such a committed HRC partisan that you see everything through the lens of electing her. I just hope the rest of the people reading the diary can see that.

                "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

                by DocGonzo on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 06:57:46 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  What? (3+ / 0-)

                  I'm a committed pro-HRC partisan?   Considering I'd like to see other candidates run, and I have zero commitment to HRC, and if someone else wins our nomination I'm just as happy.

                  I have no dog in that fight.

                  And if I was wildly pro-HRC I wouldn't be suggesting she r un for dogcatcher ;)

                  Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
                  Follow @tmservo433

                  by Chris Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 07:21:13 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Then Explain Your Strawman (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Laconic Lib

                    Maybe you're just a useful tool for HRC partisans, because your attitude and your actions are indistinguishable from a partisan's. Why else would you post that strawman, in defense of ignoring HRC's campaign during the only time it's vulnerable?

                    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

                    by DocGonzo on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 08:10:37 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  let me know (0+ / 0-)

                      Exactly the sentence or paragraph I should respond to

                      Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
                      Follow @tmservo433

                      by Chris Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 08:19:07 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  First of all... (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      WB Reeves, tmservo433, sviscusi

                      If you insist on using the word Partisan as a noun, use your articles. It would be THE HRC partisans. And I'm shocked this needs to be explained, but there is no attitude or action, universal or even inherently common among HRC supporters or detractors. So stop accusing someone of being according to a stereotype that simply doesn't exist.

                      Second, there's a vast and massive difference, between, "Can we deal with HRC's campaign when it actually matters - i.e. as part of the 2016 election cycle," and "Ignore Hillary!"

                      And at no point, have you spelled out anything tmservo433 said, which was misrepresenting the position of HRC supporters. So your strawman argument is entirely invented. In fact, the person continually misrepresenting what someone said, and making a strawman argument, would be YOU.

                      Thirdly - the vulnerability is in your head. HRC is no more vulnerable now, than she will be 6 months from now. In fact, her campaign can't be vulnerable yet - because it doesn't exist.

                      And this is coming from someone who is absolutely NOT an HRC supporter, for 2016 or any other point. I don't like many of the policies and past actions of Clinton, and I don't support her as a president. But the difference is - I'm not spending an inordinate amount of time focusing on a race, that hasn't even started yet, from a candidate who hasn't even officially announced she's running yet. Spending time trying to sabotage a campaign that is still only a presumption, is a massive waste of energy.

          •  You Are Negative (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Laconic Lib

            No, it's your straw man that's negative. They didn't say

            have no interest in supporting any democrat on any level as long as HRC is the front running democrat for the 2016

            It's like saying to people who say "end the war" the old strawman con "support the troops".

            That fallacy is as deeply dishonest as this whole diary's premise.

            "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

            by DocGonzo on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 06:55:21 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Speak for yourself. (0+ / 0-)

          Half of HRC's supporters demand...

          The other half crow...

          ALL of you firmly believe....

          This [whatever] doesn't excite anyone...

        •  That nice little old lady is ... (7+ / 0-)

          ... scaring more than old men in the Tea Party lately. I think that's pretty sweet.

          By the way, there's a huge race in South Carolina for Governor involving a real good guy named Vincent Sheheen who is up against Nikki Haley. You can find out about him or donate here.

          My dog likes me because I'm salty. Not salty like a pirate. Salty like a pretzel.

          by Tortmaster on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 09:11:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Who is the base? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Heart of the Rockies

          They vote in every election, come hell or high water. Primaries, off-year elections. They volunteer in campaigns, go to party conventions, at least at the lowest level.

          Censorship is rogue government.

          by scott5js on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 10:16:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I think the base is broader than that (4+ / 0-)

            You have defined the party activists.  There are far more people who traditionally vote Democratic in every election.  They are also the base, although they are dwindling in number for the obvious reasons.  

            •  We need more activists (0+ / 0-)

              More people who are determined to shape the Democratic Party in the liberal direction. People who recognize that voting is a part they must play in maintaining a democracy.
              We cannot just accept people's voting habits as they are. I tell people I vote in every election, to set an example. I think I last missed an election in 1974.
              We can also encourage more people to voice their opinions to their elected representatives. Also follow their voting records.

              Censorship is rogue government.

              by scott5js on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 10:12:08 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I vote in every election as well (0+ / 0-)

                and wheedled and cajoled everyone I knew, even casually, to vote.  However, when someone retorts with, it doesn't matter; they don't do what the people want, I refuse to argue with them any longer, because I see the validity of their position.  I do still encourage them to vote, even if as a protest.  It is important to be counted.

                •  Maybe younger people ... (0+ / 0-)

                  who have not completely developed their habits and convictions. I started voting at 21 (voting age back then) and have never let up.
                  As for whether it doesn't matter, I don't buy that. It certainly did make a difference recently for Eric Cantor. It was Cantor who spent more money too. Change is certainly incremental in a country of some 300 million, but not impossible.

                  Censorship is rogue government.

                  by scott5js on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 01:20:52 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No (0+ / 0-)

                    the people I am talking about are not young.  There are a lot of people, many of whom used to vote, who feel that there really is no point to it anymore.  Hell, even my septuagenarian mother (who always votes) has begun to feel her vote is worthless.  

        •  Piper this is just silly (11+ / 0-)

          People do not turn out in mid terms because they're excited about who's going to run for President two years hence. They vote in mid terms because they feel strongly about who their direct elected representatives should be.

          People have every right to talk about HRC if they choose but please, no spurious arguments about how it's going to promote mid term turn out because it won't.

          Nothing human is alien to me.

          by WB Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 03:29:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Or they vote in mid terms because (0+ / 0-)

            they're mad as hell and want to throw somebody out.

            It even happens in primaries, notoriously the lowest turnout of all.

            Example - Eric Cantor.

            Don't discount the pissed off voter. I have a suspicion they might be more important this year than most.

            Especially in an election where it seems to be either 'I can't STAND them, I'm voting for ANYBODY else' or 'meh - what difference will it make, they're both bad', the pissed off voter is going to carry the day, because the meh voter won't bother.

            •  I don't see a necessary opposition between (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Arilca Mockingbird

              feeling strongly about who their direct elected representatives should be and being " mad as hell and want(ing) to throw somebody out." So I'm not sure of your point.

              Unless you're suggesting that a majority are going to mindlessly vote against any incumbent regardless of party. I suppose that could happen, but I know of no instance where it actually has.  

              Nothing human is alien to me.

              by WB Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 02:17:11 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  I believe you are mistaken, based on our (6+ / 0-)

          experience. Dave Loebsack ran to overturn a beloved moderate Republican in 2006, when we had no idea who would run in 2008. Loebsack won on his merits through a grassroots campaign.



          Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary? . . . and respect the dignity of every human being.

          by Wee Mama on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 04:03:58 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Nothing is going to be won or lost ... (0+ / 0-)

        .. on Daily Kos.  There is bandwidth enough for Hillary diaries as well as all the vapid midterm Horserace! articles you can choke down.

        I come here to read about and (occasionally) discuss the issues of the day.  I ignore Horserace! articles because who cares.

        But nothing done here is going to move the midterms one way or the other.  If you want to do that, you will have to join a campaign or an advocacy group.  Preaching to the choir on Kos doesn't count.

    •  WooooooooHoooooooooo! (4+ / 0-)

      “Listen--are you breathing just a little, and calling it a life?” ― Mary Oliver

      by weezilgirl on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:34:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  need more of this to minimize the usual sty of (8+ / 0-)

    DINOs and eggshell scramblers

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "If we appear to seek the unattainable, then let it be known that we do so to avoid the unimaginable." (@eState4Column5)

    by annieli on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 04:24:02 PM PDT

  •  agreed, and I apologize for my (18+ / 0-)

    contribution to the flood of HRC diaries.

    I just thought that if we are going to begin thinking about it, we should begin by taking some time to examine our principles before openly asking "who else?"

    In the long run though, I think the few diaries on the list are just shootin' the breeze on a sunday. I don't think it will spill over into the weekdays.

  •  I'll second this (44+ / 0-)

    We need to invest our energy in 2014 races that are on now. Keeping the Senate and taking the House should take all of our focus from now until November.

    If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

    by CwV on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 04:27:33 PM PDT

  •  Thank God ( or dirty of your choice) (25+ / 0-)

    I was beginning to think folks forgot there was an election this November that we NEED TO WIN!

    Frankly, I’m getting more than a little tired of hearing from angry America. I’m also less than fond of knee-jerk America. And when you combine the two with the Internet, you too often get stupid America, which is really annoying.

    by jsfox on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 04:49:55 PM PDT

  •  Amen! (22+ / 0-)

    I wish Kos would pass a DailyKos Rule:

      No 2016 until after 2014.

    We have work to do to hold the Senate and try to take back the House (or at least improve our numbers).  We shouldn't be wasting our time gossiping about 2016.  I for one have not given up on the last two years of the Obama administration by throwing in the towel on 2014 and looking ahead to 2016.  Besides, I'm not sure I can bare another two years of Republican rule by obstruction.

    "Some men see things as they are and ask, 'Why?' I dream of things that never were and ask, 'Why not?"

    by Doctor Who on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 05:05:26 PM PDT

    •  Now we are gossiping about gossiping, we go down (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lying eyes, Smoh

      this road all the time.

      Why isn't anyone talking about the people in the races you want to talk about?

      I put my Senator forward many times in the gun diaries. I work him in every conversation I can.  I hope he is on the short list for VP. We might as well start with that. ja ja.

      Don't send a teddy bear to the Martinez family, they don't want you to intrude on their grief - send a postcard to a politician Not One More

      by 88kathy on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 05:14:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I wish the front pagers would focus on that (9+ / 0-)

      Go look at the front page now and tell me where there's a single headline about someone running in 2014. Not a single Democrat there. This site doesn't appear to care about 2014 except to point out how much a few republicans really suck. Why do I give a fuck about what happens in some deep red district where everyone is batshit crazy and the dems will never win. Or why the hell we need to keep hearing about Benghazi again and again.

      When it comes to the accomplishments of the dems running in 2014 it's fucking crickets.

      No War but Class War

      by AoT on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 09:09:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I think you're confused. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      flowerfarmer, Laconic Lib

      It was on the front page where the Hillary is Inevitable diaries began, including by Markos if I'm not mistaken.

      I wish Kos would pass a DailyKos Rule:

        No 2016 until after 2014.

      I don't know how you guys think you are going to be able to stop the reaction diaries without going to the original source that spurred the reactions. I realize it's easier to try to intimidate only the reaction diarists, but you'll not succeed that way, in my opinion.

      "I'm not a number" --84,414

      by BentLiberal on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 05:08:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  You very generously alluded to (14+ / 0-)

    "debating" HRC.

    What I've mostly seen are slurs, tired, bitter insults, and resentments that have been nursed for years. When the time comes for debate I hope we'll aim a lot higher.

    Critics of HRC have some valid criticisms, too often the snipping is far short of anything worthy of the title "debating," though.

    Anyway, as you say, the time for that discussion is not now.

    If your strategy depends on having fewer people show up to vote, that is not a sign of strength. That is a sign of weakness. President Obama

    by Had Enough Right Wing BS on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 05:29:09 PM PDT

  •  Honey (0+ / 0-)

      THIS is going to be the biggest backlash against media Pavlov's theory mind control in HISTORY.
       By the time the election rolls around...
       The lines to vote...
       Hillary, Hillary, Hillary...

    March AGAINST monsatanOHagentorange 3/25/13 a time warp

    by 3rock on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 05:35:40 PM PDT

  •  Sorry-have to disagree (4+ / 0-)

    Yes, we are in the middle of a pivotal mid-term election, and I'm working to hold our Senate majority, as well as get back pivotal Governorships.  

    We are ALSO in the early phase of the 2016 Presidential election, and to deny that is to deny reality.  I was at the Convention in Charlotte, and it was perfectly clear who was laying the groundwork for a possible campaign (Biden, O'Mally, Schweitzer among others).  Yes, nobody will announce a campaign until early 2015, but anyone who DOES announce early next year will be working NOW to line up possible financial and political supporters (with the possible exception of Hillary Clinton, who won't have to because her supporters are doing it for her).

    What worries me the most is all the people who don't want HRC to run, but won't apparently lift a finger to try and convince Elizabeth Warren/Bernie Sanders or any acceptably progressive candidate to decide to run, but will be ready next year to complain that "they" wouldn't let "their" fantasy candidate run.

    •  Considering each week might bring 3 or 4 news (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BMScott, Smoh

      cycles, I just don't think fighting about whose side of the Hillary fight means a damn thing other than to pontificate and show how much you love her or hate her. The next election in November could turn the tide as to whether or not soldiers will have to re-engage in Iraq. No offense but Hillary is out of government and those in government today will have to deal with questions of war and peace.

      Personally, I don't know about you but the last thing on my mind or that I give 2 shits about is the name Hillary Rodham Clinton or who is running for president 2 1/2 years from now. It's times like this, when there a shitstorm brewing in the Middle East again, mass shootings going on killing children, women and cops, income inequality, women's rights being threatened, the emotional fights going on about Hillary this and Hillary seems very superfluous. And I can walk and chew gum at the same time. If a hypothetical 2 1/2 years from now is supposed to be the most important issue we face today, then I guess I am totally politically ignorant

      Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others....Groucho Marx

      by tazz on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 09:34:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Tipped. Recced. (12+ / 0-)

    Enough of the Hilary Clinton hit diaries.  It makes you wonder whether DKos has been invaded by Libertarians, and Republicans with an axe to grind.

    •  Not necessarily an axe to grind............ (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Smoh

      but maybe a paycheck from one of the endless number of GOP  dirty tricks  groups.  How does that song, "Send In The Clowns" end............"maybe there're here"?

      Proud to be a Democrat

      by Lying eyes on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 08:03:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think the axe is more likely at this point (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lying eyes, Curt Matlock, Smoh

        though I believe the vast majority is genuine though a little vigilance and trying to keep the invective to a minimum will be needed to keep from falling for the bait from a Rainbow Girl or APAguy type.

      •  Oh bullshit... (6+ / 0-)

        ...this is just as bad as saying the people who support Clinton are being paid by her or her supporters.

        People can object to Hillary for rational or irrational reasons without being a shill.

        So take your broad brush insults elsewhere.

        We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

        by delver rootnose on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 09:09:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  If only the internet had been (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          delver rootnose

          around in Donald Segretti's heyday.  The original 'ratfucker" would have had a ball.  You think there are no modern day Segrettis  in Karl Rove's stable out to divide and discourage Democrats?  Puleeze, don't be naïve.  Politics ain't beanbag.

          Never heard of Segretti, here's one of many Google items:

          http://swampland.time.com/...  

          Proud to be a Democrat

          by Lying eyes on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 10:46:56 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The fact they exist..... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Laconic Lib

            ..., and they do exist, does not give you the right to accuse people of this community, either collectively or individually, of being paid shills.  It is a HRable and sanctionible offense.  If you suspect someone is a shill the proper course is to bring it to the help desk privately.

            Again I say your accusation is BULLSHIT and ment to lay the groundwork for accusing anyone objecting to the enivatibility of Hillary as being a paid shill.

            We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

            by delver rootnose on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 11:03:42 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Bullshit back atcha. I know the rules here (0+ / 0-)

              as well as anyone and I know I didn't break any of them. I didn't accuse anybody of anything.  My comment was off the cuff speculation in reply to the parent comment and certainly not meant to lay any groundwork for anything.    If you want to HR it go ahead.  I could not care less.

              Proud to be a Democrat

              by Lying eyes on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 11:20:42 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  This is no better than the behavior of a certain (4+ / 0-)

            former diarist who practically made a career out of constantly insinuating that DKos was awash in neo-liberal corporate shills.

            If there is any real evidence that someone is a shill, lets see it. If there isn't, 86 the baseless well poisoning.

            Nothing human is alien to me.

            by WB Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 03:39:57 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Audience? (17+ / 0-)

    The front page, long, long before that, said that Hilary was the nominee and that's that.

    That caused a lot of dyspepsia, and for good reason. People don't like being told that they don't get to vote -- by the Republican or Democratic Party. They don't like being told that Hilary is it, and if you don't think so, you're voting for Nader, because there is exactly one way to win, and everyone else is destroying the party, etc. That kind of thing generates really bad feelings.

    You can say, "Stop it," but you're telling people to stop protesting that they feel suffocated. It seems to me that no writer, front page or rec list or anywhere else, should be acting as if her or his personal version of pragmatism means everyone else should shut up or, worse, not have a criticism. The diaries you are protesting are protests -- writers trying to make a case against the presumptive nominee because they've been accused of being bad for the party and the election already for wanting to have votes.

    "man, proud man,/ Drest in a little brief authority,. . . Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven/ As make the angels weep; who, with our spleens,/ Would all themselves laugh mortal." -- Shakespeare, Measure for Measure II ii, 117-23

    by The Geogre on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 06:56:44 PM PDT

    •  They are free to say what they want.. (15+ / 0-)

      And I say that above in the comments.  I'm just saying for right now, until we get to November, we are wasting a lot of time discussing this as a heated pie fighting debate across a ton of diaries when every state has real races that matter -right now-.

      I'm OK if people want to protest Hillary all they want, the day after the election cycle ends.   Then, go to town.   I said this same thing in 2006.. about several candidates (and I think Hillary at the time).

      I'm OK if people want to bash back.. but how many Front Page diaries have we really had that have been about "Hillary is our nominee"  If we've had a lot, I'm not so big on those either.

      Not when the race I feel we should be working on is right in front of us, for the taking.

      There is a difference, at least in my mind, between saying: "Stop It" and saying: "Let's focus on something else -For now-"   That's the key point.. for now, let's get to that fight when it matters.

      What happens with HRC doesn't matter at all, in any way imaginable, to anyone in 2014.  Not in the slightest.

      Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
      Follow @tmservo433

      by Chris Reeves on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:03:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I can't agree (12+ / 0-)

        Any potential challengers (from our side) to Clinton need to hear our voices now.

        To smell the vapors of discontent, wafting across the land.

        •  Agree with you. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          flowerfarmer, Laconic Lib

          Otherwise, the inevitability may become real and other good candidates will be shut out from fund raising and votes.

          Obi Ben Ghazi to House Republicans: "Use the Farce."

          by edg on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 10:20:59 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Why? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mightymouse

          Seriously. What's the argument that it has to be now instead of after the midterms? What makes the five months between now and then so crucial?

          Nothing human is alien to me.

          by WB Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 03:44:01 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Maybe the fact that HRC is blanketing (4+ / 0-)

            the MSM? HRC is out there selling  herself/her book NOW so I'd expect pushback NOW as well.

            "George RR Martin is not your bitch" ~~ Neil Gaiman

            by tardis10 on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 05:53:12 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  For contrast, see "On the Media" 6/14/14 (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              tardis10, cybrestrike

              "On the Media," from WNYC, suggested that Hilary had produced a book she did not want to write and was doing press she did not want to do. They also examined her interview with Terri Gross and the awkwardness there within both that thesis and a recall to 2008. Their insight was that the campaign book appears just at the outset of the announcement so that the press tour coincides with fundraising, but this is too early and is mistimed for the campaign.

              Maybe.

              "man, proud man,/ Drest in a little brief authority,. . . Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven/ As make the angels weep; who, with our spleens,/ Would all themselves laugh mortal." -- Shakespeare, Measure for Measure II ii, 117-23

              by The Geogre on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 06:37:02 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Darn,I can't find the story at the (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                The Geogre, Laconic Lib

                link. But HRC's performance has struck me as both over-rehearsed and disengaged. Not her best effort.

                "George RR Martin is not your bitch" ~~ Neil Gaiman

                by tardis10 on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 08:04:25 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I think the show isn't up yet (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  tardis10

                  I think the link lists shows when they're no longer about to be aired by an affiliate. Thus, it may be Wednesday or something before this week's show will be up. Sorry about that, but "OTM" is one of the things I stay home to hear on the radio.

                  "man, proud man,/ Drest in a little brief authority,. . . Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven/ As make the angels weep; who, with our spleens,/ Would all themselves laugh mortal." -- Shakespeare, Measure for Measure II ii, 117-23

                  by The Geogre on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 10:05:02 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Okay but that isn't really an explanation for why (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sviscusi

              "push back" is crucial right now. Unless you think that any time HRC is in the news it requires "push back".

              In which case you'll be committing to constantly pushing back between now and election day 2016, since pretty much anything HRC does between now and then is going to be treated as newsworthy by the MSM.

              While I can understand that impulse as a visceral reaction, it doesn't really make much sense on a practical political level. Knee jerk anti-HRC attacks every time she makes news aren't going to magically call forth an alternate nominee.

              So the question remains: what practical results can be expected that justify indulging in such tactics five months before the mid terms? If the purpose is simply to inflict early political wounds on HRC, is that sufficient reason for risking distracting/demoralizing turn out in the mid terms? A further thought; if the midterms end up as a rerun of 2010, won't that likely make it more, rather than less, difficult to mount an effective challenge to HRC?

              I suspect the reaction to such an outcome would be a defensive circling of the wagons. Pushing for a more progressive Presidential candidate would be viewed as far too risky.    

              Nothing human is alien to me.

              by WB Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 12:28:31 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  There are many ways to game out (0+ / 0-)

                how attacking HRC now (& yes,every time she is media large) works or does not in enabling another candidate to enter the Democratic field. I do it all the time. Similarly,one can guess about the outcome of 2014 elections and the potential mood of the Democratic Party. All conjecture and guesses.
                My current guess is that HRC is very far from a lock to win the presidency in 2016. But I value any and all voices that post their authentic opinions because while we can all spin out what might or might not be practical in a systems sense, today I'd say authenticity trumps 2+ years out gaming.

                "George RR Martin is not your bitch" ~~ Neil Gaiman

                by tardis10 on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 08:55:36 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Authenticity? (0+ / 0-)

                  What is that suppose to mean? I would assume, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that all opinions concerning HRC pro or con are authentic. One side's authenticity doesn't "trump" the other side's to anyone other than the committed partisan.

                  It sounds very much as though you aren't really interested in political effectiveness. Apparently, you think that politics is a game of personalities; an arena for egotistic expression rather than a collective, cooperative effort to achieve material goals.

                  If this is so, it would certainly explain your dismissing strategy and tactics as "gaming", rather than recognizing them as necessities in any political endeavor.

                  In which case there's not much basis for dialog. There's little common ground between those who think of politics as personal theater and those who view it as collective struggle.  

                   

                  Nothing human is alien to me.

                  by WB Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 10:54:45 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Interesting response. (0+ / 0-)

                    I'd say I am interested in political effectiveness while recognizing current reality. (Gilens/Page) So we all work toward changing that reality,non?  And yes, I do recognize how much celebrity culture/marketing/advertising permeates both politics and policy.
                    Now since I happen to be wonky & policy driven by nature, my interest in US politics,per se,is in how to achieve specific goals. Sometimes that means I will support a specific political candidate. Go,Bellows! More often,it means my activism is issue specific.
                    As for authenticity,I'd say we both know what it means. And rewriting my comment as if I'd assigned it to only one side in the HRC wars isn't cricket. Maybe you are right,we have no need to dialog further.

                    "George RR Martin is not your bitch" ~~ Neil Gaiman

                    by tardis10 on Tue Jun 17, 2014 at 12:13:25 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

        •  I really don't see why (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KiB

          Did Barack Obama or any other 2008 candidate decide whether to run, or how to campaign, based on the tenor of Daily Kos diaries and comments — in mid-2006 or at any other time?

          "Democracy is a political system for people who are not sure they are right." —E. E. Schattschneider

          by HudsonValleyMark on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 04:59:31 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I agree with you (7+ / 0-)

        I won't write on Hilary vs. anyone, and I don't usually write comments on those diaries. I know how I feel about her, and I know that her supporters won't be swayed by me. Heck, I don't want to sway them, and, as you say, we have business to attend to here.

        The site wastes time both by "Hilary is wretched" and "Hilary is the unstoppable force." However, those are diaries. What makes them move onto the rec list is something I don't know (really. . . that's not snark -- I've never looked at the mechanisms -- this is not pie).

        I was not indicting you, of course, because your call is perfectly reasonable. I was just trying to explain that people, usually in comments, get told that it's just not possible to not support Hilary. The "Hilary is a monster" diaries are responses. They're misdirected energy, perhaps, but I'd wager every one was a response.

        I would suggest, by the way, that the Hilary watch be left to CNN and Politico after November 2014 as well. We should talk about candidates and not play the "someone is thinking about thinking about taking lunch with someone important" game. That stuff leads to President Huntsman. (Remember how he was going to be the GOP nominee based on his lunches and meetings?)

        "man, proud man,/ Drest in a little brief authority,. . . Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven/ As make the angels weep; who, with our spleens,/ Would all themselves laugh mortal." -- Shakespeare, Measure for Measure II ii, 117-23

        by The Geogre on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:20:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's all good. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ParkRanger, The Geogre, KiB

          We're good.   In a lot of ways, I like moments like this because people do get invested and they keep coming to sites like DK to debate HRC and it drives traffic.

          That's the reality of the business.

          But I know some people get wary of it, and it gives us a chance to say: "HEY!   I'm fighting for candidates over here, right now.."  

          And that's all good.  

          It's kind of a win/win.

          Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
          Follow @tmservo433

          by Chris Reeves on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:24:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  It will only matter to Hillary (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tmservo433, scott5js

        if and when she's President because she will need Democrats in those Senate seats up for grabs this year.  That goes for anyone else that might be nominated by our party and win the White House.

        Proud to be a Democrat

        by Lying eyes on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 08:07:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Beyond that.. (4+ / 0-)

          And while it seems totally unthinkable, electing good (D)s to stay in office helps protect us against the unthinkable in 2016.

          Have to keep your eye on the ball every step of the way.

          Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
          Follow @tmservo433

          by Chris Reeves on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 08:09:19 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry tmservo (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Laconic Lib

        But that's a bunch of bs.

        You are telling one side to stop and you are saying the other side is free to do what they want.

        This, coming way down in the comments and not in your diary is much too little, too late to give you any veneer of neutrality at all:

        If we've had a lot, I'm not so big on those either.
        I don't think you thought this out. It's a one-side diary against the people who you are trying to convince of something. If you looked at this approach objectively at all, you'd see it can't be effective.

        "I'm not a number" --84,414

        by BentLiberal on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 05:16:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Exactly (7+ / 0-)

      For reference, kos's somewhat ridiculous May 5 diary:

      Hillary Clinton presidential poll

      She's going to be discussed. There are both folks who for whatever reason thinks that Hillary is the best thing since sliced bread, and those who see her as symbolic of a neutered and corrupt Democratic Party.

      Let the discussion flow, I say!

      •  The poll didn't really bother me. (3+ / 0-)

        But the other diary, I forget the title but it was something like "Shut Up Assholes, Hillary Is Our 2016 Candidate" was rather troubling.

        Obi Ben Ghazi to House Republicans: "Use the Farce."

        by edg on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 10:23:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The rox/sox diaries were just normal (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          The Geogre, cybrestrike

          "meta" after that poll.  Hillary's book roll-out was troubling to me and worthy of discussion.

          My Florida barometer is set at Hillary vs. Jeb and she is winning as of now.  But, her behavior this week has been bad and will not attract the necessary younger voters which is another part of that barometer.

          Her defensive attitude and wrong answers after years of reflection reminded me of Alex Sink losing the winnable Governor's race and losing my winnable District 13 after Steve Israel transported her here for the special election. (and yes we did have a very likeable candidate that bowed out after having been on the ballot against Young last year)

          Hillary is going to have to be better.

      •  It's Hillary's book roll-out (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tardis10, flowerfarmer

        that sucked up so much media energy this week that caused the renewed Hillary diaries.

        It seems that she could have waited until after the midterms but that's not the way she rolls.

        I'm guilty of giving my opinion.  I felt she did a very poor job of explaining herself, wasn't honest and wasn't  "likable enough".  She worried me.

    •  that's a bit of a distortion (8+ / 0-)

      a lot of the FP looks at the polling and history and makes the very valid point that right now it looks like it's Clinton's if she wants it.

      Unfortunately that pragmatic matter of fact statement (which you should note is not an expression of support or not) has been morphed and twisted into saying the FP supports Clinton.

      Personally I think people are just seeing what they want to see.

      Der Weg ist das Ziel

      by duhban on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:50:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's true but it's also true (0+ / 0-)

        with Hillary choosing to do her book roll-out before the midterms, and doing such a poor job of it, that it's worthy of discussion here.  She was worrisome with her deceptive answers and her "don't question me" behavior.

      •  Do I have to name names? (0+ / 0-)

        Look, I would do what I could to avoid either having pie or flinging the bits I see laying around, but some folks upthread have mentioned a rather ill-tempered front page post that said, "Hilary IS the nominee." That was not cautious or neutral.

        As I say, when anyone tells any group of online writers anything, but especially, "The thing you're here for is already decided," it generates heat -- a lot of heat.

        A long, long time ago, each Democrat had to decide where she or he stood on the following questions:
        1. Which is more important, winning or being moral, as you see it?
        2. Which is more important, having a tolerable choice or having a choice that is good?
        3. At which point does the group become more important than the individual point of view.
        (All of us think the group is more important.) Having made up our minds on these, no one likes having someone else's decision dictated or our own decisions deprecated and ourselves insulted in the process -- whichever side. No calling HRC supporters sell outs, no calling Sanders-4-Pres people Naderites. I respect the HRC voters, even if I'd rather not be one.

        "man, proud man,/ Drest in a little brief authority,. . . Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven/ As make the angels weep; who, with our spleens,/ Would all themselves laugh mortal." -- Shakespeare, Measure for Measure II ii, 117-23

        by The Geogre on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 06:46:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  again you are mistaken (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          The Geogre

          That article while it could be paraphrased as "Hilary IS the nominee" was much more complicated than that. Further it was never an endorsement but rather it made some very valid points about the historic level of early polling for Clinton and how that likely makes it Cinton's race to lose.

          Hell if you read kos' comments you'd see that his concern in down ballot and he has told people that if they don't like Clinton to do the same or to prove him wrong.

          This idea that people are being told what to think is simply wrong.

          Der Weg ist das Ziel

          by duhban on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 08:35:51 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I respect your reading (0+ / 0-)

            but you believe that I read with poop colored lenses, and I think you did so with rose colored ones. We might all be right, wrong, or neither, etc. If nothing else, the candidate in question, or her supporters, or her loss in 2008, have generated sensitivities.

            Let's all work for the locals. (I've got Jason Carter to support, and the RGA's ads are making me mad.) I just wanted to explain that, whether wrongly, as you maintain, or rightly, as I think, the people writing the diaries are responding.

            "man, proud man,/ Drest in a little brief authority,. . . Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven/ As make the angels weep; who, with our spleens,/ Would all themselves laugh mortal." -- Shakespeare, Measure for Measure II ii, 117-23

            by The Geogre on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 10:10:33 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Big question: "Is HRC's high poling due to lack (0+ / 0-)

            of an alternative?"

            The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

            by nextstep on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 11:04:48 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  You said it far better than I ever could... (0+ / 0-)

      Thank you for putting into words the frustration I feel on this issue.

      Adequate health care should be a LEGAL RIGHT in the U.S without begging or bankruptcy. Until it is, we should not dare call our society civilized.

      by Love Me Slender on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 06:44:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The Front Page started all this. (10+ / 0-)

    If the Front Page doesn't want to bring up Clinton debates, they shouldn't ignite Clinton debates.  

    MM saying that "Hillary is it, period, end of story" struck a lot of people very wrong. Where's the democracy of saying, "Don't even look at others!  It's been  decided without your input."?

    If this site wants focus on something -- oh let's see, Midterm Elections sounds good -- then the Front Page should focus on that -- focus on elections and candidates and leave Hillary and 2016 out of THEIR discussion.  And especially anti-democratic-process anointments.

    Surely MM understands the dynamics of his website, doesn't he?

    "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

    by YucatanMan on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:02:40 PM PDT

    •  Kos is just being realistic. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      duhban, Lying eyes, scott5js, aimeehs

      And he probably doesn't want to be rendered politically irrelevant by chasing unicorns like Warren.

      American Presidents: 43 men, 0 women. Ready for Hillary

      by atana on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:15:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Was he ever going to chase Warren? (6+ / 0-)

        What did my comment say?

        If he didn't want to divert the site into a lot of arguing about Clinton vs (anyone else), why did he sling that on the front page?

        He could have just let it be, and direct attention after attention to all the 2014 Congressional and State elections. He could have pointed out all the great places where a D might replace an R.  He could have done a lot of things.

        But, knowing how the dynamics of the site works, after having run it for many years, he chose to put up a "Hillary or else" diary. Are you saying he did not know how a lot of people would respond?

        "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

        by YucatanMan on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 08:02:02 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Maybe he was trying to clue people in (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tmservo433, aimeehs

          that he doesn't have a problem with Hillary? That was what I got out of it.

          American Presidents: 43 men, 0 women. Ready for Hillary

          by atana on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 08:06:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I actually hope (5+ / 0-)

            Warren never considers a run for the presidency.   She is a legislator of the first order.  A powerful legislator that can shape policy of our government for decades if she stays in the senate.

            You need those people, who can protect you from bad judges, who can throw out hot rhetoric to drive a debate, and who can debate fearlessly for her objectives.

            I worry that running someone like Warren moves to neutralize one of the legislators we longterm need.

            Not everyone makes their most important mark as 'they have to be president'.   Teddy Kennedy shaped policy for a very long time from the senate.  

            Frankly, in my dream scenario, the only job Warren would leave the senate for would be the USSC

            Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
            Follow @tmservo433

            by Chris Reeves on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 08:11:23 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Senate Majority Leader Warren (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              scott5js, tmservo433, BMScott

              sounds pretty good somewhere down the line. :-)

              There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

              by Cali Scribe on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 10:03:20 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  That's a wishful fantasy (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                YucatanMan, flowerfarmer

                Warren has less chance of being majority leader than she does winning the presidency.  I am a big supporter of Warren, but if you think she will be able to jump over all of those more senior to her and that the corporatist hold on the party will let her assume such a position, I think you are being naive.  Chuck Schumer, for one, would never let this happen- unless we are able to get him out of the senate beforehand.  

            •  You're commenting on the Presidential race (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              flowerfarmer, PhilJD, Laconic Lib

              in this comment?  You're voicing an opinion against someone you don't want to be president.?

              How does that square with the fact that you just asked a bunch of people (who feel differently than you) to not do what you're doing in this comment?

              "I'm not a number" --84,414

              by BentLiberal on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 05:21:12 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  How do you know they feel differently then I do? (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Onomastic, sviscusi

                Is the first issue..
                And secondly, I have said repeatedly in the comments.. and I mean in most of them, that it is the major topic and of course we will discuss it.

                My point wasn't: we can't talk about it.
                My point was:  This is the ONLY thing we are talking about here lately.  At the moment I published this, the top 3 diaries were 2 "No HRC" and 1 "Pro HRC".

                That makes it hard to 'get air in the room' for other things, as the "recent diary" list built up with responses to both approaches "why are you pro" "why are you against"

                Saying "let's move on" isn't taking a side, it's not even saying "don't discuss it" it's just saying: we can discuss (and should be discussing) other things that are more pressing.

                That's it.

                Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
                Follow @tmservo433

                by Chris Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 07:23:43 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

                  "I have said repeatedly in the comments."

                  But your diary weaves the fiction that this all started 3 days ago and the culprits are people pushing back against the Hillary-is-inevitbale framing, which started prior to that. And again, you ignore the book tour and all the media it is getting and rail against people reacting to it.

                  And you exaggerate that it's ALL that people are talking about here.

                  It's easy for you to take this narrow view because, as you've stated, you plan to vote for HRC in the primaries, and so the importance others place on opposing that is lost on you.

                  "I'm not a number" --84,414

                  by BentLiberal on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 12:51:29 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Where, at any point, did I say (0+ / 0-)

                    I plan to vote for her in the primaries?  Anywhere?   Keep pushing ideas on me, because it flatly isn't so.

                    I can think of several democrats who if they ran I would support them significantly above Hillary.  And, my vote in a primary in Kansas is worthless.

                    But I don't have any clue who will run.

                    Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
                    Follow @tmservo433

                    by Chris Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 06:46:45 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  And, for the record (0+ / 0-)

                    if Marting O'Malley ran, I'd probably put him above HRC.   But I'm not going to spend a ton of diaries on why I like the Governor of Maryland for a race for the white house.  Too much else going on

                    Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
                    Follow @tmservo433

                    by Chris Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 06:54:36 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  "How do you know they feel differently then I do?" (0+ / 0-)

                  Take a gander at who is rec-ing your diary.

                  You're against Warren for President. You are telling people who like to see her or someone else as an alternative to Clinton that they need to stop diarying about their views.

                  That's how they feel differently than you do.

                  And then just to show that your rules don't apply to yourself, you take the time to write a long comment on why Warren should not be president. How is that OK under your rules? Is it because it's your diary so an exception can me made?

                  You're just not seeing at all how one-sided it is. But it's transparent to a whole bunch of other people who are not recing your diary

                  "I'm not a number" --84,414

                  by BentLiberal on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 01:01:27 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Because I think Warren should stay in the senate.. (0+ / 0-)

                    You think that means I'm against all other potential oncomers for Hillary?   Really?  

                    There are several democrats I would favor over Hillary.  And, after November, we can talk about that.   I can think of a few who with the right fundraising could be real contenders in 2016.

                    I think it's a much more open field than anyone gives it credit.

                    But let's get real.  The diaries for the most part were 'Hillary sucks..' and even if we don't care for a democratic candidate, tearing them down in a year we are trying to elect other democrats is like getting in a giant circle and firing upon ourselves.

                    PACs that are lobbying for Hillary are raising funds faster than anyone else, and they are encouraging local democrats to come to their events to get donors.   That happens everywhere EVERYWHERE.    

                    I have no idea if Hillary will be the nominee or if she'd be a good one.   I don't have time to care about that now.   But I do know there are a lot of things we can all be doing for local candidates right now ;)

                    Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
                    Follow @tmservo433

                    by Chris Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 06:49:49 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

      •  Bingo!!!! (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        atana

        New Republic: So are the left-wing blogs as bad as the Tea Party ones in this case? -------------------------Chuck Schumer: Left-wing blogs are the mirror image. They just have less credibility and less clout.

        by AlexDrew on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 08:14:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Imagine if he had chased Obama in 2006! (0+ / 0-)

        When Hillary Clinton was the odds on favorite, what a fool he would have been made to be!

        Contrary to popular belief, zombies are quite intelligent and excel in anagrams.

        by Patience John on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 09:03:52 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Since when is "he started it" a (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      aimeehs, Onomastic

      valid excuse?  

      Plus it's not even true.  There have been 4000 front paged diaries this year.  Less than 200 have referenced Hillary Clinton at all and maybe 10 could be construed as advocating or campaigning for a Clinton candidacy over all others.

      The community is responsible for the content of diaries not the front page.  We are the ones writing and reading diaries focused on a race 2 1/2 years from now that had absolutely no declared candidates yet.

      MM saying that "Hillary is it, period, end of story" struck a lot of people very wrong. Where's the democracy of saying, "Don't even look at others!  It's been  decided without your input."?
      Attacking Hillary Clinton in a diary does absolutely nothing to get a better candidate to run.  Soliciting donations for a draft candidate 'x' or starting letter writing campaigns do but that's not what's happening.  Say Hillary Clinton sucks all your want, she's still guaranteed to get more votes than a non existent opponent.
      If this site wants focus on something -- oh let's see, Midterm Elections sounds good -- then the Front Page should focus on that -- focus on elections and candidates and leave Hillary and 2016 out of THEIR discussion.  And especially anti-democratic-process anointments.
      ~25% of front paged diaries have been on election matters, Jed Lewison himself has written 400 diaries on elections, that's over 10% of the all front paged stuff and that's just one of the many pagers.  
      Surely MM understands the dynamics of his website, doesn't he?
      I'm sure he's quite used to the typical sound and fury that accompanies things like that and the nothing that it almost always signifies..  I'm sure he knows that no anti Clinton diary is among the top 200 recced diaries, that the broad consensus among the sites readership if fine with a Clinton candidacy with a very large percentage desiring it.  I'm sure he also know that democrats as a whole are incredibly supportive of Hillary Clinton and that if she's the candidate it will be because that's what a majority of democrats including those of this site want.

      Surely you understand the dynamics of his website.  That attacks on a democratic icon designed purely to tear down that icon will cause nothing but strife and internecine blog warfare, especially without a competent alternative.  There are a lot of Clinton supporters here and if the only message to them is Clinton sucks rather than O'Malley or Schweitzer or whomever is great then there will be nothing but pie.

      •  It wouldn't have mattered if there had been only (6+ / 0-)

        one front paged diary saying that Hillary has it locked up without even declaring her candidacy.

        That's a highly undemocratic statement, don't you think?

        That's the one diary which set off all the turmoil you're seeing today.

        But then he did a second one too, with a disingenuous poll designed to continue the dispute. Markos himself was playing this.

        I'm saying the current crop of "yay" or "nay" would have been less without MM's sticking his foot into it and stirring it all up.

        You do not even respond to this section you quoted. Instead you divert and change the topic:
         

        MM saying that "Hillary is it, period, end of story" struck a lot of people very wrong. Where's the democracy of saying, "Don't even look at others!  It's been  decided without your input."?
        Attacking Hillary Clinton in a diary does absolutely nothing to get a better candidate to run.  Soliciting donations for a draft candidate 'x' or starting letter writing campaigns do but that's not what's happening.  Say Hillary Clinton sucks all your want, she's still guaranteed to get more votes than a non existent opponent.
        The bolded statements are the focus of what you quoted. Nothing in your response even pretends to address that.

        Let's ask this:  Do you favor doing away with primaries and just deciding 2 1/2 years out who the nominee will be via... hmm... reading tea leaves?  Polls, 2 1/2 years before an election?  

        Hillary was "ahead" at this point in 2008 as well. Things happen.

        My point is that the owner of the "more and better Democrats" website probably should respect the democratic process and allow the voters to speak in the primaries. If he doesn't believe in democracy, let him proclaim that.

        That's the vote that counts.

        "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

        by YucatanMan on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 09:49:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No. (0+ / 0-)
          That's a highly undemocratic statement, don't you think?
          It’s a statement of opinion.  A somewhat rash statement, I think, but not ridiculously indefensible if read with a normal degree of understanding (e.g., that it doesn’t apply if for some reason she cannot or chooses not to run).  

          And that’s assuming that anyone actually made so blunt a statement; I can’t be bothered to dig around to find the exact wording of whatever statement was actually made.

        •  The first mistake (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          YucatanMan, aimeehs

          is thinking that it's up to kos who the nominee is.  

          Criticizing his call that in his opinion Clinton's the nominee despite vocal opposition here make not Clinton the nominee.  Heck kos can say whatever he wants, he could spend his every free moment supporting another candidate and Clinton will most likely still be the nominee.  He's not a kingmaker and especially not at that level.  Every bit of activist success this place has had, has been down ticket or at places where few others were looking and a big push from here could get the ball rolling.  That's just the nature of it.

          If people want to rage at Markos, that's fine.  He's a big boy who can take it.  It's just pointless.  I get the feeling behind it, I get that some people don't want Clinton as a nominee and that they can feel impotent (hopeless?) about the fact that she's the front runner.  I just don't see the point in allowing ourselves to succumb to the anger that is born from that.

          For me it's a matter of the serenity prayer

          God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,

          The courage to change the things I can,
          And wisdom to know the difference.

          We're not going to change the nominee here, and no one is going to change the nominee now.  Rather than wasting our time and effort on something that's impossible now, we should be focused on whats possible now.
          •  Oh, I'm not physically angry, although (4+ / 0-)

            intellectually, I see his diaries as being wrong.

            I've also had this thought:  Don't clicks go up during flame wars, or battling diaries, or whatever you want to call it?  Look at all the comments in the pro- / anti- Hillary diaries.  

            Erase those and the site would have been a lot less active recently, wouldn't it?  Or at least somewhat less active?

            Maybe these pie fights are good for business.

            Maybe Kos just ignites them on purpose, because he surely knew the dynamics of his own site and what would happen if he declared anyone the final nominee, let alone Hillary Clinton.

            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

            by YucatanMan on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 12:28:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  And what happens if she doesn't run? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      YucatanMan

      A lot can happen between now and 2016, or even 2015. A health crisis -- if not her, then Bill or even Chelsea could get her to think about what really matters to her. Some sort of financial setback. Or maybe she'll just decide that life's too short to deal with Republican assholes, be they in Congress or in the media. What happens to Markos' grand proclamation that "it's Hillary" if it isn't Hillary? We need to identify at least some of the possibilities soon, then work our little (and not so little) butts off to get him (or her) elected.

      There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

      by Cali Scribe on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 10:02:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I definitely think people need to evaluate various (5+ / 0-)

        people regardless of how things look today.  There were an awful lot of people in 2006 who thought that Hillary was "in" for 2008.  

        That didn't turn out as expected. Politics are always full of surprises. Always. Things happen around the world. Secrets are revealed. Accidents happen. Health events, like Bill's heart attack, happen.

        At any rate, it should never be a forbidden topic, or even thought of as 'wasted time', to talk about who is going to be nominated for any party's positions for anything.  That IS politics.

        And that, precisely, is why I thought MM's front page pronunciation was so wrong.  It was basically anti-political:  
        It is DONE. She HAS been selected.  Hillary WILL be nominated. Hillary WILL win.

        Well, WTF do we need this website for, if that's the way politics are done?

        "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

        by YucatanMan on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 10:20:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I could fully understand her (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        YucatanMan

        deciding not to get in the race if things continue to go south in Iraq.  And I can't say I would blame her.  

        •  There are many unforeseeable scenarios (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tardis10, flowerfarmer, orestes1963

          which might make someone - anyone - reconsider their political plans.  The notion this is all tied up is just so premature, it seems like a very rooky-ish comment to be making.

          Unless... maybe he just wants more pie fights?  If people aren't arguing, are they looking at his site?  Frankly, there are few things that pull me here anymore.  

          Mostly the environmental, climate, and green tech diaries draw me in, along with labor issues and some of the history. Oh, well, then there's the NSA, but that is actually being covered better elsewhere, so DK is doing rather poorly (don't give two shits) there.

          So, well, there's a supposition:  Maybe he really likes the pie fights, even maybe for business reasons.  If the site isn't highly active, he doesn't continue to pull in money. Or build the mailing lists off the petitions.

          "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

          by YucatanMan on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 12:33:34 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  T&Red for the cry of "focus, people!" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tmservo433, duhban

    Somehow I don't think it is going to work, though.

    American Presidents: 43 men, 0 women. Ready for Hillary

    by atana on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:03:16 PM PDT

    •  *eh* Whether it works or not... (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      atana, badscience, duhban, ParkRanger, BMScott

      If I can get people to just look and say "damn!  There are candidates running somewhere near me, maybe I should check on that.." then it's all good.

      If people want to diary HRC until November, that's fine.  

      But I wanted to say it so that we can keep reminding people real candidates they can vote for are out there.. right now.

      Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
      Follow @tmservo433

      by Chris Reeves on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:26:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Yes -- it's time to work to defeat Mitch McConnell (21+ / 0-)

    This year, 2014, the most important race is in KY.
    Let's get to work to elect Alison Lundergan Grimes.

  •  Absolutely (7+ / 0-)

    The Republicans and especially the talking heads ("ALL TIED UP!!!") want to start the next presidential race now. But we have no reason to get drawn into pie fights ("Too Hill or Not to Hill? That is NOT the question.") ahead of time.

    Deep breath.

    Whew! Life goes on. More or less.

    And God said, "Let there be light"; and with a Big Bang, there was light. And God said "Ow! Ow My eyes!" and in a flash God separated light from darkness. "Whew! Now that's better. Now where was I. Oh yea . . ."

    by Pale Jenova on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:27:58 PM PDT

  •  the recent, most attention grabbing (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lying eyes, atana, DianeNYS, sviscusi, aimeehs

    (at least to our eyes/attention span) flare up in Iraq has also prompted the "Hillary Navel Gazing." Her vote for the war and her speech in defense of that vote has exacerbated the spate of diaries, I believe.

    I visited my first Presidential Library in February. It was LBJ's in Austin. One of the displays was a long, wall-wrapping reproduction of Presidents and their fist ladies. The other thing I saw was how the LBJ library curators had modified the opening video to include the presidency of Barack Obama as the fulfillment of LBJ's Civil Rights accomplishment. I had to pinch myself to understand that I was really in Texas and that I had just passed a statue to a traitorous confederate general on the campus of UT Austin. But back to the wall of Presidents and Firsts. I saw the culmination of that display because in my minds eye I saw the reversal of Bill Clinton and HRC's images--she as President and him as First Gentleman. I got chills.

    In a lot of ways, the presidency (should it happen/and I think it will) of HRC will be like Barack Obama's was for me. Important for its symbolism (I am African American and a woman) but as Zinn said all the while we force him/her to be and do better.

    •  Lovely comment. Thank you. nt (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      atana, kpbuick, sviscusi, aimeehs

      Proud to be a Democrat

      by Lying eyes on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 08:17:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That hit me in 2008 after the NC/Indiana primaries (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ParkRanger, kpbuick, scott5js, BMScott

      I was talking with my great-aunt who's be political her whole life has worked tirelessly for the local party and teachers union and she made one comment that broke my heart.  She just quietly looked at me and said "I really liked her".  

      It hit me that this woman who put herself through college at a time when woman didn't go to college, who became a teacher because she genuinely loved being able to touch peoples lives, who was politically active at a time when most other woman felt they couldn't, that this woman saw Hillary Clinton as one small fullfilement of the work she's done in her life.

      On election night Eugene Robinson said something like "for the first time in my life I can look at my son and say you can be anything you in the world, even president" and it was heartbreaking to me that it can't yet be said to a woman.

      Clinton's not perfect and there are others out there who might make a better president, one of which I may even support, but I'm sure as hell not going to rip her to shreds because there might be someone running who's better.  After 2008 and seeing the beauty of one minority group finally grasping the brass ring while another swallowed their hopes and helped despite knowing that it meant it wasn't their turn yet, I'm not going to attack Clinton.  Maybe someone will beat her, but I won't contribute to tearing her down when instead I can build someone else up.

    •  Symbolism doesn't fix (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tardis10, flowerfarmer, Laconic Lib

      income inequality and the host of issues that threaten our nation and humanity that result from neoliberal acolytes.

      Hillary does not have the benefit of a glib tongue.

      by The Dead Man on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 04:38:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I know that (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        PhilJD

        That is why people like Zinn are so important. I understand exactly how compromised our politicians are and that job # 1 for the president is to protect the person who occupied the office before you.

        The history of The vote for African Americans is a history of symbolism leavened by distasteful choices. But also, a history of striving.

  •  rec'ing this & a couple of differing pov's (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tmservo433, Shockwave

    w/tag lines "HRC", this one being perhaps the most common-sensical

    However, this IS a political FORUM, is it not?

    please correct me if I'm wrong about that

    "Show up. Pay attention. Tell the truth. And don't be attached to the results." -- Angeles Arrien

    by Sybil Liberty on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:55:09 PM PDT

    •  It is.. (5+ / 0-)

      And like I said, I don't mind HRC debate.. but when the Rec list is 1/2 discussion of HRC, I just felt we were leaping over the edge where an HRC debate for 2016 was sucking the oxygen out of the room.

      That's all.  It's all good ;)

      Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
      Follow @tmservo433

      by Chris Reeves on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:57:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Your points are well-taken. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Dead Man, PhilJD

    I don't think you['d be seeing as many of the diaries you talk about had not the management on this site tried so hard to quash the idea that anybody besides Mrs. Clinton might be our 2016 presidential nominee so early in the election cycle.

    You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment.

    by MikePhoenix on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:55:50 PM PDT

  •  Can't thank you enough for your spot on post! (10+ / 0-)

    The HRC diaries are, at best, an ill timed distraction. Or perhaps, in some cases, a deliberate one.

    We have elections to win this year and nothing else is as important.

    Again, thank you.

    There is something in us that refuses to be regarded as less than human. We are created for freedom - Archbishop Desmond Tutu

    by Onomastic on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 07:58:05 PM PDT

  •  If Progressives had thought more about 2010 (7+ / 0-)

    We wouldn't be in as bad a shape as we are.

    And now here we are in 2014 ignoring Congress again.

    Thank you.


    ODS results in Obama's amazing ability to humiliate his biggest critics, on the right and the left.

    by NoFortunateSon on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 08:18:37 PM PDT

  •  I loathe these looooooooong campaigns (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jgilhousen, BMScott

    There are no words that have been invented in any language anywhere to express how much I loathe speculation about potential, maybe, possible candidates OVER two years in advance of the next national election.

    I also know how suddenly the political landscape can change.  As a Minnesota resident, I remember when Paul Wellstone and his wife and staff members and the pilots died in a plane crash eleven days before election day.  Fate doesn't do anyone any favors when it comes to election plans..., so pro/anti HRC diaries are a pointless waste of time.

    Neither HRC nor other Dems have declared their candidacy, so speculation about something that may or may not happen OVER two years from now is sheer nonsense.  Writing pro/anti posts now only raise a person's blood pressure for no good reason whatsoever.

    I take pills for high blood pressure, among other ongoing health issues.  Trust me.  You do not want to end up on medication for high blood pressure or anything else having to do with events that may or may not happen..., so take a chill pill, relax until DNC 2016 some three months or so before election day, and you will be much happier that you've made a conscious choice to live in the here-and-now, or concentrate on elections where candidates have already declared their intentions for THIS year and you can go help them win elections.

    I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

    by NonnyO on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 09:16:46 PM PDT

  •  Paradoxically I'm happy that HRC is not... (4+ / 0-)

    ...campaigning for any candidates in 2014 and she's leaving that to Elizabeth Warren.

    BTW there are diaries that I consider a waste of time.  The HRC diaries are not in that category.  It is clear that a majority of Kossacks are not satisfied with inevitability, positions or explanations of her past choices.  It makes me want to stay and continue working in local races.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 09:18:40 PM PDT

    •  Big difference between a waste of time (5+ / 0-)

      And higher priorities. I say repeatedly in the comments I'm ok with the debate, but we have so many things that are higher priorities right now.

      Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
      Follow @tmservo433

      by Chris Reeves on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 09:22:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  A lot of Kossacks are thrilled about an HRC (0+ / 0-)

      campaign but we feel as if we can't talk about it much less diary about with our diaries becoming a pie from the anti brigade.

      However that is not what this diary in particular is about, so I'll refrain from adding more.

      My house race is district 7 in Florida and it's been unbeatable for as long as I can remember for the ways it's gerrymandered.  However we do have Governors race that I'm seriously thrilled about this year.  I have a lot less hope for FL District 7.

      Charlie Crist for Florida Primary date: August 26, 2014, Election Date: November 4, 2014

      by aimeehs on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 03:55:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for the diary (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tmservo433, scott5js

    We need to refocus on reality.

    “The answer must be, I think, that beauty and grace are performed whether or not we will or sense them. The least we can do is try to be there.” ― Annie Dillard, Pilgrim at Tinker Creek

    by 6412093 on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 09:46:34 PM PDT

  •  While I agree that 2014 is a crucial place... (10+ / 0-)

    ...for our attention now, and there is immense work to be done on that score, for Congress and for state legislatures, it's kind of hard to avoid talking about HRC when she herself is on tour for a book that was published five months before the election.  Perhaps she could have waited on that.

    Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

    by Meteor Blades on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 10:42:11 PM PDT

    •  I think the benefit is (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Meteor Blades, navajo

      That without a bunch of diaries feuding over Hillary, there are a lot of people who will put their eyeballs on diaries here that say: put that energy to 2014

      Of course we will talk about it, I wish not as much.. But if we can just capture some of those pro/anti HRC eyeballs for the rack of D candidates actually running then it works.  

      I'm sure their will be tons of other moments were Hillary fever gets hot. Either way.  And that's the ideal time to say:  Let's win in Kentucky. Mississippi, Kansas, Utah, Florida. ;)

      Because I guess I'm just that much of a dick I don't mind using people's anger or love at one politician to refocus them to something else. ;)

      Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
      Follow @tmservo433

      by Chris Reeves on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 11:08:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I have no trouble avoiding it, just as (0+ / 0-)

      I’ve no trouble avoiding most of the HRC diaries.  Bluntly, I don’t expect them to say much of anything that I’ve not heard too many times already.

  •  We can walk and chew gum, you know. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BentLiberal

    We must have always have a view towards longer term goals, even as we deal with the present.  Otherwise they never get achieved.  In politics it is actually possible to win every battle and still lose the war.

    We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both. - Former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

    by RageKage on Sun Jun 15, 2014 at 11:17:46 PM PDT

    •  We can also project as well as the Right (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Onomastic, scott5js

      Warren is stumping for Grimes in Kentucky, will probably be in North Carolina for Hagan, West Virginia for Tennant, etc. and that can be seen a number of ways. I choose to see it as an effective catalyst helping those candidates get to 50%+1 with key elements of our base. That doesn't eliminate or discount other factors or motives on the part of Warren.

      The same can be said of HRC. She'll be asked to do the same for most if not all of those candidates because she actually does help excite some key elements of our base. I fear there is an element that will "sour on" Grimes because (for the sake of discussion) "has HRC in for fundraising more than she has Warren in for student and Union rallies." That's where the obsessing on 2016 can hobble us, and I'd like this community to at minimum recognize that consequence.

      Grimes, Nunn, Tennant, etc. in the Senate and Carter, Sheheen, etc. in Governor's mansions helps ANY Democratic POTUS and hinders (perish the thought) ANY GOP POTUS going forward.

      Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. --Martin Luther King Jr.

      by Egalitare on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 02:22:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Hillary IS running. For President. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mightymouse

    Of the United States.   The official announcement will be a mere formality.

    Hope that clears up any confusion.

  •  No. Discussing the future of the soul of the Demo (4+ / 0-)

    Party is entirely relevant even with 2014 elections.  Do the Democrats want to just "win" with neoliberal hacks that damage the 99% just as the Republicans, albeit with a velvet glove, or do they really truly want a more equal and just nation?

    Hillary provides a great framework to discuss this since she exemplifies everything that is wrong with the Democratic Party today.

    Hillary does not have the benefit of a glib tongue.

    by The Dead Man on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 04:33:34 AM PDT

  •  Look Forward, Not Backward (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laconic Lib

    Unless a lot changes (and it certainly can), Clinton will be president after the 2016 elections. Starting with her grip on the 2015-2016 primary process.

    So of course people, like the diarist, who want President Hillary want us to "move on". Instead of changing what we can to get a better Democrat to win the 2016 primaries.

    The idea is creepily like what Republicans always tell us when we have a chance to make changes to stop their candidates: first "speculation is premature"; then "it's old news" and we should move on.

    This is the attitude of entitlement. It goes hand in hand with the rest of the attitude, which includes warmongering and never repenting from mistakes.

    We are capable of organizing for Democratic victories in 2014. Especially with the Republican Party stunned and divided by the defeat of their House Majority Leader. And we are capable of getting ahead of the Hillary propaganda machine by talking about replacing her in 2016 as the Democratic nominee.

    Or we can just be told what to do.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 06:52:50 AM PDT

    •  I love how people are now assuming I'm Pro-HRC (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sviscusi, Onomastic, scott5js

      If you went back to my thoughts in 2008, which I think are largely still here, I was pro-Obama.

      I'd favor other candidates over HRC... (though, as I state above, not Warren as I want her elsewhere)

      But no one has announced, they won't announce yet.

      I look forward to lots of diaries immediately after the election on where people are going to support their candidates.   Where they go doesn't matter to me.

      Right now, the only thing that HRC is doing for me is that they keep holding these 'Ready for Hillary' events, and whether I like or hate HRC, those events are a chance to bring money in to candidates who are actually running right now, so of course I'm sending candidates to them to at least attend and talk to donors.

      Those things aren't me backing HRC in 2014.   For all I know HRC could get hit by a bus in the next 6 months.    She could decide not to run (she has not announced), or another candidate I really want could run.  

      I have no opinion on who should be our next nominee yet.  I'll wait until they actually make a case to me.   That's where I stand on this.

      Meanwhile, I'm just saying: lots of candidates running right now, let's give them some love... I'm more interested in hearing what is happening for Grimes in Kentucky or Mississippi or Iowa or now Cantor's old district.

      Sure, we are capable of organizing for 2014.. but when we get too many people focused on debating something that isn't in any way relevent to 2014, it means less time we have devoted to knowing our actual candidates this year and working for them.

      Which is why I'm out today working for a House Member running in 2014.. so I won't be responding to comments for the rest of the day.   But  Pro-HRC?   More like pro-candidates that have an actual hat in the ring.

      Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle
      Follow @tmservo433

      by Chris Reeves on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 07:29:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This should be BLATANTLY obvious, but... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Onomastic, scott5js

    ...I'll say it anyway.

    If you ARE an HRC supporter, 2014 is the place to be because Democratic gains in the midterms will lead to a greater likelihood of Democratic policy achievements, which will (of course) bolster an HRC 2016 campaign.

    If you AREN'T an HRC supporter, 2014 is the place to be because your best hope for a "fresh face" to emerge lies in...a stronger national party, which depends upon...stronger Democratic presence top to bottom.

    Either way, I'm with tmservo - it's 2014, folks.

    The word "parent" is supposed to be a VERB, people...

    by wesmorgan1 on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 07:47:27 AM PDT

  •  there will be many voter suppression diaries writt (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    scott5js

    ten here and elsewhere  before the 2014.

    i haven't read much of the HRC hate/love diaries for the very point you make- she's not running now

    but as in every election cycle there will be diaries written which may not be sponsored by koch bros type think tanks but are full of despair at the prospect of another election choosing between a candidate and party that goes against science and reason and truth and is unanimously represented by bought and paid for sycophants, warmongers, power lickers and certifiable loons, and a party that has a lot of shortcomings, but as a group is the only thing this two party representative democracy (or whatever) has to keep the loons from turning us into a third world oligarchy.

    if you're not going to vote for hillary in 2016 because she doesn't fit your principled mold, so fucking what.

    if you don't vote for democrats in the 2014 because they don't fit your principled moldings, and the republicans keep the house and gain in the senate, then FUCK YOU AGAIN! like in 2010.

    This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and GOP lies by broadcasting sports on over 170 Limbaugh radio stations.

    by certainot on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 08:27:22 AM PDT

  •  dKos runs a hundred diaries a day (0+ / 0-)

    probably more.. WTF diff does it make if a few people want to write HRC diaries?

    Ignore them!

    Not everyone has to concentrate on your particular interests 24/7.  Geeebus.

  •  T&R. I, like many of my fellow Americans (0+ / 0-)

    err Kossacks....are pie-war weary. I think people get bored and HRC is an easy pie-war to start. Not that there isn't any substantive argument to be made for either case, but as this diary aptly points out, we haven't come to that bridge yet.

    The 2014 election is coming fast, time to get off our fannies and do what we do during elections :)

    "Who's the more foolish, the fool, or the fool that follows him?"--Obi-Wan Kenobi

    by punkRockLiberal on Mon Jun 16, 2014 at 12:26:22 PM PDT

  •  It's ours to lose, not to win. (0+ / 0-)

    "Republicans are running a nutcase in Iowa in Ernst, giving Democrats a solid chance to grab that seat."

    That's an open seat the Dems need to hold onto in the wake of Tom Harkin's retirement, not a seat they have a chance to grab from the Repubs.

    "Elect Republicans, and they will burn the place down. And they will laugh while they do it and have a great time. And then what?" -- Rachel Maddow

    by LumineHall on Wed Jun 18, 2014 at 05:07:19 PM PDT

Ottoe, trillian, Angie in WA State, CJB, wlkx, fcvaguy, Chi, Radiowalla, Odysseus, Brainwrap, murphy, Jeff Simpson, Me, Pandora, madmsf, dengre, Fabienne, ChicDemago, CupaJoe, scorinaldi, The Baculum King, dsb, bilge, Matilda, Doctor Who, Heart of the Rockies, Bruce The Moose, parker parrot, Wee Mama, KMc, marksb, mole333, paulitics, larryrant, Bronxist, askyron, navajo, Boris Godunov, sviscusi, manneckdesign, psnyder, MrSandman, ManhattanMan, figbash, virginislandsguy, scott5js, chrismorgan, mnguitar, NYFM, Timbuk3, Curt Matlock, Paul Hogarth, Sybil Liberty, Los Diablo, radarlady, DianeNYS, v2aggie2, Lying eyes, HudsonValleyMark, PsychoSavannah, wildtrack, J Rae, Kevskos, bleeding blue, GreyHawk, jcitybone, blue jersey mom, Steve in Urbana, spunhard, Ginny in CO, FindingMyVoice, Ekaterin, mightymouse, xanthippe2, begone, rserven, sideboth, WB Reeves, edwardssl, cardboardurinal, smokeymonkey, AoT, deha, DiesIrae, happy camper, PJEvans, ER Doc, middleagedhousewife, johnwcasey, CA Nana, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, Statusquomustgo, NonnyO, cpresley, Tempus Figits, Thinking Fella, clinging to hope, Msanger, Ken in MN, jessical, ColoTim, Stwriley, puakev, shesaid, suejazz, ballerina X, HCKAD, bobswern, gchaucer2, skod, Assaf, TomP, jgilhousen, MKinTN, JeffW, wayoutinthestix, MikePhoenix, 6412093, Sixty Something, Senor Unoball, NewDealer, skohayes, jamess, weezilgirl, left my heart, TokenLiberal, mattc129, Justanothernyer, Diogenes2008, Turn Left, Ran3dy, rsmpdx, Pale Jenova, notrouble, jibrille, I give in to sin, Bonsai66, moonbatlulu, platypus60, MKSinSA, asym, oxfdblue, Leslie in KY, Shelley99, moviemeister76, Tortmaster, citisven, Nannyberry, Former Chicagoan Now Angeleno, Words In Action, BlueOak, Its the Supreme Court Stupid, awcomeon, serendipityisabitch, Susan Grigsby, piers, kjoftherock, Egalitare, Neuroptimalian, ericlewis0, science nerd, Oh Mary Oh, translatorpro, Onomastic, BrowniesAreGood, PaDemTerry, kerflooey, ladywithafan, coquiero, spooks51, slowbutsure, jardin32, Amayi, Possiamo, bootsykronos, lexalou, ten canvassers, Chicago Lawyer, Kokomo for Obama, Lorikeet, badscience, LeftCoastTom, sofa turf, bywaterbob, enhydra lutris, chira2, punkRockLiberal, disconnect the dots, randomfacts, James Protzman, Miggles, DEMonrat ankle biter, ParkRanger, No one gets out alive, mikeVA, AnnetteK, James Allen, KiB, NoFortunateSon, barkingcat, AnnieR, 2thanks, exatc, Dave in AZ, jan4insight, reginahny, Arahahex, Had Enough Right Wing BS, Dams1986, etherealfire, monkeybox, wasatch, Dr Swig Mcjigger, Robynhood too, Arilca Mockingbird, Greenfinches, atana, koosah, Eric Stratton, Linda1961, Thornrose, 3rock, ORswede, Jon Sitzman, northerntier, Smoh, duhban, CwV, skepticalcitizen, plooto, betorah, Dodgerdog1, eagleray, Fish Man, Urban Space Cowboy, AJayne, BMScott

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site