Democrats To Clintons: We Just Can’t Quit You — Because You Won’t Let Us
[guest post by Dana]
The day after the election, Slate published a post-mortem about the Democratic party’s enormous loss. Writer Jim Newell held responsible the DNC, a number of loyal Clinton supporters, including the media, long-time members of the Clinton machine, lawyers, and of course, Hillary herself (although he ultimately let her off the hook a bit by holding more responsible those who enabled her…):
The Democrats will now control next to nothing above the municipal level. Donald Trump will be president. We are going to be unpacking this night for the rest of our lives, and lives beyond that. We can’t comprehend even 1 percent of what’s just happened. But one aspect of it, minor in the overall sweep, that I’m pretty sure we can comprehend well enough right now: The Democratic Party establishment has beclowned itself and is finished.
I think of the lawmakers, the consultants, the operatives, and—yes—the center-left media, and how everything said over the past few years leading up to this night was bullshit.
The midterm losses? That was just a bad cycle, structurally speaking; presidential demographics would make up for it. The party establishment made a grievous mistake rallying around Hillary Clinton. It wasn’t just a lack of recent political seasoning. She was a bad candidate, with no message beyond heckling the opposite sideline. She was a total misfit for both the politics of 2016 and the energy of the Democratic Party as currently constituted. She could not escape her baggage, and she must own that failure herself.
Theoretically smart people in the Democratic Party should have known that. And yet they worked giddily to clear the field for her. Every power-hungry young Democrat fresh out of law school, every rising lawmaker, every old friend of the Clintons wanted a piece of the action. This was their ride up the power chain. The whole edifice was hollow, built atop the same unearned sense of inevitability that surrounded Clinton in 2008, and it collapsed, just as it collapsed in 2008, only a little later in the calendar. The voters of the party got taken for a ride by the people who controlled it, the ones who promised they had everything figured out and sneeringly dismissed anyone who suggested otherwise. They promised that Hillary Clinton had a lock on the Electoral College. These people didn’t know what they were talking about, and too many of us in the media thought they did.
We should blame all those people around the Clintons more than the Clintons themselves, and the Clintons themselves deserve a ridiculous amount of blame. Hillary Clinton was just an ambitious person who wanted to be president. There are a lot of people like that. But she was enabled. The Democratic establishment is a club unwelcoming to outsiders, because outsiders don’t first look out for the club. The Clintons will be gone now. For the sake of the country, let them take the hangers-on with them.
With that, as Newell examines the state of the current Democratic party, he suggests that going forward, a new and improved Democratic party needs to be established, and it must not look like the old party. Unfortunately, he recognizes that blaming others for the huge losses will likely prevent it from making the changes necessary to win an election in the near future:
Whoever takes over what’s left of the Democratic Party is going to have to find a way to appeal to a broader cross section of the country. It may still be true that in the long term, Republicans can’t win with their demographics, but we found out Tuesday that the long term is still pretty far away. Democrats have to win more white voters. They have to do so in a way that doesn’t erode the anti-racist or anti-sexist planks of the modern party, which are non-negotiable. If only there were a model for this.
The few Democratic leaders who remain are going to say that it was just a bad note struck here or there, or the lazy Bernie voters who didn’t show up, or Jim Comey, or unfair media coverage of Clinton’s emails, to blame for this loss. I am already seeing Democrats blaming the Electoral College, which until a few hours ago was hailed as the great protector of Democratic virtue for decades to come, and Republicans were silly for not understanding how to crack the blue “wall.” They will say, just wait for Republicans to overreach. Then we’ll be fine.
Apparently the Democrats have already decided that the new party will look a lot like the old party:
Chelsea Clinton is being groomed for the New York seat held by Rep. Nita Lowey.
Chelsea could run for the seat in NYC’s 17th Congressional District once Lowey, a respected, 79-year-old career politician with nearly 30 years in office, decides to retire, we have exclusively learned.
Lowey’s district includes parts of Rockland and Westchester counties and, conveniently, Chappaqua, the Clinton family home base.
…
A source told us, “While it is true the Clintons need some time to regroup after Hillary’s crushing loss, they will not give up. Chelsea would be the next extension of the Clinton brand. In the past few years, she has taken a very visible role in the Clinton Foundation and on the campaign trail. While politics isn’t the life Hillary wanted for Chelsea, she chose to go on the campaign trail for her mother and has turned out to be very poised, articulate and comfortable with the visibility.”
–Dana
UPDATE BY PATTERICO: We just have to make a pact that we will never again vote for any person not already elected President named Bush, Clinton, Obama, Kennedy, or Trump. Enough with the dynasties already. Enough.
And just think, Chelsea has also has two children.
Dana (d17a61) — 11/11/2016 @ 8:55 amGreat topic. The NY Times listed 14 young Democrats to watch. It included 1 Governor (Rhode Island!), 5 representatives in Congress, and assorted local officials — mostly mayors and city councilmembers. One is a Kennedy, another classic Democratic dynasty. The Democratic bench is not impressive right now.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:10 amChelsea Clinton has demonstrated that she lacks both her mom’s steely determination and her dad’s ability to relate to ordinary people outside the wealthy urban bubble, yet she’s supposed to be a promising candidate? I have a feeling she would be Caroline Kennedy redux, though potentially even more embarrassing.
JVW (6e49ce) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:16 am“Whoever takes over what’s left of the Democratic Party is going to have to find a way to appeal to a broader cross section of the country.”
That won’t happen if they put a member of the Clinton dynasty in Congress. The rest of the country can’t stand her.
Fred Beloit (12281a) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:27 amHeh. Perhaps lackluster Caroline Kennedy can give lackluster Chelsea some pointers about spreading “the family magic” to the next generation of voters. It has worked very well for her so far, hasn’t it? I’m not going to lose any sleep over Chelsea’s future in politics. And yes, DRJ, the Dem bench is heavier on geriatrics than on rising stars. That’s a huge near term issue for them in future statehouse races as well as Washington.
elissa (7e64e4) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:30 amIn this one thread, posts by Dana, DRJ, JVW, and elissa so far.
My kind of thread. Thank you all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzOHq5WbQ8k
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:35 amThanks Simon. I consider that a high compliment indeed. A remembrance of good times and great discussions on this blog.
JVW (6e49ce) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:38 amyou can’t be a *real* clinton til you get a federal government piggy pension to call your very own
happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:41 amThe Democrats are certainly in disarray:
Dana (d17a61) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:44 amI guess that, despite their vast wealth, the Clintons still feel they need a source of income. It’s hard for them to sell influence when they don’t have any.
Edoc118 (05a689) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:45 amDitto. I hope there will be many more threads like this instead of, well, you know.
elissa (7e64e4) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:48 amAs long as the DNC / MSM refuse to hold Hillary Clinton fully responsible for the loss because she was just that awful of a candidate, the party is doomed to repeat itself. And pushing Chelsea forward is evidence of that. Until they assign Hillary Clinton full responsibility, and make her own the loss, then they will remain as they always have. It’s funny they can’t see it.
But isn’t that just like Democrats: unwilling to let individuals assume responsibility for their own actions and bad decisions…
Dana (d17a61) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:49 amDRJ, thanks for posting that Frank Bruni list. I hadn’t seen it before. My first reaction is that Bruni still sees Democrats as steeped in identity politics. Most of the 14 are noted as “the first African-American” this or “the first Asian” that or “the first gay” the other. I only counted two choices, the state senator from Colorado who is for teacher tenure reform and Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii whom I actually am very impressed by, who appear to have ever challenged party orthodoxy in any way.
This column was written in June, and at that time Bruni no doubt figured that Hillary would cruise to election and are the choices seem to be based upon the Democrats’ peculiar belief that the party can continue to do what its doing and that demographics will ultimately provide them with the margin of victory. I think that idea was dealt a serious blow on Tuesday.
JVW (6e49ce) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:51 amsmells like white privilege to me
happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:52 amDoug Band said in one of the uncovered emails that Chelsea’s a spoiled brat.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:56 amAnd Band has been Bill’s right hand man for a long time.
It goes against everything they believe in but Democratic elites have to stop trying to fix races, including the DNC party chair. For now, politicians who wait their turn and parties that leave decisions to the elites are useless remnants of the partisan political past.
Populism is the new political theme for both parties, and Bernie supporters know it, too. They won’t be denied for long.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:56 amHow many could have told Mr. Newell that 2 weeks ago,
Raise your hand
Whoosh, I felt that breeze
Add that Americans don’t like corruption and want people in government to obey the rules.
If they would only listen to us.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:56 amMr happyfeet, I think our gal Chelsea has a lot of teen spirit, too. You can smell it from a mile away.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:57 amBetween offering up Chelsea Clinton as a bold new fresh face, and the violence and rioting in major cities, Trump’s re-election gets more certain by the day.
Eventually some adult in the D party will see reality for what it is. But people can stay irrational a very long time, longer than they can stay solvent.
Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:57 amI agree, JVW. Trump changed things for the GOP but he’s also changed things for the Democrats.
DRJ (15874d) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:57 amKeith “Nation of Islam” Ellison. He’s the ticket. He’ll make the appeal of the Democratic party more selective than ever.
Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 11/11/2016 @ 9:59 amPerhaps George Stephanopoulos will become DNC chair. He has behind the scenes political organization experience, knows everybody who’s influential, and has the right ideology. Plus, then his wife would not have to leave the country because Trump won.
Or Rahm is another possibility. He is not having a fun time at all these days as Mayor of Chicago.
elissa (7e64e4) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:03 amEasy pick up for the GOP.
I’m in favor of it.
Run Chelsea run.
papertiger (c8116c) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:04 amIf they run her I’ll buy an “I’m with Chelsea.” yard sign.
I’ll be the only one in town but…
papertiger (c8116c) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:07 amWhat has Hillary!’s steely determination ever gotten her.
Basically the same thing Chelsea’s last name has gotten her. Six figure no-show
jobs. Unfortunately for the world and for the United States when she was appointed SecState she showed up.
Seriously, other than completing her undergrad/graduate degree in her M.R.S. at Wellesley and Yale what has she ever accomplished? She’s proven she can be elected to office in New York whenever she wants. If my dog had the same last name and was related to Billy Jeff, my dog could get elected in New York.
Plus my dog is a lot more likeable and human than Hillary! will ever be.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:16 amIt goes against everything they believe in but Democratic elites have to stop trying to fix races, including the DNC party chair. For now, politicians who wait their turn and parties that leave decisions to the elites are useless remnants of the partisan political past.
Boston Magazine, which is reliably urban liberal as one might imagine, had a really perceptive article a few years back on the problem that Massachusetts Democrats face. Even though the party dominates the state, they have way too many office holders who serve for decades and decades. So waiting patiently behind the senior congress members (Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, Joe Moakley, et al.) are state representatives and mayors, and waiting behind them are city council members, school board members, aides, and political activists. So if you are a young progressive you come to realize that it will take you 30 years of waiting in line and slowly moving up the ladder for one of those seats, and you may end up being shuffled aside anyway should a Kennedy or a progressive darling like Deval Patrick or Elizabeth Warren want that seat. Because of this, the article suggested, lots of really good progressive minds decide to forego a life in politics.
This is my long-winded way of saying that one thing Democrats ought to consider is saying goodbye to the fossilized office-holders like Pelosi, Schumer, and the rest of them. But there’s something about that party that fetishizes seniority so I wouldn’t expect that to happen.
I would love for the President-elect to offer Tulsi Gabbard a cabinet position, maybe as head of Veterans Affairs. She may turn it down, but I think it would be a very smart outreach and a way to slightly neutralize progressives.
JVW (6e49ce) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:22 amDoes Petraeus live that far south on the Hudson?
urbanleftbehind (efac08) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:23 amWhat has Hillary!’s steely determination ever gotten her.
She was bad cop to Bill’s good cop. I think it’s safe to say that he wouldn’t have risen as high as he did if she wasn’t bare-knuckle brawling in the backroom.
JVW (6e49ce) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:23 amPerhaps George Stephanopoulos will become DNC chair. He has behind the scenes political organization experience, knows everybody who’s influential, and has the right ideology. Plus, then his wife would not have to leave the country because Trump won.
ABC probably wouldn’t even make him leave his job on the network.
JVW (6e49ce) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:25 amR.I.P. Robert Vaughn, the Man From U.N.C.L.E.
Icy (b955d2) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:26 amAnd Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit, their fiefdoms, are in ruins. We all see that.
The Dems should have seen it coming. The last two midterms were routs. But they followed the Bob Shrum battle plan and lost it all.
Patricia (5fc097) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:30 amDaughter has an assignment, “Describe your reaction to the election results”…
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:43 am30, I would get that guy confused with the ‘khold husband from The Graduate/Mayor from Jaws.
urbanleftbehind (efac08) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:56 amJesus Flipping Christ on a flaming pogo stick! Chelsea was always a peculiar looking child, but that photo of her makes her look like one of the masked figures from THE PURGE. What the F*CK have they done to that girl? And who the hell allowed that picture to be sent out?
Also, she’s looking creepily like chubby little Monica did during the ‘Bubba is boinking the help’ flap; is it possible she and good old Dad are getting on a little West Virginia style action?
*shudder*
Another generation of this crime family. What a REVOLTING idea.
C. S. P. Schofield (99bd37) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:58 amThis is a joke, this is real: “Chuck Schumer promotes Keith Ellison to head of D.N.C.”
MD, how old is your daughter? I don’t think that kind of intrusive assignment is good for little kids.
Patricia (5fc097) — 11/11/2016 @ 11:26 amThis is what a news article that strives for a semblance of balanced reporting and is decently constructed looks like.
http://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/axelrod-accept-results-of-election-and-learn-from-them/
elissa (7e64e4) — 11/11/2016 @ 11:29 amDemocratic elites have to stop trying to fix races, including the DNC party chair.
If they did this, they would no longer be Democrats. It’s built-in to the model. Donna Brazile did nothing out of the ordinary – she just got caught. If Wikileaks hadn’t released the emails, we would have never had our suspicions confirmed.
Dana (d17a61) — 11/11/2016 @ 11:33 amUPDATE BY PATTERICO: We just have to make a pact that we will never again vote for any person not already elected President named Bush, Clinton, Obama, Kennedy, or Trump. Enough with the dynasties already. Enough.
Patterico (115b1f) — 11/11/2016 @ 11:42 amThat’s just how she looks. Let’s not be mean. I’ll chalk it up to your correct and righteous disgust for the idea of another Clinton running for office.
Patterico (115b1f) — 11/11/2016 @ 11:44 amChristie seems to be getting the boot from directing the transition team for recommending too many NTs for posts. Pence is running most of it now per ZNN.
urbanleftbehind (efac08) — 11/11/2016 @ 11:54 amI thought that was one of the most flattering pictures of Chelsea I’d seen.
MD, advise your daughter to shade this along the party line. In fact, shading isn’t really enough. Have her use bold colors. She’s anguished, distraught, fearful that global warming while shorten her life, and tempted to take two of the pills the school nurse distributed yesterday. Just don’t let her drink the koolaid.
BobStewartatHome (b2bab4) — 11/11/2016 @ 11:57 amI was sad to see that earlier today. He was also the last major star alive from the cast of The Magnificent Seven
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 11/11/2016 @ 11:59 amUPDATE BY PATTERICO: We just have to make a pact that we will never again vote for any person not already elected President named Bush, Clinton, Obama, Kennedy, or Trump. Enough with the dynasties already. Enough.
Bring on the Roosevelts!
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/11/2016 @ 12:00 pm21. He’ll make the appeal of the Democratic party more selective than ever.
They can always hire Ian Faith to run the party and in four years we’ll hopefully see the marquee “Puppet Show and Democratic National Convention.”
Jack Klompus (63d8fa) — 11/11/2016 @ 12:01 pmI think it’s interesting that the DNC list of possible leaders doesn’t include any women. Clinton and Brazile, advancing the cause for women everywhere? Not even in their own house.
Dana (d17a61) — 11/11/2016 @ 12:03 pmWe just have to make a pact that we will never again vote for any person not already elected President named Bush, Clinton, Obama, Kennedy, or Trump. Enough with the dynasties already. Enough.
We should made a master list of families to add to the list. I propose:
Hahn
Murkowski
Udall
Daley
Cuomo
Brown
Sununu
Any others come to mind?
JVW (6e49ce) — 11/11/2016 @ 12:05 pmOne of those names is not like the others. Trump hasn’t shown any more of an inclination towards building a dynasty than Reagan did. Actually, to be fair, neither has Obama.
Anon Y. Mous (9e4c83) — 11/11/2016 @ 12:05 pm@R.I.P. Robert Vaughn, the Man From U.N.C.L.E.
Icy (b955d2) — 11/11/2016 @ 10:26 am
Very, very sad to hear of this. Fine actor, stellar spy show.
Back in the early 70’s a friend saw Vaughn in a London pub, approached him, pulled out a pen and said into it, “Beep, beep, open channel D.” Vaughn smiled, coolly put down his beer and replied, “My, the drinking age is young in this country.”
“=beep-beep= Open Channel D.”- – Napoleon Solo [Robert Vaughn] ‘The Man From U.N.C.L.E.” NBC TV
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/11/2016 @ 12:12 pmCarson (In)
urbanleftbehind (efac08) — 11/11/2016 @ 12:12 pmLandrieu (La)
Roybal (Ca)
Graham (Fl)
Madigan (il)
Romney
LaHood probation status
The Kentucky chick probationary status
> one thing Democrats ought to consider is saying goodbye to the fossilized office-holders like Pelosi
Pelosi is my Congresswoman. I voted against her – her opponent was a nonpartisan guy attacking her from the left.
She won, of course.
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 11/11/2016 @ 12:51 pmWell, Bob,
Thanks, I wish it was that easy
The water fountains at school are spiked with the kool aid…
She is thinking and feeling that the electoral college is unfair, thinks
“Your vote counts” is not true
I tried to explain the mob problem of a pure democracy,
but…
What do they teach in school these days..
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/11/2016 @ 12:53 pmSo you would reject an otherwise good candidate just because s/he comes from a family that has already produced other good candidates and office holders? Or even bad ones? How does that make sense? If George P is a good match for whatever office he is contesting in any future election, why would you vote for someone else just because of his name?
Milhouse (40ca7b) — 11/11/2016 @ 1:24 pmWe must not, ahem, “permit” Chelsea to establish a foothold in politics.
Ed from SFV (3400a5) — 11/11/2016 @ 1:27 pm@Jack Klompus:They can always hire Ian Faith to run the party and in four years we’ll hopefully see the marquee “Puppet Show and Democratic National Convention.”
That was after he quit. He got them a new tour in Japan.
One of the best things about that documentary, was seeing Ian Faith with his hands in his own pockets, for once.
Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 11/11/2016 @ 1:31 pm@Milhouse:If George P is a good match for whatever office he is contesting in any future election, why would you vote for someone else just because of his name?
If the case could be made that he were the ONLY match that office, perhaps. But there are probably thousands of people who could fill it as ably or better, and he will not fill it so well as to offset the harm done by encouraging a familial dynasty.
Bad enough that everyone in government and media went to the same schools and married each other, do they have to share DNA too?
Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 11/11/2016 @ 1:34 pmhttp://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M3cfb8f35d5568b28fa927aaac47296a2o1&w=300&h=225&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0
Colonel Haiku (3bf827) — 11/11/2016 @ 1:40 pmWe have to make our stand now. No Michelle, Sasha, Malia, Eric, Ivanka . . . just NO.
Patterico (115b1f) — 11/11/2016 @ 1:41 pmI hope that there are some other ambitious Democratic politicians in Nita Lowey’s district who would be willing to run against Chelsea Clinton. I would think this election would have taught Democrats that the Clinton family isn’t the answer to everything.
Joshua K. (9ede0e) — 11/11/2016 @ 1:47 pmI agree, Patrick. Of course Michelle is planning her campaign.
And I say NO.
Patricia (5fc097) — 11/11/2016 @ 2:47 pmThis line could drive any sensible person bats: “They have to do so in a way that doesn’t erode the anti-racist or anti-sexist planks of the modern party, which are non-negotiable. If only there were a model for this.”
This only highlights they have outrageously distorted definitions of racism and sexism and deeply racist and sexist approaches to labeling and sorting them.
SarahW (3164f0) — 11/11/2016 @ 2:50 pmI don’t mind political families, I just mind THAT one, because influence peddling is baked into the cake.
They have nothing intrinsically useful to offer otherwise. Just as no one – NO ONE – would ever pay the loud, monotone and shrill HRC for her actual speaking ability, Chelsea has no particular gifts or charisma or ideas to make her a force in her own right. She is probably a decent and level headed person, but not impressive in any capacity that I’ve ever seen handed to her by virtue of her family tree.
It would be the courted special interests and the machine that selects her and crowds out the democratic competition to clear the way for her, not any sort of organic selection process; that makes her a weak candidate, Dems do that and pay the big money for bad speeches at their own peril. Suckers that they are, they probably will.
I was always sort of relieved Ronald Reagan’s youngest set of children were never really forces in politics, not for lack of interest. In contrast, Lynn Cheney had a light of her own, and I think she has a place in the future of the GOP.
SarahW (3164f0) — 11/11/2016 @ 2:59 pmMichelle has a “Hillary” problem in that she is not nearly as charismatic as her husband, and there is no sign of any singular ability of her own, beyond a hectoring and smug distaste for her own country; which, I admit, has been fashionable and there is a big grievance culture for her to appeal to. There’s one defense: offer something better.
SarahW (3164f0) — 11/11/2016 @ 3:03 pmSarahW,
Apparently you (and I) are misinformed on that account: Mrs. Obama walks on water according to the masses. We must have missed it, but there you go.
If she ran for office, or when she does, she’ll clean up. She has had 8 years of media buy-in, build-up, and their unabashed support. And the DNC won’t be running a white male any time soon.
Dana (d17a61) — 11/11/2016 @ 3:19 pm54 @Gabriel – I completely forgot that “Sex Farm” was a hit in Japan!
Jack Klompus (cb01da) — 11/11/2016 @ 3:30 pmthey did the same for mrs, assad, and gosnell’s girl.
narciso (d1f714) — 11/11/2016 @ 3:33 pmMichelle O will have to step up her game a bit, Dana; she has a huge perception advantage, reality of “politician” Michelle will be different. In her great favor, the democrat bench is pretty, pretty thin.
SarahW (3164f0) — 11/11/2016 @ 3:36 pm@Jack Klompus: I completely forgot that “Sex Farm” was a hit in Japan!
Understandable. But you can’t blame Ian for that puppet show, would not have happened if he’d been managing.
He’d have had them in a big college town.
Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 11/11/2016 @ 3:37 pmin the 19th century, there were dynasties that fell out of favor like the harrisons, or some like the stevensons, who had a measure of success, in the 19th, but didn’t rise to federal office in the 20th,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/11/2016 @ 3:40 pmIt’s conceivable the Clintons’ influence will wane faster than we might have thought. As one writer said, there are all those quids paid in and no way to get the promised quos.
Richard Aubrey (472a6f) — 11/11/2016 @ 3:55 pmI recall reading that one of the Russian mafia’s money people put a ton of money with Bernie Madoff.
I can imagine a scene as in casino royale, where the matobo warlords come to collect from le chiffre,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/11/2016 @ 3:59 pmMD in Philly (f9371b) — 11/11/2016 @ 12:53 pm–
I thought if you haven’t already seen it, this blog article about popular vote/electoral college may be useful in conversations with your young kool aid fountain daughter Good luck.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/11/hillary_wins_the_popular_vote__not_.html
elissa (c7f82f) — 11/11/2016 @ 4:30 pmSarahW,
MSM: She wears Versace like no other! She deserves to be our next president!
Dana (d17a61) — 11/11/2016 @ 4:35 pmI’m sure they have it in the back of their minds, but the rejection to her big campaign outing, must give them pause,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/11/2016 @ 4:43 pmApparently, HILLARY! is one of the Goodmen.
iowaan (91c663) — 11/12/2016 @ 5:16 pm