Endorses Clinton To Go Up Against Trump In General Election" class="article-topic-image" />This was to be expected, but I’m waiting to see what newspaper endorses the republican nominee (as the Rs call him).
So far a whopping three newspaper endorsements for the Trumpster Fire, at least one of them bought: National Enquirer, NY Post, NY Observer.
How did folks in your neck of the redwoods respond to her June 2nd foreign policy/Trump take down speech. I’ve seen some reports that her speech sealed the deal for a lot of likely voters. The latest polls were run prior to it.
All in all, a balanced, well thought out endorsement, in my opinion. I endorse the endorsement.
Bernie Bros claim that the endorsement should have been divided between Clinton and Sanders by using Clinton subscribers and Sanders subscribers ratio of total subscribers in 5, 4, 3, 2, …
(Online subscriptions only - print subscribers don’t count because that’s “rigged to favor non electronic users” )
And for those papers, it’s obviously a wise financial decision.
It was a toss up between skewering him and lambasting him, but no big cheers that I’m aware of. There are a number of volatile state races including statehouse, US Senate (Boxer’s seat) and state and local ballot propositions that seem to be leading the discussions. Local rag is withholding endorsing either her or Sanders for the nomination but decries trump’s “reckless, coarse, etc etc” campaign.
I’m waiting for "National Wall and Fence Weekly " to weigh in.
He has cozy relationships with all of these for reasons we all know, and other media are calling out these endorsements. No bragging rights here.
I suspect there may be some “Operation Chaos” crossover monkey business afoot. Clinton’s lead in CA was consistently double digits right up until Trump closed out the GOP nomination; immediately dropped to 2 points after that, then steadied. Some reporting on registration switches from GOP to NPP would be informative. Also, I think some of the NPPers may have (mistakenly) thought that they would be able to vote in (closed) GOP primary but have now learned that they are only able to request a Dem primary ballot and are supporting Bernie to prolong the Dem nominating process.
Hillary clearly bought the editorial board.
That would be immoral. Unethical. Dishonorable. UNCONSCIONABLE in a land of law and order and the sanctity of the vote.
You’re probably right.
Welp, I used to think the LAT was a decent publication, but now they’ve just stamped themselves as corrupt corporatist money-laundering whores who are aching to attack Iran, gut social security, savage efforts to deal with climate change, and turn the Treasury Dept. over to Goldman Sachs. The Hillary Victory Fund is nothing more than a sleazy slush fund that enables Clinton to buy off delegates under the guise of raising millions for downticket Democrats who are corrupt corporatist money-laundering whores themselves.
Did I leave anything out?
And the Observer (Ivanka’s hubby is its publisher) is rooting for the BernieOrBust movement.
I think the number for Hillary is 57,Bernie is still telling his supporters the convention will be brokered. What ?
“Who, from the 1940s-1960s endorsed Nixon!”
Clinton’s lead in CA was consistently double digits right up until Trump closed out the GOP nomination;
While I don’t discount the possibility of some ratfucking by primary voters, it’s generally the case that a candidate who has nailed down the nomination gets a bump in the polls simply by virtue of his “success.”
It’s also good to keep in mind that not all of the polls show the race that tight in CA, and the polls with larger numbers of respondents have given Clinton a much larger lead. Why that should be I can’t say.
the part where Hillary uses her grandkids as props.
aside from that: perfecto
I remembered the other day polls in CA were similarly all over the place back in 2008 (back then RCP Average was Obama +1.2, the result was Clinton +9.6). So I decided, well we will know it when we know it, but I know it won’t be a 70-30 result for Sanders.