Why Hillary Clinton Really Lost

Exclusive: An insider book on Campaign 2016 reveals a paranoid Hillary Clinton who spied on staff emails after losing in 2008 and carried her political dysfunction into her loss to Donald Trump, writes Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

An early insider account of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, entitled Shattered, reveals a paranoid presidential candidate who couldn’t articulate why she wanted to be President and who oversaw an overconfident and dysfunctional operation that failed to project a positive message or appeal to key voting groups.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaking with supporters in Phoenix, Arizona. March 21, 2016. (Photo by Gage Skidmore)

Okay, I realize that people who have been watching Rachel Maddow and other MSNBC programs – as well as reading The New York Times and The Washington Post for the past four months – “know” that Clinton ran a brilliant campaign that was only derailed because of “Russian meddling.” But this insider account from reporters Jonathan Allen and Annie Parnes describes something else.

As The Wall Street Journal review notes, the book “narrates the petty bickering, foolish reasoning and sheer arrogance of a campaign that was never the sure thing that its leader and top staffers assumed. … Mr. Allen and Ms. Parnes stress two essential failures of the campaign, the first structural, the second political. The campaign’s structure, the authors write, was an ‘unholy mess, fraught with tangled lines of authority, petty jealousies, and no sense of greater purpose.’”

The book portrays Hillary Clinton as distant from her campaign staff, accessible primarily through her close aide, Huma Abedin, and thus creating warring factions within her bloated operation.

According to the Journal’s review by Barton Swaim, the book’s authors suggest that this chaos resulted from “the fact that Mrs. Clinton didn’t know why she wanted to be president. At one point no fewer than 10 senior aides were working on her campaign announcement speech, not one had a clear understanding of why Americans should cast their vote for Mrs. Clinton and not someone else. The speech, when she finally delivered it, was a flop – aimless, boring, devoid of much beyond bromides.”

The book cites a second reason for Clinton’s dismal performance – her team’s reliance on analytics rather than on reaching out to real voters and their concerns.

There is also an interesting tidbit regarding Clinton’s attitude toward the privacy of her staff’s emails. “After losing to Mr. Obama in the protracted 2008 primary,” the Journal’s review says, Clinton “was convinced that she had lost because some staffers – she wasn’t sure who – had been disloyal. So she ‘instructed a trusted aide to access the campaign’s server and download the [email] messages sent and received by top staffers.’”

Nixonian Paranoia

In other words, Clinton – in some Nixonian fit of paranoia – violated the privacy of her senior advisers in her own mole hunt, a revelation that reflects on her own self-described “mistake” to funnel her emails as Secretary of State through a private server rather than a government one. As the Journal’s review puts it: “she didn’t want anyone reading her emails the way she was reading those of her 2008 staffers.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders speaking to one of his large crowds of supporters. (Photo credit: Sanders campaign)

But there is even a greater irony in this revelation because of the current complaint from Clinton and her die-hard supporters that Russia sabotaged her campaign by releasing emails via WikiLeaks from the DNC, which described how party leaders had torpedoed the campaign of Clinton’s rival for the nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders, and other emails from her campaign chairman John Podesta, revealing the contents of Clinton’s paid speeches to Wall Street banks and some pay-to-play features of the Clinton Foundation.

WikiLeaks has denied that it received the emails from Russia – and President Obama’s outgoing intelligence chiefs presented no real evidence to support the allegations – but the conspiracy theory of the Trump campaign somehow colluding with the Russians to sink Clinton has become a groupthink among many Democrats as well as the mainstream U.S. media.

So, rather than conducting a serious autopsy on how Clinton and the national Democratic Party kicked away a winnable election against the buffoonish Donald Trump, national Democrats have created a Zombie explanation for their failures, blaming their stunning defeat on the Russians.

This hysteria over Russia-gate has consumed the first several months of the Trump presidency – badgering the Trump administration into a more belligerent posture toward nuclear-armed Russia – but leaving little incentive for the Democrats to assess what they need to do to appeal to working-class voters who chose Trump’s empty-headed populism over Clinton’s cold-hearted calculations.

The current conventional wisdom among the mainstream media, many Democrats and even some progressives is that the only way to explain the victory by pussy-grabbing Trump is to complain about an intervention by the evil Russians. Maybe Maddow and the other Russia-did-it conspiracy theorists will now denounce Shattered as just one more example of “Russian disinformation.”

The Times’ View

The New York Times’ review by Michiko Kakutani also notes how Shattered details Clinton’s dysfunction, but the newspaper inserted a phrase about “Russian meddling,” presumably to avoid a head-exploding cognitive dissonance among its readers who have been inundated over the past four months by the Times’ obsession on Russia! Russia! Russia!

However, the Times’ review still focuses on the book’s larger message: “In fact, the portrait of the Clinton campaign that emerges from these pages is that of a Titanic-like disaster: an epic fail made up of a series of perverse and often avoidable missteps by an out-of-touch candidate and her strife-ridden staff that turned ‘a winnable race’ into ‘another iceberg-seeking campaign ship.’

“It’s the story of a wildly dysfunctional and ‘spirit-crushing’ campaign that embraced a flawed strategy (based on flawed data) and that failed, repeatedly, to correct course. A passive-aggressive campaign that neglected to act on warning flares sent up by Democratic operatives on the ground in crucial swing states, and that ignored the advice of the candidate’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, and other Democratic Party elders, who argued that the campaign needed to work harder to persuade undecided and ambivalent voters (like working-class whites and millennials), instead of focusing so insistently on turning out core supporters.”

So, perhaps this new book about how Hillary Clinton really lost Campaign 2016 will enable national Democrats to finally start charting a course correction before the party slams another Titanic-style campaign into another iceberg.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com).

298 comments for “Why Hillary Clinton Really Lost

  1. Richard Eastman
    April 29, 2017 at 19:01

    The Clinton campaign and the candidate were in tune with the values and aspirations of Democrats. Hillary Clinton was one like them and her success would be their success. Can’t you see that if she had an interest-group issue apart from the glass-ceiling for their kind, it would diminish from the entitlement that her victory simply as a Democrat who wants it and did the drill deserves. And as for “pussy grabbing Trump,” for the record, he never said that he did such things or that he liked doing such things, here merely made the sociological observation — as George Carlin would have — that when you — not “I” — are a celebrity, a star, you (not “I”) can get away with anything, even “grabbing pussy” — talking about sociological fact that was well known to Elvis, or the Beattles or Mick Jagger — a sociological fact — and he was saying in confidence while on a bus with a lowlife person, the Bush, a cousin of the Neo-con Bushes, who know about the tape recorder and was trying to steer Trump into making potentially useful statements for whomever set up the recorder. And as for making moves on someone, which he already talked about, he said what “making moves” consisted of, and it was not “grabbing pussy,” he said he made a move on her by taking her out to buy furniture. Not quite the same, is it. Hillary Lost because there were not enough Democrats wanting what she represented.

  2. Sarah Hanko-Carter
    April 27, 2017 at 00:01

    There could’ve been Russian meddling. I’ve never dismissed that idea. However, the content of the emails showed how dysfunctional the campaign was and how Hillary was an incompetent manager. I’m not fond of Hillary, but she’s not insane like Trump. Her managerial incompetence led to political malpractice. True, if any Russian meddling occurred, that’s an issue, but that doesn’t make her incompetence an non-issue.

  3. John Obeda
    April 26, 2017 at 01:23

    Russian “meddling” had next to nothing with HRC ‘ s defeat. Her arrogance and blindness to what was going on in the nation, and her underhanded fight against a candidate who could voice a vision for the nation–Bernie Sanders–disarmed her campaign. Her certainty of its “being her turn was as delusional as anything her Republican candidate said.

  4. Anonymous
    April 25, 2017 at 16:03

    We have heard Many Lies which Slanderously alleged that the recent Election result in America was because of Russian interference or influence, or because of some collusion between Russia and President Donald Trump, but these things are Obvious Lies.

    It was Known a few days before that Election, and it is Known after that Election Who and What was Really Responsible for the result of that recent Election, and these things are explained in this comment.

    We Know that the Opinion Polls predicted that Hillary Clinton had a good chance of winning that Election, and some People thought that Donald Trump was an Establishment plant to help Hillary Clinton become President, and the following Analytical News Articles Prove what Really happened in the final days of that Election Campaign, because these things Caused Many Democratic Party Voters to either stay home on Election Day, or to Vote for Donald Trump for President.

    We Know that on 25 October 2016 that Rudy Giuliani went on the Mainstream Media and said that he had some Secret Information, which he either heard from someone else, or that he received from someone else, and he spoke of his Confidence that the Information was Correct, although he did Not say what it was.

    Rudy Giuliani may have been was referring to some rumors that were afterwards Verified, or to some Information that may have came from former FBI Agents or from the New York Police Department, possibly because Rudy Giuliani or Others had received Anonymous Paper Letters of these matters, possibly on FBI or New York Police Department Issued Paper, and where those Anonymous Paper Letters Detailed sufficient Evidence that would make it Unavoidable for the FBI to Conduct further Criminal Investigations of Hillary Clinton’s Clandestine and Treasonous Servergate Crimes because of that New Evidence, and which would for Legal and Ethical Reasons make the Clintonite FBI Director Reluctantly send his Biased Letter to Congress on 28 October 2016, and that Biased Letter sought to try to Cover Up and Whitewash Hillary Clinton’s Many Crimes as Much as possible, and we Know that this was the Clintonite FBI Director’s Secret Motive, because a few days later just before the Election, the Biased Clinonite FBI Director said on 6 November 2016, that he found no wrongdoing, even though there had Not been No where near sufficient time for the FBI to do a Proper Investigation of this New Evidence, and the Clintonite FBI Director did this to help Hillary Clinton and possibly a deal was made under Blackmail to Rig the Votes with the Corrupt Electronic Voting Machines to allow a possibly Reluctant but Pupetized Donald Trump to become President, because of what was on that Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner laptop Computer which made a Hillary Clinton Presidency Untenable, because Most of the New York Police Police and FBI Agents had a Copy of that, and this is Why the American Shadow Regime along with their Puppets want Electronic Voting Machines rather than Paper Ballots, because it gives America’s Unelected and Unconstitutional Shadow Regime the Flexibility they want to Install their most appropriate Puppets for the Circumstances, even though they had Promised and Wanted Hillary Clinton as their Selected Puppet President, at https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/10/28/us/politics/fbi-letter.html , and we can see Why the FBI Director was allowed keep his job, and Even Ordered to keep his job, and Why he told Lies that Russia influenced the recent Election, because had he resigned so that he could plead the Fifth Amendment, or had he been replaced, then it would make it Unavoidable to Conduct further Investigations on the Crooked Clintons, and this is Why Committees ask the Clintonite FBI Director easy Scripted ‘questions’ or they ask those Questions in Private so that those Committees can Make Up the Necessary Excuses and Lies in order to Deceive the American People at http://www.newsweek.com/fbi-director-james-comey-russian-tampering-election-576417 .

    We heard that the New York Police Department said that they were Investigating Classified State Department Emails on Huma Abedin’s laptop Computer that was connected to the State Department, and which was used by Anthony Weiner who did Not have Security Clearance to read those Secret Emails or that Classified Information, and this should be compared to how Hillary Clinton Knew certain Information on Donald Trump from her Puppet Obama Administration that Donald Trump was being Spied on at http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/03/hillary-tipped-off-trump-wiretap-tweeted-one-week-prior-election/ .

    Anthony Weiner also used that same Computer which had the State Department Classified Emails on it for Illegal Perversions, and where dozens of People who could have asked their Computer Expert friends to hack that Computer, because they Knew that it was Anthony Weiner, because of All those Many Photos and some of those People may have told the New York Police Department of these things at http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/11/did_the_nypd_force_the_fbi_to_act_on_weiner.html , and the NSA had those deleted Clinton Emails that were claimed by the Hardened and Compulsive Liar Hillary Clinton to be Emails on Yoga, but there are People who think that those Emails that were deleted with BleachBit were Classified Emails between the State Department and Hillary Clinton to give her Information to help her with the Presidential Campaign, along with some Clinton Foundation Pay to Play Bribery Emails, and that the New York Police Department had Copies of those Emails, and this may have made the American Shadow Regime make a Reluctant Donald Trump who had other plans after possibly being an Establishment plant in the Election for Hillary Clinton, become the President, while the Shadow American Regime may have offered President Elect Donald Trump his retirement with a soft coup of a staged impeachment or a fake health issue or one of the usual excuses.

    The Reason that the False allegation had to be Invented regarding the Lie that Donald Trump was colluding with Russia to win the Election, was because there would Not be any type of cover for the Illegal, Immoral, and Undemocratic Spying that was done on Donald Trump.

    This is because such Unwarranted Spying would Unambiguously be Illegal, Immoral, and Undemocratic, and this is why the Lie that Donald Trump colluded with Russia Needed to be Invented by these Criminals.

    The False allegations and the False narrative that Donald Trump colluded with Russia is Also Needed by these Criminals to try to deflect from their own Criminal and Treasonous Activity, and they do this Only for their own Self Serving Corrupt Greedy Purposes, that Totally Disregards their Honorable Obligations to be the Paid Servants of the Public, and to Represent the Interests of the American People, rather than to be Bribed, Blackmailed, and Corrupt Puppets of the American Shadow Regime at http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/22/heres-how-much-the-fbi-planned-to-pay-trump-dossier-author/ , and at http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/02/clinton-camp-says-fbi-should-say-what-it-knows-about-trumps-russia-ties.html , and we should Not be surprised if there are Further Lies and Slanders that are Manufactured by these Criminals against Russia, because Establishment Corruptocrats and the Establishment RepTHUGlicans want to cover for each other and Decieve and Exploit Americans, because they are the Bribed Puppets of the American Shadow Regime, who Know of the saying that says that if Voting could change anything, then they would make it Illegal, which they effectively have done because of the Corrupt Voting Machines, which None of their Puppets want to Discuss, Despite All of the Manufactured Lies and Hysteria that Russia hacked America’s recent Elections.

    There is Honest Analysis of What were the Electoral Consequences associated with such Vile Crimes of the Scandal Ridden Criminal Clintons and of other Clintonites, and the next News Article is Biased Journalism and Perhaps that Website likes or needs Clinton Cash, and it tries to entirely blame the Clintonite FBI Director rather than to Blame Unforeseen Circumstances that are Associated with Criminality in a Total Surveillance State and to Blame the Clintonite Criminals, and the Clintonite FBI Director worked for the Clinton Foundation Associated HSBC Bank, but even so he had a Legal Responsibility to Update the Congress of any New Criminal Evidence in the Clinton Servergate Criminal Investigation, even though the Biased Clintonite FBI Director tried his Best to minimize the damage to the Clinton Campaign given that he was in an Unavoidable situation of having to write a Letter to Congress and which was Leaked to the Media, and the New York Police Chief said that he would hold a News Conference on this Most Serious and Evil matter, if the FBI Director refused to Investigate this, regardless of the fact that it was close to the Election at http://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/1/11/14215930/comey-email-election-clinton-campaign , and we Know that the People involved are All Americans, and that it All Happened in America.

    After reading these Facts, we can see the Who and the What of who and what were Really Responsible for the result in the 2016 Presidential Election, and All of them are American Citizens, and All of it happened in America, and so the Question is Why have we heard so Many Lies from both the Establishment Corruptocrats and the Establishment RepTHUGlicans, and I think that the Evidence makes that Obvious.

    It is because the Establishment Corruptocrats and the Establishment Republicans are 2 sides of the same Dirty Coin, and they are the Puppets of the American Shadow Regime, and these Puppets look after each other while Pretending to be opponents of each other and they Trick the People, because these are the Orders given to them by the American Shadow Regime, and Congressional Committees and Senate Committees are occasions to find the Lies that are Needed to be Professional Excuse Makers, because it must be made to appear that Wrongdoing has been investigated, because otherwise the Voters might want a Third Political Party to be the Government for the People, and that is Not what the American Shadow Regime or their Puppets want, and we can see Why they do Not like WikiLeaks, because WikiLeaks makes it Difficult for the Establishment Puppets, which Includes the Bribed and Corrupt Puppet Mainstream Media to Lie and Cover Up for each other and for other Puppets and for their Puppet Masters who are the American Shadow Regime.

    On 3 May 2016, Donald Trump became the presumptive Republican Presidential nominee that was then made Official on 19 July 2016, and so the Clinton Campaign Knew who Hillary Clinton’s opponent for the Election was, and on whom to Intensify the Spying at https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-05-04/trump-becomes-presumptive-republican-nominee-as-cruz-exits-race .

    We can be Certain that any American of Significance to the American Shadow Regime would have been Spied On Secretly, either with Corrupt elements within the Intelligence Agencies or possibly with Paid Private Detectives, and that other Information would also have been gathered from the Collaborating Puppets of the American Shadow Regime, and while America’s Surveillance Nazism is More Subtle and More Refined and More Deceptive than that of Nazi Germany and the Gestapo, it can be compared to, and is bigger than what occurred with the Gestapo in Nazi Germany with regards to its Scale and Efficiency, as the American Patriot and Hero Edward Snowden made these things Known to the American People.

    There is an Official timeline of the Trump Spying Scandal that began with an attempted first FISA warrant submitted on 1 June 2016, but that was rejected because even the Puppet FISA Court thought it to be Slanderous, Ridiculous, and Highly Improper, because Donald Trump has Always been a Patriotic American, and the Unpatriotic and Treasonous Corruptocrats and the Unpatriotic and Treasonous American Shadow Regime have Always Known this, but they do Not like People who are even remotely Honest or Patriotic, because they Cannot use them to be their Treasonous and Unprincipled Puppets.

    We can see that this was happening after Donald Trump became the presumptive Republican Presidential nominee on 3 May 2016, and we see that the Unprincipled managed to obtain an Unwarranted Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant or FISA warrant by means of a Corrupt Process by the Clinton and Obama Regime, because this FISA warrant was Subtly and Deceptively directed at a computer server in Trump Tower which was Conveniently alleged to be suspected of having alleged links to a Russian bank, but this gave the Clinton and Obama Regime their Corrupt and Criminal Excuse to Sufficiently ‘incidentally’ Spy on Donald Trump and his Associates at http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/timeline-of-obama-probe-of-alleged-trump-russia-ties/ .

    We can see that the Lies which Falsely said that Russia was trying to help Donald Trump win the Election, or that there was alleged collusion between Russia and Donald Trump were Needed to justify the Immoral and Improper and Undemocratic Spying on Donald Trump, because it helps these Criminals at Committee Hearings, and it helps them to escape going to Court if ever their Criminal and Vile Schemes are Discovered, because they can use their Convenient Lie that they were ‘concerned’ over matters of National Security, and they Would even use Foreign Spies in their Criminal Schemes at http://www.wnd.com/2017/04/analysis-confirms-british-role-in-trump-being-spied-on/ .

    This might make some of the Senator Sanders supporters Realize that Washington has to be cleaned up before they could ever Vote for the Democrats, and while most of them would not want to Vote for the Republicans, they can either stay home on Election Day or Vote for another Political Party like the Green Party.

    There are People who say that Socialism as an Economic Model does not work, and Regardless of what was Wrongly said that Senator Sanders is an Economic Socialist, it is a Fact that Senator Sanders is Not that type of Socialist, but he is More for Regulated Free Enterprise than the Socialist Crony ‘Capitalist’ American Shadow Regime is, because of the Socialism of the Clintons making Banks make Sub Prime Loans, and giving Taxpayers’ Money to Banks, and the Trans Pacific Partnership and Globalization are Socialism to the rest of the World that is Funded by American jobs and American Money, and they Only make a few Americans Extremely Wealthy, and the Compulsory Petrodollar is Also Socialism, and it Cost America over 10 Trillion Dollars to try to defend, along with the deaths and casualties of Thousands of American Military Personnel, and it Cost Iraq and other Countries Millions of deaths and casualties and refugees, along with Massive Human Rights Abuses from the Evil American Empire, because Saddam Hussein wanted to Sell Iraq’s Oil in Euros rather than Dollars, and that was the Real Reason for the Iraqi War, because America wanted Selective Socialism from other Countries, which Only Depressed the American Economy and also much of the Global Economy, but it made the Unelected and Unconstitutional Criminal American Shadow Regime Extremely Wealthy with Dirty Money in an Unethical way, which is their Preferred way to make Money, because that is the type of People that they are, and America is the Secret Allies of Terrorist ISIS in Syria, and we Know of the Slander and the Injustices and the War Crimes and Damage to Property that America is Responsible for, and People can do a Google Image Search for Syria to Understand some of America’s Holocaust Denial Crimes that the Evil American Empire Knows that it is Responsible, for and Guilty of.

    It would be Interesting if Experts Calculated the Entire Cost of American Improper Selective Socialism on America, and on how Much this Improper American Selective Socialism Increased the Wealth of a few Americans, including their Puppet Politicians and for their Puppets in the Entertainment Industry, and for their Puppet Journalists in America’s Mainstream Media, and there could be some People who think that the word Liberal could be used by some People at times as a Euphemism for Feral, and that the word Progressive could be used by some People at times as a Euphemism for Regressive, while at other times those People think that those words are used as they are understood by People.

    We can see that it is Highly Suspicious for the Obvious Reasons, that the Clintonite FBI Director was Not replaced, or that he did Not resign, or if he pleads the Fifth Amendment, and this Shows that America Needs a Third Mainstream Political Party, that is Not comprised of corrupt puppets, but rather of Honest Public Servants of the American People.

  5. Jon Vought
    April 25, 2017 at 03:21


  6. Steve Spain
    April 25, 2017 at 02:37

    I believe that this represents the truth. She couldn’t even talk straight towards the end of her campaign. When she came to Omaha…. in a speech standing in front of Warren Buffett, Hillary Clinton promised to raise taxes on the Middle Class. That shouldn’t have been well received by anyone who was actually paying attention.

  7. Izzy
    April 25, 2017 at 02:02

    Thank you so much!

  8. Sue
    April 24, 2017 at 19:59

    The DNC is too corrupt and arrogant to accept responsibility for that election fiasco. The Democratic Party is out of touch with the concerns of it’s party members and ignored the voter favorite in the primaries, because they had promised H.C. the 2016 election if she would throw her support to Obama in 2008. As former lifelong democrat, my only choice was to abandon the party that abandoned it’s democratic values and ignored voters and am now independent.

  9. Nigel Dandridge Perry
    April 24, 2017 at 19:43

    The only message I got from HRC was that she would bend over backward to help Israel. That meant military action.

  10. MBrucker
    April 24, 2017 at 18:29

    I think this statement from the article says it all. “So, rather than conducting a serious autopsy on how Clinton and the national Democratic Party kicked away a winnable election against the buffoonish Donald Trump, national Democrats have created a Zombie explanation for their failures, blaming their stunning defeat on the Russians.”

    The Democratic Party, instead of being accountable for the mess they made with the DNC and torpedoing Bernie Sanders’ campaign (who probably would have won against 45), is choosing – in true political fashion, to deflect the issue by blaming it on the Russians.

    Why does it have to be “the Russians intervened on our election” or they didn’t. I believe both of these reasons affected our 2016 election.

    What I’d like to see is SOMEONE being accountable for this mess. What I’d like to see is our “representatives” actually take a look and see what would be best FOR THE PEOPLE and not how they can find another way to line their collective pockets. WE THE PEOPLE are getting mighty tired of this.

  11. Ned Brubeck
    April 24, 2017 at 18:19

    I have been saying this for months. Bernie’s young supporters became disillusioned after the nomination was stolen from him and with the media beating the “It’s Her turn!” drum, they stayed home on Election Day.
    At the end of “Liberty Valance” the paper’s editor says “When the truth becomes legend, print the legend.”
    HRH HRC, DWS, and the DNC are desperately striving to turn truth into legend.

  12. Adrienne Brietzke
    April 24, 2017 at 18:17

    BERNIE! Heads up! Apparently even GOD thinks Perez is full of shit!

    Or we won’t.

    You’re at a pinnacle in your career, where, with your popularity, YOU could make our country realize so much of what you’ve fought for this past 40 years. Yet you waste your time trying to revive the more-than-dead Dem party.

    If you would just LOOK for a moment – your supporters REVILE the Dem party and want NOTHING to do with it! THAT was the biggest lesson from the campaign.

    It’s been 5 months since the election. The election where we the people REFUSED to support the deeply corrupt Dem party. NOTHING’S CHANGED! Except we’ve not managed to draw forth another leader.

    I KNOW that if you’d step up to lead an independent party, we’d have Medicare for all and monies focused on programs for we the people, like Social Security and childhood hunger, tuition free colleges, etc. etc. Time is proving that ONLY YOU can DO it.

    The time is NOW! – Before the GOP shoves another health bill written for insurance & pharma and NOT AMERICANS down our throats.

    If you’d step up, we – could STOP the GOP juggernaut! But instead you drag Tom “I’m part of the problem” Perez around the country trying to fix a Dem party that DOESN’T WANT TO BE FIXED!


    We are at an incredible apex RIGHT NOW. We could effectuate MEANINGFUL CHANGE for we the people in a huge sweep! THAT. WON’T. HAPPEN. WITHOUT. YOU.

    That’s the stark reality we face! How can you deny that which you’ve worked so hard to accomplish when it’s within your grasp?
    Read: http://vetsforbernie.org/bird-defecates-on-tom-perez-in-kentucky-authorities-suspect-birdie-sanders/

  13. Adrienne Brietzke
    April 24, 2017 at 18:16

    She needs to GO AWAY. She stands for NOTHING. She champions only those causes or issues which result in money she can get her fat little greedy hands on.

  14. Sydney Suttman
    April 24, 2017 at 16:32

    While T-rump is an horrific, black comedy…waking everyone up; Hilary would have been silently, “business” as usual…horrific with a warring proclivity…that is IF SHE & HER’S could milk it/war for money…..&&……the population would have all have gone back to their fascination with their gadgets &___let her. I voted for JILL. I don’t know what she would/could have done but it COULDN’T HAVE BEEN WORSE THAN THESE TWO.. Even despite T-rump; our system is failing it’s citizens with nasty rot, obesity & huge gaping holes. we’re a mess. WE NEED TO COME HOME___PUT CORPORATIONS ON A DIET___& FIX US___ALL OF US___EVERYONE.
    WE NEED A THIRD PROGRESSIVE PARTY. DE-MOCK-CRASSY is 19th century dead. Hilary is a 19th century male politician. She is strong, bright & experienced but she is not leadership material. SHE NEEDS serious checks & balances.

  15. Razor
    April 24, 2017 at 15:46

    The DNC does not want to chart a new course. the appointment of Perez should tell you that. they continue to blunder blindly in the same direction because they still refuse to see the writing on the wall. the voters did not turn out to support them largely due to resentment at the way they appear to have torpedoed Bernie Sanders but also because the DNC in an amazing display of arrogance pushed for the one candidate that was as equally unpopular as Trump. they believed that the voters would fall in line because surely no one wants Trump to be president. bad move DNC. I would guess roughly 75% of the population did not want Trump as president – but the same numbers could not bring themselves to vote for HRC either. and that’s how Trump got elected. And he will get elected again. the DNC needs to wake up – the people do not trust the DNC anymore. unless they reinvent themselves with a more progressive message they will not be viewed as a viable alternative – they will continue to be seen as the usual corrupt politicians who have no regard for what is best for the people.

  16. Marvin Aldor
    April 24, 2017 at 15:21

    I was intrigued to read that the New York Times “inserted a phrase about “Russian meddling'” in to Kakutani’s piece. But I can’t manage to find any substantiation of this. Would you kindly post a link to your source for that? I’d be curious read more about it. Thanks.

  17. Abdullahi Edward Tomasiewicz
    April 23, 2017 at 17:45

    Clinton lost because nobody wanted her and her AIPAC/Zionist friends to have any more power than they already have.

  18. Large Louis de Boogeytown
    April 23, 2017 at 10:24

    Nasty, nasty woman.

  19. Mike D
    April 22, 2017 at 15:26

    I never thought twice about voting for Bernie Sanders (I didn’t) – voted Trump.. but to watch (10+ youtube videos) on the shaft job that he got from the Nevada Democratic Convention – I shake my head. That was strangeness. The final speech by Boxer was – was more than I could take. Bring back the real left – BOXER and group are not the real deal.

  20. Robert Tinker
    April 22, 2017 at 13:52

    She lost because Donald Trump played dirty politics end of story .

  21. susan_sunflower
    April 21, 2017 at 22:27

    Clinton 2016 lacked the suspense and tension of Obama in 2008 when, at least in my state (previously Red Colorado), there was reason to bite the bullet and vote LOTE because the polls were uncertain and Bush had won so decisively here in 2000. I suspect that the exact same triumphalist sense that Trump could not win, suppressed the vote — and some quite serious mistrust and dislike that didn’t “go away”. I’m suddenly wondering that the trajectory of Clinton’s unfavorability ratings over the course of 2016. Comey’s last minute announcement cost her 3 points in pre-election favorability …

  22. John Ferman
    April 21, 2017 at 16:58

    I am not in a position to know how valid the article is. What I did not hear all during 2016 was Clinton’s articulating what she saw were the nations main problems and what would she put forward to remedy them. In other words, ‘why you should vote for me.’ I like Bernie’s postiveness and hoped it would shape Clinton. Alrhough disappointed by what I didn’t hear, I voted for Hillary on trust alone.

  23. April 21, 2017 at 16:45

    The BIGGEST (and most predictable) mistake made by Hillary Clinton’s campaign was its abject failure to create a clear, credible story for why Americans should vote for Democrats IN GENERAL rather than Republican candidates. The Republicans had a story for why Americans should vote for Republicans in general, and it worked even though their story will based mostly on bold-faced lies. Democrats should STOP hiring ideologically clueless people to be their “campaign advisers.” They may be good at raising campaign donations from the super-rich, but they usually fall short when it comes to actually winning elections.

  24. Louisa
    April 21, 2017 at 14:23

    [quote:] “The New York Times’ review by Michiko Kakutani also notes how Shattered details Clinton’s dysfunction, but the newspaper inserted a phrase about “Russian meddling,” presumably to avoid a head-exploding cognitive dissonance among its readers who have been inundated over the past four months by the Times’ obsession on Russia! Russia! Russia!” [/end quote]

    No, the book actually accepts the claim of Kremlin Konspiracies to undermine the election. It is in many ways a great read, but it skims over and ignores a lot of stuff, and – amazingly – remains rather pro-Hilary despite describing all the ways her campaign malfunctioned (largely by its own poor design). It’s a book that will probably annoy many people: Clinton is described as in this article, Trump as a dangerous sexist buffoon, Gary Johnson appears once (in passing), Jill Stein is nowhere to be found … and Bernie Sanders is basically smeared and reviled throughout.

    Anyway, thanks for a good article :)

  25. April 21, 2017 at 13:27

    I’m guessing this is why disgruntled insiders chose to leak the Clinton and DNC emails to Wikileaks. Lesson not learned: Don’t treat your campaign staffers like scum.

  26. Charles Browning
    April 21, 2017 at 13:14

    I’m a little surprised Robert wrote this article based on reviews of the book, apparently not having read the book itself. Seems uncharacteristic.

  27. BrownScent87
    April 21, 2017 at 12:06

    Do you have a paypal account ? in the event if you do you can make an additional 300 a week in your revenue working from home for 3 hours every day… go to
    ………………… https://makeusdclockurl.blogspot.com/

  28. John Doe II
    April 21, 2017 at 09:57

    Trump’s anti-science budget will be a disaster for America’s bottom line

    In its approach to scientific research, President Trump’s budget can be accurately described as a mugging. I’ve watched this happen before, up close and personal. It does not end well.

    The administration’s funding plan entirely eliminates the Department of Energy’s most exciting, cutting- edge, high-risk, high-potential research program, ARPA-E, the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy.

    Its double-digit cuts to the National Institutes of Health — America’s research bulwark against infectious diseases, cancer and other threats to public health — could mean the NIH will be unable to issue any new research grants in 2018.

    The Trump budget cuts the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Research by 50%. (Earlier, the EPA’s new overseers eliminated “science” from the mission statement of its Office of Science and Technology Policy, as though science were now a dirty word.)

    Federal climate studies will be eviscerated, and references to climate change have been scrubbed from some federal websites. (But, as Neil DeGrasse Tyson famously said, “The good thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe in it.”)

    The Sea Grant program — which supports more than 3,000 scientists, engineers, educators and students working to protect and sustain coastal ecosystems, communities and resources at 300 institutions — is entirely eliminated. So is the Chemical Safety Board.

    Funding for restoration of the Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound, San Francisco Bay and other waterways is also essentially deleted.

    Defunding science is the intellectual equivalent of eating our seed corn.


  29. John Doe II
    April 21, 2017 at 09:31

    Hillary lost.Three cheers, huh.

    Instead we get the “Real American” BOZO voted in by white nationalists.

    You Get What You Deserve.

    As Mr. T would say, “I pity the fool!”

    • John Doe II
      April 21, 2017 at 17:32

      4 Hours at the White House With Ted Nugent, Sarah Palin and Kid Rock

      APRIL 20, 2017

      WASHINGTON — Ted Nugent, Kid Rock and Sarah Palin had a fete to remember at the White House for several hours Wednesday night, as President Trump treated the high-profile supporters to a white-china private dinner, a room-by-room tour and free-range policy chat.

      “We were there for four hours, man!” Mr. Nugent, a 68-year-old Detroit native, said in a telephone interview on Thursday, using a four-letter expletive to signal his amazement at Mr. Trump’s willingness to spend so much time with his three casually dressed visitors.

      “He gave us a wonderful personal tour of every room and talked about the origins of every carpet and every painting — there was a Monet — and then we had dinner,” said Mr. Nugent, who has referred to former President Barack Obama as a “mongrel” and to Hillary Clinton with an array of unflattering epithets.

      The encounter included a tour of the executive residence, a grip-and-grin session with Mr. Trump in the Oval Office and an impromptu snapshot — featuring a sneering Ms. Palin — in front of Mrs. Clinton’s official portrait as the three guests and their families left through the East Wing.

      Mr. Nugent said one member of the group — he wouldn’t say who — asked the three to extend their middle fingers beneath the portrait. “I politely declined,” he said. “Let the juxtaposition speak for itself.”

      Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, described the meeting as “a long-planned” token of the president’s appreciation for Ms. Palin’s support in the 2016 campaign. But Mr. Nugent said it was much more than that.”

      It was not clear if the president expected quite as much company. The invitation was initially extended to Ms. Palin, who promptly invited the two aging, gun-loving, stringy-haired musical bad boys —

      Ms. Palin, whose slashing, populist-in-pumps political style prefigured Mr. Trump’s economic nationalist message, bonded with the president, another former reality TV star. She posted a raft of pictures on her website the morning after the visit, which had not been listed on the president’s public schedule.

      “President Trump’s invitation for dinner included bringing a couple of friends,” Ms. Palin wrote on her web page, which displayed behind-the-scenes snapshots with a grinning Mr. Trump. Mr. Nugent, left, said the group was at the White House for four hours.

      Mr. Nugent, who posed, capped in a camouflage cowboy hat, with a seated Mr. Trump in the Oval Office, was the subject of a 2012 Secret Service investigation after suggesting violence toward Mr. Obama during that year’s re-election campaign.

      Not everyone was pleased with the visit.

      “Ted Nugent, vile racist who called Obama a subhuman mongrel, feted by Donald Trump. Disgusting, disgraceful,” Norman Ornstein, a progressive political scientist, wrote in a Twitter message.

      Mr. Nugent chortled when asked if he regretted his comments about Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton.

      “No! I will never apologize for calling out evil people,” he said, arguing that Mr. Obama “intentionally dismantled the American dream for eight years.”

  30. David F., N.A.
    April 21, 2017 at 01:52

    Didn’t MSNBC mention Jill Stein’s name more on election night than they had had during the two years leading up to the election? Those faces were priceless.


  31. frank balzer
    April 20, 2017 at 19:47

    HRC lost because she is 1. a creature of wall st. 2. a rigid neo-con militarist (she never met a war she didn’t like) & 3. inept and 4. rightwing (within her political career she never introduced, orchestrated support for, or passed any legislation that could labeled “for the people.”)

    • Zachary Smith
      April 21, 2017 at 00:31

      All of this contributed to a loss against her favorite Republican opponent who, despite his own set of horrible flaws, was was viewed by voters as less risky than herself.

      Since the election I’ve seen how the mental struggles of friends and relatives who voted for one or the other of them mirrors my own following the 2008 election – I clung to and excused Obama for far too long. I’ve had to patiently explain more than once that we Americans had a choice of two unacceptable candidates in 2016, and even though one of them was certainly going to be elected, I saw no need to identify (vote) for either of them. In my view an ax murderer with “only” 3 victims isn’t notably better than one who has chopped up 5 people. Trump is beginning to match Hillary in most ways, but even if he turns out “worse” than her, so what?

      Even then I wouldn’t wish for a time machine to go back and try to make the woman President.

      At some point there is too much evil in a candidate to get past the “gag” reflex.

  32. mike k
    April 20, 2017 at 16:26

    The so-called American political system is nothing but a huge bribery bazaar. To vote in this system is to enable a criminal conspiracy that is mostly carried out right in plain view of it’s victims – the American public.

  33. akech
    April 20, 2017 at 16:05

    Racism is an inner feeling which a racist harbors about another person of a different race. In my humble opinion, this harbored feeling can never, never, never ever be stamped out from a racist, even if you are able to create thousands of laws against!
    In a civilized society, the only thing a fair government with fair justice system can do is to ensure that the racist does not go out on a rampage and start wreaking physical, financial or social havoc on the objects those inner racist “episodes”! And this is the only type of protection any victim of racism should wish to be protected from.’

    Furthermore, I would prefer to know the faces of those racists who are hell bent on physically harming me; that critical knowledge would allow me execute my escape route far away from them and find some corner to survive. However, the slick predator/racist can never afford to give the object of his/her racism a room to escape. S(he) prefesr to operate from a close proximity by winking and smiling to ensure that the object of his/her resentment does not have a chance to escape!


    In just a couple of months after this encounter both Gaddafi and his Foreign Minister son would be gone! Hillary would be laughing and Barack Obama would be on cloud nine! Barack Obama never indicated to his cheering voters that this was his intention!



    Since 1985, the Democratic party has become populated with people whose main aim is to use, abuse, control or discard those constituents they call their base and then proceed on to implement policies that are harmful to these so called base! Lying to these voters is merely a means to some other personal political ends!

    Barack Obama treated those who voted for him with such contemptuous smiles while raining in on some innocent citizens of the world with drones. Most of the people killed on these drone attacks were innocent civilians who may not have understood why their lives were terminated.

    Hillary’s campaign mercilessly went after those constituents who supported Bernie Sanders with such vindictiveness that only well-paid David Brock could deliver; she then expected these despised Sander’s supporters to lick their wounds and put her in the White House allowing, her to advance those policies close to her personal pocket book theme: the promotion of TPP/ NEOCONS/MIC/Wall Street agenda around the world!

    There is no difference between an overt and a covert racist, except for the fact that covert racist does not allow the targeted victim a chance to escape; covert racist operates from a very close proximity using all sorts of disguises! Visiting African American Churches during election circles does not exonerate a covert racist from racist the damage s(he) does! Shouting racism during election cycles does nothing to help its victims!!


  34. mike k
    April 20, 2017 at 15:42

    I cannot understand why people are so obsessed with elections. Once you have understood that they are simply a mainstay of the we live in a democracy scam, it’s time to move on and realize that we will never get the world we want through voting for it. You are going to have to act differently if you want real change, Forget the #&@*ing elections and get busy working for the changes you want!

  35. Rubyjane
    April 20, 2017 at 11:00

    Hillary lost the general election because she never really won the Democratic primary..and everything went to hell from there.

    • Daniel
      April 20, 2017 at 14:43

      It is really as simple as that. Not to discount all of the commentary above, which I always find enlightening…

  36. Feliz Navidad
    April 20, 2017 at 09:34

    From the outset, Clinton made it clear that her tactic was to attract Republican voters, who, she assumed, would flip for her over Trump. Not only did that not happen, she alienated her Democratic base by running essentially as a Republican. This was particulary insulting as such a huge swath of the party had clearly signaled its displeasure with right-leaning Democrats with stunning support of formerly independent, Bernie Sanders.

    As well, her attacks on supporters of her opponents, “Bernie-Bros” and “Deplorables” revealed a stunning lack of character buttressed by class arrogance. This arrogance was perfectly reflected in the fire wall of her support — the Democratic super-delegates who steadfastly refused to hear the voices of their own base.

  37. F. G. Sanford
    April 20, 2017 at 09:05

    I think Johnny Rivers explained the whole whole thing with his 1966 hit single, “Secret Weiner Man”.

    There’s a man, they called him Carlos Danger
    To every teenage girl he was a stranger
    He sent them cell phone pics
    And tweeted lots of tricks
    Odds are he’s what ruined Clinton’s chances

    He’s the – Weiner Man
    Secret – Weiner Man
    They got his cellphone number, and that revealed his plan

    Beware of pretty pictures on your cellphone
    A pair of BVD’s might hide a nose cone
    Oh be careful what you tweet
    If you can’t be discrete
    Odds are that your shorts will cause a cyclone

    Secret – Weiner Man
    Secret – Weiner Man
    They took away your laptop, and your insurance plan

    Bopping on the campaign circuit one day
    Facing Huma’s lawyers on the next day
    Hillary’s perplexed
    Her server could be next
    Warrants for a search could come tomorrow

    Secret – Weiner Man
    Secret Weiner Man
    They’re drawing up the charges, to put you in the can!

  38. Jay
    April 20, 2017 at 08:50


    Hillary lost because she ran a horrid campaign–likely having the nomination stolen for her.

    She didn’t win by 2.8 million votes. She lost because she didn’t pay attention to the country, and she could articulate a reason to vote for her.

    All of these flaws were evident in 2007/8, she didn’t improve her chances later.

    • susan_sunflower
      April 20, 2017 at 12:13

      It’s worth considering that the reasons Clinton lost (a race she was widely expected to resoundingly win) are not the same reasons Trump won … the latter being perhaps more important in the long run.

  39. Jay
    April 20, 2017 at 08:41

    Patrick Lucius:

    Afrobleu is clinging to a narrative, like Marcotte, also afroblue apparently didn’t read my comment–just wanting to use my comment as a way to dismiss a point about Hillary’s weakness, and the repeated weakness of her defenders (Marcotte).

  40. dgvb
    April 20, 2017 at 03:50

    All you need to know about how Clinton lost the election is not a book, but just one sentence. She wasn’t Bernie Sanders. There it is. Anything else is just more ways for the Democrats to continue to BS themselves and everybody else.

  41. Marko
    April 20, 2017 at 00:06

    I’m relieved to read so many good , thoughtful rationales presented as to why Hillary lost. I was a little worried that maybe I’d gone too far with my ritual of sticking a new pin in my Hillary doll every day after she’d won the primary.

    I’m really glad it’s not 100% my fault , but I still wouldn’t mind claiming just a tiny bit of credit.

    So I do.

    • Joe Tedesky
      April 20, 2017 at 01:50

      Marko you better not say that too loud, because if Rachel and Hillary’s Russian interference angle doesn’t workout you will be next on their excuse list. If the media shows up at your front door here’s a piece of advice, just relax and enjoy the exposure because no matter what, good press or bad press, this is America and that’s how celebrities are made. Do you have any spare dolls? I’ll take a Hillary, Rachel, Donald, or any DC chump doll and stick it to them….I might even use nails.

      • Marko
        April 20, 2017 at 05:30

        “……I might even use nails. ”

        Oh no. I wish you hadn’t given me that idea. As things stand now , I can’t even see any of my Rachel doll , all I can see are the pinheads.

        No spare dolls though , sorry. I make them myself , and I can only manage to keep a couple in use at any one time. You see , for the stuffing I use my cat’s shedded fur , and though she throws off fur like a snow-blower , it goes really fast when you start stuffing a life-sized doll. I’m convinced the fur enhances the hex , though it’s not doing much to Rachel so far. She does seem to be getting a bit uglier over time , so I’m hopeful there may be something starting to happen. Maybe nails would boost the bad juju bigly — heck , I may as well give it a shot.

        Big rusty nails , yeah , that’s the ticket…..

      • Bob In Portland
        April 21, 2017 at 14:25

        Marko. That’s a Russian name, right?

        • Marko
          April 21, 2017 at 17:36

          Haha. No , not quite. It’s a nickname , like if Trump’s golf buddies started calling him Donaldo.

  42. Chris Jonsson
    April 19, 2017 at 23:55

    Hillary lost the election because she was a terrible candidate, she lied consistently, she cheated Bernie Sanders out of the primary which was reported on by Wikileaks before the DNC convention. Efforts to cover the dishonesty and fraud was revealed by Wikileaks. The DNC attempted to disappear their campaign emails spelling out how they sabotaged the Sanders campaign the start. A lame attempt was made in blaming the damning leaks on the Russians. The Russian BS has been carried out to the extreme, with the heavy lifting from the media.
    Bernie supporters were silenced and blocked from participating at the convention. Bernie was drawn to heel by Hillary and has been her slave ever since. Nobody believes what Bernie says anymore. Too bad. He could have beaten Trump, but Hillary made him into her foot soldier by using her billions in campaign donations and by controlling the Clinton owned DNC. No problem. Another opponent tanked, although Bernie put up a struggle in the beginning, making their job more difficult. Had to let the insurgent know that dissent will not be tolerated in the DNC now a days. So long New Deal Democrats. Your service is no longer required.

    • Joe Tedesky
      April 20, 2017 at 01:51

      The best thing Bernie could do is usher in a Gabbard, or any politician in DC like her.

  43. doray
    April 19, 2017 at 22:44

    War-mongering, corporate-loving, crooked-as-hell Clinton lost because the corporately owned and operated media covered Trump far more than Sanders. If they’d have given the same coverage, we’d most likely have a future to believe in instead of the pathological, corporate dick-slinging we’re stuck with now, (or until we figure out how to subvert the dominant heinous paradigm).

  44. Azzael
    April 19, 2017 at 20:55

    “The two parties have combined against us to nullify our power by a ‘gentleman’s agreement’ of non-recognition, no matter how we vote … May God write us down as asses if ever again we are found putting our trust in either the Republican or the Democratic Parties.” – W.E.B. DuBois

    “Dear Hillary Clinton Supporter, I am normally an empathetic, open-minded, and forgiving person. That is why, when I was listening to a friend (who supports Clinton … ”

    “I don’t care when a Clinton supporter tells me how worried or afraid they are if Trump wins. And the reason why is simple: They didn’t care when I expressed my frustration, anger, and sorrow at Bernie Sanders’s defeat. They told me I was wrong, that I was spouting conspiracy theories, and that I needed to get over it and get behind Clinton to beat Trump.

    Yet, over the past few months, I have seen evidence time and again that proved what I and other Sanders supporters were saying was true. The Democratic primary was rigged against him. No one can refute that now (although I’m sure plenty still will). Here is a list of the ways in which the “system was rigged” (to steal a Trump phrase) against Sanders and/or in favor of Clinton:”


    • susan_sunflower
      April 19, 2017 at 22:47

      yes, the “It’s just politics as usual” response was staggering … I admit it never occurred to me that the DNC would allow Sanders to win … that’s not how they roll … that’s not their kind of politics … I didn’t know what had moved him to volunteer to sheepdog the younger veterans of Obama’s Army, but I suspected he was there to keep them going Green or “worse” …

      The lack of contenders for the nomination, imho, spoke volumes, particularly when I considered a handful of younger politicians who should have been on the stage, to develop their national presence, if not for 2016 for 2020 (if needed) and certainly for 2024 if Clinton won — Cory Booker, Al Franken, Elizabeth Warren, and then more I’ve never heard of. They needed to be talked up because it was past time to be considering life after the baby boomers retirement. The next-generation needed to be officially introduced to the nation — better late than never. Through all those ridiculous investigation, the republicans had successfully managed to make a dozen younger not-very-interesting politicians household names. The Democrats needed to do something to counteract the appearance that they had no bench, that no one had shown up because it, in fact, was a coronation.

      It speaks badly of the DNC that (after Obama’s victory in 2008), Sander’s popularity apparently blindsided them … they hadn’t learned a thing from 2008 … and by appearances, they still haven’t. As of a couple weeks ago, it looked alarmingly as if Clinton was re-entering the public sphere and Team Clinton had no intention of loosening their grip of the Party …

      • LJ
        April 20, 2017 at 15:49

        You are too smart by half but why did the DNC let Obama win, was it Soros’s (and others) money ? The Clinton’s had already greased the skids unfortunately they didn’t own Dean’s 50 State strategy and by the way why did they get rid of Howard Dean so quickly way back long before now? He was sidelined but not as quickly as Jerry Brown in 1996 but who is the last man standing? Must have been because Howard Dean hooped and hollered. Yeah right. As for the Younger Democratic politicians who should have been on the stage, they are not groomed they are suppressed and the seniority system keeps them in place . Only a Governor with outside money could truly rock the Democratic Boat and they are spotted and groomed long before they would ever aspire to such heresy. . Still Pelosi is calling the shots. Her boy, Eric Slawell is being groomed now….., he’s a good Centrist military yes boy… watch it happen. Something is getting in the way of your thinking,, I can only imagine what but I like the way you write, very bright and engaging.. Peace in our Times. President Nixon Now More Than ever.

        • susan_sunflower
          April 20, 2017 at 20:59

          Teddy Kennedy was still alive and he backed Obama and loathed the Clintons … and the popular support and energy for Obama was the stuff political parties wet dream about … Don’t forget that that year’s contender included the much more near-socialist John Edwards who actually talked about — gasp — poverty … (did he actually mention the other now long forgotten and all but unmentionable word “peace” — I don’t remember).

          Obama “was allowed to win” because no one in their right mind would have jeopardized the black and brown vote, one he had proven he had the momentum to win (running against Old Man McCain and Sarah Palin improved his odds) …

          It was a nasty nasty primary race in many ways … that left a badly divided party, that was never reconciled, much less healed … If the Democratic Party apparently, during the 8 years of Obama, morphed into the Clinton Party even more than it had been … how and why they and Obama allowed this “boomer” control of the party to go unchallenged is worthy of a book of its own. Obama was SUPPOSED to reinvigorate the party … he either gave up or never tried … latter seems most likely … the question is why.

          • LJ
            April 21, 2017 at 15:59

            The two party system has been entrenched in all 3 branches of government for 170 years. The Constitution did not create a two party system but our Judges are partisan hacks nonetheless. The DNC and the RNC control what happens in the elections, the cash flow. This is not Democratic in any way. These people are insiders who do not face elections, they are coronated in house. Obama appointed Wasserman-Schultz for obvious reasons . She was a Hillary supporter and an insider in big time fund raising from a particularly generous special interest group. When the election happens even though tehncandidates talk of change, reform or draining the swamp this does not mean it is going to happen. Checks and balances and the legislated process, the senority system and politics, insider trading , dictate what will actually happen. Obama did not have a real agenda he was a Centrist and appointed Clintonites to the major Cabinet Positions and Chicagoans at Commerce and Chief of Staff who were also Clintonites. That and keeping gates and Paulson’s Bank Bailout Obama never gave himself a chance to ber anything but a rubber stamp or a White House Lawn Jockey. An old saving keep yoour friends and your enemies close. Obama kept the Clinton’s close. They were not friends.

  45. Ser Korz
    April 19, 2017 at 20:53

    She lied too big?

  46. Jessejean
    April 19, 2017 at 20:47

    Couldn’t happen to a more deserving gal.

  47. April 19, 2017 at 20:31

    After Obama’s weak, war-making, hopeless and changeless 8 years, Clinton telling folks that everything is fine, we’re the “indispensable nation” did not work. The people knew that everything isn’t fine. Clinton has no originality and she lacks the smooth and schmooze ability of her husband, she’s just dull. Smart but dull.

  48. April 19, 2017 at 20:28

    HRC won by 3 million votes. Analytics won it for Trump. (See the Jared Kushner Fortune interview). Desire for change was the dominant factor after every 8-year incumbency POTUS election with exception of 1836 & 1980. Trump’s stupidity had to have been a bit more extreme to have overcome the desire for change. HRC couldn’t win under these circumstances since it had only happened twice before in US history.

  49. Jay
    April 19, 2017 at 19:34


    “The second was racism. You can believe what you like but I still prefer statistics over anecdotal evidence.”

    No, there was no solid polling of just racists, who’d not voted in 2008/12, but suddenly decided to vote in 2016.

    Stop pushing these lies. And they are lies. Ms Marcotte already made a fool of herself with this garbage.

    What there was was big fall off in voter turnout, the whys of that are that it’s harder for the poor to vote, and yes, racists in the GOP have made it harder for black people, the poor (of all races) and brown people to vote in states like North Carolina and Florida. This fact does not make the “racists did it” delusion you’re pushing as an excuse for Hillary’s failures any more valid.

    Now, if you could point to polls of voters who’ve voted for twenty years, including polls of their racist, or non-racist, attitudes you could have a point, but you can’t point to those polls because they don’t exist.

    Hillary ran a horrid campaign and could barely articulate a reason to vote for her.

    Oh, and likely the nomination was stolen for her via outright fraud.

  50. John Albertini
    April 19, 2017 at 19:16

    She lost because she is a Goldwater Republican Corporate Puppet. Bernie would have won! Where have all the liberals and progressives gone? They are NOT in the Democratic Party any more! Witness the fraud of the DNC to get her the nomination.

    We voted for her only as the slightly, very slightly, lesser EVIL! But she never touched the masses because she is just a shill for the corporate elite who own her, bought with $150 million for speeches she refused to release. So why should the people in the bottom HALF, economically, have voted for her. NO REASON!!!

    THAT is why she lost!!!

  51. R Smith
    April 19, 2017 at 17:52

    Watching the train wreck that is Hellery Clinton from another country amazes me that anyone voted for her after she did the hatchet job on Bernie.

  52. Alexander R Buttny
    April 19, 2017 at 17:40

    Yikes Robert Parry,
    Once again I’m surprised at your opinon. You seem to be laying the Clinton lose solely at the feet of Clinton. You seem to be agreeing that Clinton outright lost the campaign when polling showed her as strong or winning right up to the voting. In other words, she/they may have missed the real currents in the country but she/they didn’t just flop. I’m speaking as a Bernie supporter (who jumped off the Clinton train very early after feeling she was failing to articulate a vision. She was IMO, running on, and reacting to, polls. As soon as Bernie hit I saw the candidate I was hoping for). So I do agree that the sabotage of Sanders by the DNC was a real disservice to the country. Sanders could have captured far more voters than Hilary did.
    But where in your analysis is CIA director’s Comey’s 11th-hour and unprecedented bombshell that they had more to investigate with the emails on the laptop of Anthony Weiner? I have seen studies of the polls before and after that ham-handed devastating announcement and the results seem clear. Nothing else had changed.
    Honestly, you seem like you have an axe to grind here with Ms Clinton. And not I’m not even a fan of hers.

    • evelync
      April 19, 2017 at 18:22

      Alexander, re your comment:
      “But where in your analysis is CIA director’s Comey’s 11th-hour and unprecedented bombshell that they had more to investigate with the emails on the laptop of Anthony Weiner?”

      I’ve have wondered about that too whenever the MSM and pollsters were claiming that things shifted after Comey’s 11th hour pronouncement.

      I’m a Bernie supporter too, btw, and during the primaries and before the election I met and also heard about, second hand, Republicans and Independents who said they may have disagreed with Bernie but they trusted him and voted for him. And as you may agree he certainly was the strongest candidate against Trump or any other Republican.

      I suspect what may have happened, given the enormous distrust of Clinton that was there all along, the Comey announcement may not have created the distrust that led to a shift in the polls. Instead the Comey announcement might have removed the self censorship (responding to polls, etc from already disillusioned Democrats and Independents who had lost faith in the Democratic Party and its standard bearer Clinton but had not yet come to the point of responding out loud about those feelings).

      Of course this is conjecture on my part, but the propaganda to “elect the first woman” and “Hillary is a shoo in” and all the rest was too strong for some people to buck that narrative to express their doubts and how they were beginning to feel because of the endless regime change wars and the irresponsible deregulation of the banking system and the unfair trade deals. People knew, but perhaps Comey allowed people to be more honest responding to a poll.

      Clinton was a very weak candidate, IMO.

      After reading the Truth Report on Honduras which explained how she followed right wing elements in the State Dept that supported the 2009 coup (She and Obama refused to call it a coup which would have ended military aide according to U.S. laws)
      the brutality and bloodshed that followed was horrific. (She called it a “hard choice” in one of her books) –
      I could not support her and in Texas voted for Bernie in the primary and Gary Johnson in November – not that I agreed with the libertarian philosophy but because he promised no more regime change.

      I think a lot of people lost trust in her because she represented the failed policies that led to so much pain for working people, but it was unacceptable to voice that mistrust publicly for some Democrats and maybe Comey played a role in making it acceptable to express those doubts.

      I guess what i’m saying is that Comey, after all, did not accuse her of anything, but his announcement that her actions were being scrutinized may have helped shatter a taboo.

    • susan_sunflower
      April 19, 2017 at 18:49

      The 350,000 e-mails were incidentally discovered on a previously unexamined laptop computer that Huma “never used” … in part because of the still missing Clinton e-mails, they needed to be opened and examined. They could not be opened without a separate subpoena (not covered under the Weiner phone sexting investigation subpoena). Rudy Guiliani had already hinted at “new developments.”

      What would you have done? He might have waited for Guliani (and others) to leak and let that unauthorized leak drip out over days. Do you think that would have been better?

      • susan_sunflower
        April 19, 2017 at 20:43

        my bad, it was 650,000 e-mails …

        I always assumed that Clinton was too ambitious and too smart to do something flagrantly stupid and career-endangering and what she did with her server/emails might have been brushed off as “bad housekeeping” or arrogance — except that various recollections and explanations either changed or were simply never provided … giving another “appearance of impropriety” even obstructionism. My sympathy eroded over time, people in high positions need to be accountable and need to be held accountable … it felt like a warning of what was likely to come during a second Clinton administration.

        The reports of her continuing paranoia about some disloyal aide sabotaging her campaign in 2008 are a surprise to me … both the paranoia and the “grudge-holding” but I discovered (I asked several over at Salon) that a number of the most virulent HRC-supporting Bernie Bashers had been PUMA’s who were still outraged to have lost in 2008. Their depth of feeling towards Bernie and his supporters amounted to loathing towards another wannabe usurper … Sanders had managed to threatened the Queen Bee and he and his supporters needed to be taken down. How much of the Bernie Bro outrage was either fake-news and how much was manufactured by various proxies eager to raise an ugly ruckus? I have no idea.

        • LJ
          April 19, 2017 at 22:02

          SS What you saw is what you get. Hillary was fired by the Sam Irwin Committee for lying on her first job.She believed she’d get away with it because she’s so smart and evrybody else is soooooo stoopid. Whitewater, Travelgate, Steven Foster’s Death and missing papers, SOS , Hillary has always acted out in the same way. She has a personality flaw like a visible twitch. It’s a female version of arrogance, hubris and entitlement. . That she could have been allowed to run for office in 2012 with the Super delegate support she had and with Wasserman-Schultz in the drivers seat of the DNC when everyone knew what they knew,,,well?????, and then the Democrats rallied around her , Poor Hillary, she’s persecuted because she’s a woman,,even B. Sanders , showed the depth of corruption of the Democratic Party. Thinkspeak bought and paid for, the Clinton’s were on a mission. They almost succeeded.

        • Skip Scott
          April 20, 2017 at 08:27

          As a retired radio operator who worked with classified info, I can tell you it was way more than “bad housekeeping” on Hillary’s part. We had separate removable hard drives that were kept in a safe for classified data. And we had nothing “Top Secret” or above. The law states that intent is not required for prosecution, just gross negligence, for mishandling of classified material. She should be in jail. It was pure arrogance on Hillary’s part. For her, “The rules are just for the little people.”

          • susan_sunflower
            April 20, 2017 at 10:40

            I’m not sure that indictments were warranted, but I meant that finding benign explanations — bad housekeeping — is how high level investigations often “go away” … Clinton’s lack of cooperation, changing details, bad memory, and public outrage at being investigated created a snowball magnifying effect for anyone paying attention … while Clinton supporters in turn stonewalled, refused to admit there was anything to investigate and blamed Comey (and Lynch and Obama at times) for Clinton’s self-perpetuating “persecution” … IMHO, the Clinton reaction to Comey’s subpoena announcement was infinitely more damaging than the announcement’s contents … I was astonished as Team Clinton announced that Comey had cost her the election before votes were cast … I even wondered if they were trying to lower expectations, finding an excuse should the results fail to meet the glorious, widely-circulated expectations.

  53. glitch
    April 19, 2017 at 17:29

    She came, we saw, she lost.

    Too many people saw that clip and were horrified and repulsed.

    Anybody who saw it and still voted for her I have serious reservations about.

    • glitch
      April 19, 2017 at 17:33
      • turk151
        April 20, 2017 at 01:09

        I was recently told by an exasperated Hillary fan that she does not care what happened to the Syrians or Libyans.

        The real issue is that women make 80% of men’s salaries and arent equally represented in the board rooms. Mass carnage, rape and destruction of families in the middle east is a bothersome annoyance.

  54. William
    April 19, 2017 at 17:18

    Hillary Clinton lost the election because she was Hillary Clinton. At this point and time, (19/04/2017), she couldn’t even run for ‘Director of Garbage Collectors’. And fortunately, the people knew this woman was a fruitcake and as dangerous as they come, so she lost. Unfortunately, there wasn’t much to chose from after the DNC ruined all the rest of the candidate’s chances by corruption and greed. The deep state wanted Hillary and no one else!! So they shot themselves in the foot and lost it all. Trying to sell Clinton to the people was not possible and the fixing of the votes just wasn’t enough! So we got Trump. End of story!

  55. Stiv
    April 19, 2017 at 16:38

    For sure the “blame” has to go to the crazy bad Clinton campaign for even letting the Trump/GOP forces get close. However, Trumps dysfunction is on him…to blame his idiocy on valid inquiries into his campaigns operations is a strange double standard. Clinton should take resonsibility for her loss yet Trump has to do had things because of investigations ..”they made him do it”.

  56. John Doe II
    April 19, 2017 at 16:38

    That Hillary singed on with Jewish ‘liberals’ about 25 yrs ago, is well known.
    There’s grand difference between Jewish ‘liberals’ and this century’s Progressives.

    Conservative Party Real Americans
    stick to their ‘right-to-bear-arms’
    never wanting to abandon Superiority
    based upon the blond whiteness of their being.

    Real Jewish liberals were as the aristocracy
    they were highly respected intellectuals
    taught by Kibbutzim, Jews from the tribe of Judah
    who sought after Community and understanding.

    Progressives are of that ilk- as Bernie Sanders
    Trump can’t see beyond himself and The Brand.
    never wanting to abandon racial Superiority
    based upon the blond whiteness of their being.


    • John Doe II
      April 19, 2017 at 16:40

      Ivanka’s golden appeal in China may be Trump’s secret weapon

      APRIL 18, 2017 .

      Much has been said about how the Chinese view US President Donald Trump, but recently thoughts have turned to the Chinese perception of his daughter Ivanka. Blond-haired, attractive, and interested in Chinese language and culture, she may be seen as the perfect foreigner. Many young Chinese women are enamored with her success and grace, looking up to her as a role model, though news sites also demonstrate general awareness of the controversies surrounding her and how her appeal might be deliberately used to placate China.

      With her light hair, eyes and skin in addition to her family background and her own successful fashion line, Ivanka fulfills the ideal of ???, “white (pale), rich, and beautiful”, which is used in Chinese pop culture to describe the perfect woman. Her golden coloring comes across as all-American, the prototypical image of a Westerner. In a land where physical attractiveness is still seen as practically a moral virtue (my colleagues and students in China were at least as delighted to have a “pretty” female foreign teacher as by my ability to speak their language), this goes a long way to promoting her image abroad.

      • Abe
        April 19, 2017 at 17:03

        Wonder if Daddy or Little Cushball will mind if President Xi grabs Ivanka by her, um, “golden appeal”?

      • John Doe II
        April 19, 2017 at 17:07

        Definitions of Lucent

        Lucent things shine or glow with light. On a clear night, the full moon is lucent in the sky.

        The literary word lucent essentially means “luminous” or “radiant,” glowing with a soft, bright light.

        You’re most likely to encounter it in a poem or novel, describing the stars or white flowers in the dusk,
        or someone’ s beautiful pale face.

        It comes from the Latin lucentem, from lucere, “to shine.” ( as does the name Lucifer )

        … just say’n

  57. Bob In Portland
    April 19, 2017 at 16:11

    I’m waiting for someone to write the book, but both Clintons were apparently recruited by the feds to spy back in the late 1960s, probably 1968. Bill’s classmates in Britain at the time assumed he was CIA, and being a student there would put him in a good position to monitor anti-war activities in Europe, which he seemed somewhat involved with. At the same time Hillary was inserting herself into the Democratic Party and first monitoring a Black Panther trial in New Haven, Connecticut, and then during an internship with the law firm in Oakland, California which represented most of the Black Panther legal issues there. That would fit nicely with the FBI’s COINTELPRO program, whose main target at the time was the Black Panther Party.

    If you look at US intelligence’s priorities at the time, the Democratic Party in 1968 was still not cleaved from the subtly radical vision of what JFK had envisioned. One way to steer the party into the control of the Deep State was to remove the political icons of the left: Robert Kennedy, who would have blown his brother’s murder out of the water and started a civil war between the CIA, its clients, and the working class. Martin Luther King was similarly dispatched for similar reasons.

    But beyond eliminating political figures who threatened them the Deep State needed their own Democrats to tow their party line. As a college student back in the day, if I attended a peace rally I could expect a COINTELPRO asset nearby ready to throw a brick, if not someone from the CIA, the DIA, the ONI and maybe the local police red squad watching and taking down names. If the government was willing to spend money to put spies in peace groups and unions, it was certainly willing to recruit people with bigger personal roles and greater potential as politicians.

    During the 2016 primaries Hillary Clinton endorsed any possibility of a war against Russia and its allies while downplaying any real progressive actions suggested by Sanders, like free college education, raising the minimum wage, single-payer, the end of the drug war, and a restructuring of the tax system to raise taxes on the wealthy. She addressed those topics as little as possible and after getting the nomination eliminated those topics almost entirely from her campaign stops.

    Unless you were enthralled by her gender there was very little that Clinton or the DNC offered to the working class.

    • LJ
      April 19, 2017 at 17:08

      Attend a meeting in a room full of activists today and you can be certain there are intelligence assets in the room. You can also be assured that everyone there has been triangulated by “Intelligence” several times and are under surveillance. Later, attend a march or protest and there are also the black clad “anarchists” there. Some of them are also intelligence moles also . Certain acts in Oakland for instance by these ‘anarchists” make you wonder what they are thinking and what they are trying to accomplish. Things haven’t changed a lot I don’t think from those heady days of the 60’s There just isn’t much LSD around any more but the Medicinal smoke and various candies and oils will do in a pinch..There will always be climbers wanting to loan themselves to the CIA and it is surprising these days how many people freely admit that they have provided information and taken money and perks for their efforts. I remember when I was a kid we made fun of East Germany. Different Germany I suppose now.

      • Bob In Portland
        April 19, 2017 at 20:54

        And, of course, that doesn’t count the parts of the Deep State that have been privatized. In the late 80s, early 90s in the San Francisco Bay Area, there was a private spying operation being run through, of all things, the ADL of B’nai B’rith. My union was being spied by them via dumpster-diving and undoubtedly humint gathered at our meetings; the number of organizations, unions, businesses, political figures, etc., totaled over 900. Among the employees of this op was a former FBI asset and a cop from the SFPD who had photographs of people blindfolded and strapped to chairs in his locker at work. He disappeared to the Philippines. He had been “tasked” to the CIA in Central America and North Africa prior to spying on student anti-apartheid groups, groups against Shell Oil, etc. The ACLU office in SF wrote a paper about it.

        Why would the spies privatize spying operations? When we sued in court to get access to the information that was collected on us the judge ruled that it was private property and that those who wanted to see why they were being spied on were out of luck. Funny how justice is served.

        • Abe
          April 20, 2017 at 20:47

          The ADL, of all things. Who knew?

          Appreciating your c99p contribution, Bob. Thanks much.

  58. April 19, 2017 at 15:56

    Very well written!!! with on target analysis. A pleasure to read.

    My favorite line: I realize that people who have been watching Rachel Maddow and other MSNBC programs – as well as reading The New York Times and The Washington Post for the past four months – “know” that Clinton ran a brilliant campaign that was only derailed because of “Russian meddling.” Priceless.

  59. April 19, 2017 at 15:46

    Thanks, Abe, Greg Palast always has points to say that get overlooked, but it still shows election fraud prevails even at local levels. Bernie could have gotten the nomination if the primaries hadn’t been stolen.

  60. April 19, 2017 at 15:16

    ‘Endless campaign mode’ is how Mike Lofgren put it in his book “The Deep State” which has a good subtitle which I forget, and he spent 28 years in government. It’s a good book from an insider congressional analyst. US politics starts revving up for the next cycle as soon as the oaths are taken.

    There was definitely no substantial discussion of issues in the campaign, the wars did not even get brought up by the media in debates, Bernie barely mentioned them. It was all a show, more so than ever because of Trump, and Hillary Clinton has no ability to entertain, she is so wooden. Whoever said it was all personality focus is right.

    This is not a democracy here, it is an oligarchy, or a corporatocracy. Citizens United put the nail in the coffin of democracy. It was already bad with the corruption from lobbying. Are there any fair elections here? I doubt it, politicians have become so corrupt, from State to Federal level. The 2000 election was definitely stolen by the Supreme Court, and it’s likely 2004 was also stolen by fraud. As for Obama, maybe he won but he certainly didn’t govern democratically, the War machine took over.

    I read a couple of the right-wing books about Clinton during the campaign, by Ed Klein and by the Secret Service agent who served during Bill Clinton’s administration. The books and the agents’ statements were quite believable, and those who had been long serving said that Hillary Clinton was the nastiest person they had to protect in all their years at the White House. Klein’s book which uncovered the machinations of the Clinton Foundation had, I would think, a large influence on many people of either party, showing the corruption. This book reviewed here shows that Clinton out-Nixoned Nixon. I certainly hope she will “stay in the woods”, as Bill Maher advised. As for her gaining more popular votes, most came from California and New York, both states of the false “liberal” bastion.

  61. Abe
    April 19, 2017 at 14:45

    How Hillary Clinton™ Really Won:

    National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster, a pro-interventionist Hillary Clinton brand ambassador, pushed for Trump’s Tomahawk missile strike on Syria.

    “McMaster is a loyalist of disgraced former CIA director and convicted criminal General David Petraeus, being a part of his inner circle during the disastrous occupation of Iraq. As Mike Cernovich says, it is now “Trump supporters out, pro-war Petraeus puppets in.” Interestingly, Petraeus and Hillary Clinton are two peas in a pod in their embrace of military interventionism and American exceptionalism. Do we have Clinton in the White House by stealth?

    “What else apart from a security establishment coup driven by those in the service of the military industrial complex lies behind Trump’s decision to strike Syria? […] he must sacrifice his previous views and embrace NATO, abandon détente with Russia in favour of the prevailing hostility, embark on military adventurism with gay abandon and sign on to the regime change agenda in Syria. In other words, he has to assign foreign policy to the Generals in his administration, war hawks in Congress and war planners in the think tank community.

    “Another motivation is the ceaseless, relentless war staged on him by the media establishment. They are like a dog with a bone and they will not let go until he is impeached. The RussiaGate scandal, though it lost some momentum, will not be let go of by the media. While the real scandals are the surveillance on Trump which implicates Obama and the felony of leaking Flynn’s surveilled conversations, the media remains fixated on RussiaGate and election interference – another groundless accusation that the media insists is an indisputable fact.

    “Now, after Trump’s strike on Syria – purportedly as a humane reaction to the horrendous suffering of civilians at the hands of the ‘animal’ Assad – voila, we have a media swooning over him like a love-struck teenager. All is forgiven and Trump gets a honeymoon ride…at least for a little while. He has adopted American exceptionalism and its manifest destiny to police the world and punish evildoers who offend the US-led world order. He has shown himself willing to be the figurehead of an empire desperately pushing back against the withering of its hegemony. This is what is demanded by the media: control of the world first, domestic concerns second.”

    Trump’s Strike on Syria Driven by the Deep State
    Paul Mansfield

    • susan_sunflower
      April 19, 2017 at 15:13

      good points … the neocons refused to concede or “be led” instead they have tamed the new President, at least wrt foreign policy and interventionism … Rather alarming how inflated reports of some new wide-spread approval of our newly blooded president were … considering how very “situational” that approval like was and will be (particularly with many doubting the official story’s particulars wrt the gas attack) … Today’s story that Team Trump simply lied about the “mission” and direction of travel of aircraft carrier and miliary vessels at sea should give additional pause … if you’re gonna lie, the durability of that lie should be greater than 72 hours or whatever.

      SEOUL, South Korea — When news broke less than two weeks ago that the Trump administration was sending the aircraft carrier Carl Vinson to the Korean Peninsula, many South Koreans feared a possible war with North Korea. Others cheered for Washington, calling the deployment a powerful symbol of its commitment to deterring the North.

      On Wednesday, after it was revealed that the carrier strike group was actually thousands of miles away and had been heading in the opposite direction, toward the Indian Ocean, South Koreans felt bewildered, cheated and manipulated by the United States, their country’s most important ally.

      who’s laughing?

      • D5-5
        April 19, 2017 at 20:23

        There is also, lingering, the mystery of the missiles. Did 36 go astray or not? If so, where did they go and who is responsible? There are many answers to these questions, none verified to my knowledge. I was reading today the missile strike was on the schedule prior to April 4.

    • D5-5
      April 19, 2017 at 20:14

      Seems to me the example here is dead-on re what’s wrong with Trump. That is, he has ended up with a general in line with Clinton’s and might as well be Clinton. His grasp is very small, and I don’t mean just his hands. So he will need to be led, continually.

  62. April 19, 2017 at 14:10

    Does it make any difference that Clinton “Lost.” ?
    Interesting article below: Who is really running the “show”?
    April 19 ,2017
    BY AHT Staff
    Saudi Arabia Bribed US into Yemen War with $200bln

  63. susan_sunflower
    April 19, 2017 at 13:52

    This morning, NBC is again flogging the Stein ate dinner with Flynn and the Russians and cost Clinton the election in crucial state races…

    Stephen Cohen on John Batchelor mentions the revelation that a FISA warrant was granted to investigate/surveille fairly peripheral Trump associate Carter Page on the basis of the Steele (HRC paid for) dodgy dossier …
    (we had been previously assured that although applied for, all FISA requests to surveille Trump himself had been denies; except that it’s also been revealed that FISA denies no requests… )

    I think that Clinton assumed that the p*ssygrab video (which she had had since the spring and had delayed releasing until after Trump was the anointed candidate) would sink him … The Steele Dossier was circulated and turned over to the FBI in Auigust, also after Trump was the anointed candidate. (No one has asked what the Clinton campaign knew about the dossier’s contents and when they knew it). In hindsight, it appears they thought/ assumed that the FBI investigation — instigated by the Steele dossier — would demolish Trump before election day …

    (GuilianI had already hinted at forthcoming revelations from Weiner/Abedin’s laptop … I personally believe Comey’s announcement was an effort to defuse an impending “bombshell” leak of the new subpoena and 350,000 e-mails … and thought the Clinton campaign’s overreaction backfired, suggesting both vulnerability (some exclaimed that Comey had cost Clinton the election before votes were cast) as well as even something like the appearance of “consciousness of guilt” panic.

    fivethirtyeight:: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-did-comey-hurt-clintons-chances/ 11/06/2016

    The change corresponds with Clinton’s drop in the national popular-vote lead: from a 5.7-percentage-point lead in our estimate on Oct. 28 to a 2.9-point lead now — so a swing of about 3 points against her.

    (hint: She still had a 2.9 point lead)

    • susan_sunflower
      April 19, 2017 at 14:18

      Just because it hasn’t been mentioned much by anyone I’ve seen, the British were warning the USA about Trump’s “Russian ties” going back to 2015 …

      In a report [March 2017] last month the New York Times, citing three US intelligence officials, said warning signs had been building throughout last summer but were far from clear. As WikiLeaks published emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee, US agencies began picking up conversations in which Russians were discussing contacts with Trump associates, the paper said.

      European allies were supplying information about people close to Trump meeting with Russians in Britain, the Netherlands and in other countries, the Times said.

      As with Manafort, who has been under investigation for nearly a year, I have to wonder if there’s considerably more smoke than fire … It appears that a “fix” to destroy Trump was long planned, and — somehow — failed to deliver … The almost universal pre-election silence wrt his “mob” connections (long-standing and well documented, even if he’s remained tefloned from indictment) is — to me — another inexplicable curiosity. Was it fear of organized crime or fear of Trump’s lawyers that kept the subject muted?
      (I have always thought Trump was/is dirty, and am appalled to have a known associate of organized crime in the White House … selling American real estate to Russian oligarchs not.so.much… let’s see Washingtonian outrage over their tax avoidance and money (ruple) laundering.


      (Stephen Cohen thinks “they” are doubling down on trying to cripple Trump via Russian links scandal … be concerned that a dying cornered beast is supremely dangerous … and to the extent that this response to losing an election may well be worse than “losing an election” … we’re screwed.

  64. LJ
    April 19, 2017 at 13:45

    It ( Hillary) lost in 2008, straight up with an overwhelming advantage at the DNC and in the Superdelegate count. . . She was not the candidate of change. Her Yuckiness factor is off the scale. She is gross Gaping Maw not withstanding ! She epitomizes corruption. Sanders would have won a fair fight. The move to the right under W.J. Clinton (Bill Bubba Blythe) was a disaster for the base of the Democratic Party. Labor, the core constituency was abandoned for NY Finance and the new Billionaire class. The Democrats did not deliver on anything. Lousy , unsustainabke health care and MORE WAR.. They are now the party of War. Bill Clinton gave China favored nation trading status after Tinnamen Square, repealed Taft Hartley, advanced the concentration of media into fewer and fewer hands, did little to nothing for the environment, did absolutely nothing for the Handicapped and they vote in the millions, in 8 years, he did little on education. Clinton was a do nothing disaster for the American People . Then his wife as SOS solicited donations from Foreigners for the Clinton Foundation and hid her actions on a private Server that was illegal. I’m sorry, the Democrats are dying of a self inflicted protracted suicide of 1000 cuts and counting . And still, you have Pelosi and Feinstein etc. bragging about how great they are, and Still you have the Democrats selling out the people and capitulating to a narrow special interest group that is best associated with and represented by the New York Times. In my humble opinion the Democratic Party in it’s present form should die and a new left wing Democratic Party should emerge. I say forget trying to fix it, Let it die of corruption and cancer or Kill it. The only thing the Dems have going for them is that they are not in power and Trump is > PERIOD. That is nothing to run on an a Mid-term victory and even a landslide changes nothing. Cut out the cancer or let it die. Hillary Clinton should never be associated with the Democratic party ever again. Her or any other Centrist Traitor to the American people, Good-bye, Good Riddance.

  65. gijoe
    April 19, 2017 at 13:44

    If Maddow does do what you mention in the article, it would be a disgrace on her part because the company where she works (and is essentially paying her bills), had the authors on Brian Williams show: http://www.msnbc.com/brian-williams/watch/shattered-authors-share-the-story-behind-hillary-clinton-s-loss-924162115732.

  66. elmerfudzie
    April 19, 2017 at 13:43

    In an age where the citizens of this world are expected to tolerate, even accept!, privacy invasions such as the “internet of things”, spying TV’ apps observing our movements, in private dwellings, doubleclick.com collecting and storing storing every website web surfers use, smartphones that can track our location and so on… I do believe Americans have a right to dispense with protections under the “HIPAA privacy Act in cases where candidates are running for any high office. The Rasmussen poll has shown that 59% want Hillary’s health records released, this sort of privilege extends as well to releasing personal tax returns (Trump). Let’s recall political embarrassments such as Nelson Rockefeller, who’s released tax records showed that he paid NO federal income taxes in 1970. No doubt we’d all suffer the same shock once Hillary’s medical records are opened to the voting public! The more we as a nation succumb to clear violations of Amendment IV of the Bill of Rights (secure in our houses, papers against unreasonable searches and seizures) for example, NSA’s mass surveillance of everyone, everywhere, so shall our federal leadership; senators and representatives succumb to releasing their medical and financial records for public scrutiny.

  67. ridgewalker
    April 19, 2017 at 13:42

    If Clinton had been an effective candidate Trump’s Russian inspired and aided methods of deepening our societies divides would have been wholly ineffective. She was a flawed candidate and the democratic party hierarchy of urban elites were simply ignorant of how American voters were thinking and feeling. We need a real people’s party, both the democratic and republican parties are DOA and not revivable.

  68. cmp
    April 19, 2017 at 13:16

    To be completely honest with you, I feel sorry for Hillary; (.. as well as, many others, who are direct and indirect victims of the disease) .. Because, I believe that they suffer from a long disease which goes all the way back to the cave. .. And, for which, we have yet to find a cure. The disease has many techno-babble names, descriptions, and characteristics, but, it’s easily recognizable as (.. cave like..) predatory greed.

    But, because of my faith in humanity, I believe that the disease may eventually be arrested. (.. e.g.; as a physical example: before Insulin, just one of the characteristics and beliefs of the diabetic, was that they were thought to be crazy.)

    The deliberate and obvious theft of our airwaves has greatly exasperated the cross contamination of this tragic mental disease. .. And, because of this theft, I believe to a point, that there is some truth to this line from the great film ‘Network’ of 1976:
    Max Schumacher: [about Diana] .. I’m not sure she’s capable of any real feelings. She’s of the television generation. She learned life from Bugs Bunny. The only reality she knows comes to her from over the TV set.

    Now Uncle Sam, he currently has two children. .. And, both of these children are Crack Addicts. .. And, every day both of these children keep spinning all of their lies – deeper and deeper – for another puff on the pipe. .. Now, do we really believe that as a family, we can stop any of the insanity – as long as our children continue drowning in the Crack (.. money..) that has submerged Washington DC? .. Our State Legislatures? .. Our County Boards? .. Our City Halls?

    .. not that I really care, but I believe that the one of the authors of the book, her name is Amie, and not Annie.

  69. Paul G.
    April 19, 2017 at 12:34

    There is one thing more disturbing than Trump; it is the spectacular failure, so far, of the Democratic( an oxymoron) Party to acknowledge they ran a corrupt, anti-democratic, influenced peddling war monger for the nation’s highest office. They had a chance at correction by electing Keith Ellison as chair of the DNC but chose Clintonista, Obamabot Tom Perez for the position.

    Although Bernie is now accompanying him on a 6000 mile tour (his minder?), it is questionable the DNC has learned its lesson. The question is whether the Vermont Senator is being taken seriously by the insiders, or is just being used as a “sheepdog” to bring progressive along.

    The constant whining about “the Russians” is the sign of a loser institution that is totally blind to its own faults and unwilling to face the music and clean house of the Hillarybots that led it down the path to ruin.

    If we had a parliamentary system it wouldn’t matter so much as another party could rise to the occasion, but with our system we’re stuck with these jerks.

    • DannyWeil
      April 19, 2017 at 12:39

      Democracy does not work and is failing all, over the world. America was founded as a republic not a democracy and this is poorly understood.

      A democracy is rule by the omnipotent majority. In a democracy, an individual, and any group of individuals composing any minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of the majority. It is a case of Majority-over-Man.

      A republic is similar to a representative democracy except it has a written constitution of basic rights that protect the minority from being completely unrepresented or overridden by the majority. And these can never be trampled on.

      America has gone from a Republic to a representative plutocratic democracy, meaning those elected reprsent the rich and the powerful. In other words, like Rome, America is dying.

      • April 19, 2017 at 13:45

        America…the bastion of rabid capitalism

      • Sam F
        April 19, 2017 at 19:23

        I avoid the “democracy vs. republic” concept used by the Repubs. Democracy (Greek origin) = Republic (Latin origin) = government by the people. It can have tyrannies, oligarchy, constitutions, etc. regardless of the name.

        Aristotle does speak (in his Politics) of small disorganized democracies vs. constitutional democracies (which some call republics) but that was a very early sketch based only upon examples of small unstable city-states.

        The Repub propaganda claims without historical or rational basis, that without their oligarchy of economic power, any democracy is merely “mob rule” which is of course nonsense. A constitution is essential, but tyranny and economic corruption work fine with or without a constitution, unless it protects the institutions of democracy.

        The problem is finding the path to constitutional amendments to restore our democracy, to protect it against economic power. Neither the Repubs nor the Dems intend to do that.

    • susan_sunflower
      April 19, 2017 at 13:30

      I think — don’t know — that Sanders is acting pragmatically because the eventual (possibly inevitable) collapse of the Democratic party and/or the duopoly, will ultimately leave many even more poorly represented … because American democracy (aspirationally) not just the presidency, it’s also at the city, county and state level. If you look at the election results map by county, the Democratic party has already collapsed … you can even look at Bill Clinton and Barak Obama being held hostage by a hostile Republican dominated congress (at least for parts of their terms) as the states and counties hemorrhaged democratic representatives in our national congress and state houses.

      In my lifetime, there have been several well-funded “professional” attempts at creating a Democratic party alternative … not necessarily “leftist” or glaringly liberal, Tom Friedman proposed a Bloomberg-Scarborough third party in 2016. The “New Party” was founded in 1992 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Party_(United_States)) There are in existence a couple dozen “third” parties in existence. I found, iirc, 5 socialist parties on my Colorado presidential ballot (and wrote in another party that had not qualified). Both the Working Families Party and the Pirate Party have shown signs of life in the few years.

      IMHO, it’s time to inventory (and strengthen) existent movements/parties and see what “working together” might accomplish … and pay attention not only to nationalism in the European elections, but also how the traditional liberal parties there are responding to quite real threats to their long-standing power.

      • Dave P.
        April 19, 2017 at 23:45

        It is a waste of time to keep talking about Bernie Sanders. Bernie Sanders is damaged goods, a different type of manipulator.

        Just to vote, I marked X in front of his name during primaries, knowing full well that this man did not even bring up the issues of our foreign interventionist adventures in other countries, and how much they are costing the taxpayers – and of course destroying social fabric and infrastructure of those countries to pieces as well.

        Building socialism implies peaceful foreign policy. Socialism and making Wars do not go together. How he would have built his so called socialism, which he was peddling, if we as a country keep on spending over a trillion dollars on Defense, Wars, and this gigantic Intelligence Apparatus. It does not make sense.

        His foreign policy would have been no different than Clinton’s.

    • D5-5
      April 19, 2017 at 14:54

      Sanders won’t be bringing progressives along en masse, I suspect, as it might be difficult to get back the 40% of his supporters who immediately quit him when he quit (after saying he would fight to the last vote at the nominating convention) last summer.

      • susan_sunflower
        April 19, 2017 at 15:05

        I haven’t seen any numbers (at all) to support the idea that Sanders’ voters abandoned the Democratic party and/or voted for “someone” other than Clinton … have you?

        • D5-5
          April 19, 2017 at 16:13

          I haven’t. My impression is a lot of them did not vote for HRC. This 40% figure is based on how many quit the DNC following his quitting the race (and this is my memory of it, I don’t have a link).

          I’m having trouble giving Sanders credit for anything viable at this point, following being very enthusiastic for him a year ago. You may well be right about his being “pragmatic,” but I’m having a hard time believing that means anything other than face-saving, ego-boosting activity on his part. I hope I’m wrong.

          I was interested from your previous discussion to check on the county level of support for Trump, and with some slight variation it seems to come out at—

          Trump won 30 of 50 states and 2,623 counties to 20 states and 489 counties. Hill’s vote plurality came from California and New York mainly.

          I think this needs to be considered in the tendency to automatically assume she won due to popular vote alone, and as an argument for the electoral system. I’m not clear myself on what’s best, still seeking . . .

          • susan_sunflower
            April 19, 2017 at 18:27

            It’s a genuine challenge to avoid the “tyranny of the majority” and the city mouse/country mouse disparites, particularly as income inequality favors the vibrant and wealthy coastal magnet cities. Same problem in Egypt, Iran and reportedly Turkey wrt Erdogan’s referendum. Doing away with Electoral College winner-take-all states would be a start, although as a “states’ right issue” that would need majority approval in each of those states … see also thwarting ongoing efforts at gerrymandering, see also voter enfranchisement.

            It’s possible to “do the math” and understand that Sander’s new-grassroots efforts are the best and fastest way to undo damage done, prevent future damage and eventually maybe create a stage full of potential candidates, remember the 2008 primary stage? The problem(s) are so much deeper than Clinton’s loss …

          • Sam F
            April 19, 2017 at 19:29

            Sanders will continue the wars for Israel. Any other progressive will not.

            Let’s dump the sheepdogs and put everything into those who care about humanity.

  70. Lin Cleveland
    April 19, 2017 at 12:19

    I selected three points for my comment.

    The book cites a second reason for Clinton’s dismal performance – her team’s reliance on analytics rather than on reaching out to real voters and their concerns.

    This hysteria over Russia-gate has consumed the first several months of the Trump presidency – badgering the Trump administration into a more belligerent posture toward nuclear-armed Russia – but leaving little incentive for the Democrats to assess what they need to do to appeal to working-class voters who chose Trump’s empty-headed populism over Clinton’s cold-hearted calculations.

    So, perhaps this new book about how Hillary Clinton really lost Campaign 2016 will enable national Democrats to finally start charting a course correction before the party slams another Titanic-style campaign into another iceberg.

    Personally, I do not feel anxious for the DNC to revamp its campaign strategy. This system run by two colluding parties both working in consort with Wall Street, the media and the Empire’s military to keep any third party candidates locked out of the public debate is a slap in the face to real democracy. You won’t find one word about political parties in the U,S. Constitution! Too many politicians work harder on creating a winning image and appealing to identity politics than real solutions to the major problems we face today. Did you know that in the ad biz manufacturers often spend more on packaging design than on the product inside the box? A whole lot of research goes into studying the subliminal effects of colors, images and such on the buyer. Political strategists do that, too. Campaigners omit “uncomfortable truths” and sometimes lie to attract your vote. Most people do know this yet feel obligated to pick the person who presents the more attractive fibs! We need more information, (transparency), and more options! No one should feel it’s her/his civic duty to vote against his own interests.

    I read a pretty good question today, “Why diid millions of voters choose greed over Green?”

  71. Dr. Ibrahim Soudy
    April 19, 2017 at 12:15

    The reason for why Clinton lost and Trump won is very simple and has nothing to do with mistakes……….THE EMPIRE IS COLLAPSING because the SYSTEM itself has no safety valves in it………The political system is no more than a CIRCUS to give the SLEEPING MASSES a false sense that they have a say in the game…………The BANKERS (led by Financial Terrorists called Goldman Sachs) have the ultimate say in the operations. During the campaign, people wanted to see the transcripts of Hillary’s talks to Goldman Sachs, right?! Guess what, Trump gave the most powerful positions in his cabinet to, hmmmm, Goldman Sachs people!!! See, Goldman Sachs (the BANKERS) always WIN…………Americans on the other hand are busy talking, reading, and writing about who won or who lost and why!! The BANKERS are delighted to know that………….keep wasting time about anything as long as you continue to be a slave for Goldman Sachs and Associates…………..

    • nancy
      April 19, 2017 at 14:24

      The American people always lose in these charades.

      • Bill Bodden
        April 19, 2017 at 14:45

        The American people always lose in these charades.

        And they will continue to lose as long as they are willing to believe the lies from the Democratic and Republican parties and their propagandists.

  72. Abe
    April 19, 2017 at 12:08

    Like so many Americans, investigative journalist and progressive comrade Greg Palast, whose work I typically appreciate, got it totally wrong on 7 April 2017:

    “Trump is taking out one airfield. That’s like taking out Mar-al-Lago and leaving Trump Tower. Hillary says, take’m ALL out. Never thought I’d say this until today: Damn, I miss that woman.

    “For years, too many of my progressive comrades have simply denied the slow-motion holocaust in Syria. When we talk about woman’s rights, how about the right not to see your child vomit out their intestines?”


    Lives matter, Greg. And “that woman” you “miss” so much helped instigate the slow-motion holocaust in Syria.

    Get a clue.

    • nancy
      April 19, 2017 at 14:22

      Greg Palast seems to be losing his grip on reality.

  73. John Doe II
    April 19, 2017 at 12:05

    Harry — “Nobody on the Left seems to realize that Americans rejected HRC en masse because they were sick of the Clintons”

    Yes, Harry, en masse… .

    Hillary Clinton Leads by 2.8 Million in Final Popular Vote Count.
    In the final count, Hillary Clinton’s lead in the popular vote
    of the 2016 presidential election was nearly three million votes.
    Dec 20, 2016

    All Hail the electoral college and it’s fidelity to slavery in these United States of Inequality – !!!


  74. turk151
    April 19, 2017 at 12:01

    Somehow, “Vote for Hillary or you are a misogynist racist!” just did not work, who would have thought?

  75. Sam F
    April 19, 2017 at 11:49

    There will be no political reform until we have constitutional amendments restricting funding of mass media and elections to limited registered individual contributions. We will not get that by peaceful means because those tools of democracy are owned by the oligarchy. Political action will fail except as education. The Dems are even more absurd as a focus of political action, as they are completely owned by oligarchy as a backstop in case the Repubs miscalculate.

    We do not live in a democracy, and those who pretend otherwise are working for the enemy whether they see that now or at the end of their lives. They will have contributed to preventing the restoration of democracy, and nothing more, like so many generations before them. Restoration of democracy is not a political choice on offer and never will be until the right wing revolution of oligarchy is overthrown.

    • DannyWeil
      April 19, 2017 at 12:34

      Correct. They must be seen as the Czar of Russia was, in 1915, or as Marie Antoinette, etc. They are gangsters, criminals.

    • Bill Bodden
      April 19, 2017 at 14:42

      There will be no political reform until we have constitutional amendments restricting funding of mass media and elections to limited registered individual contributions.

      There will be no political reform leading to the writing of a better constitution until an honest and enlightened leader emerges and the electorate shows greater intelligence and moral and ethical probity to elect such a leader. If the Second Coming – assuming there was a First – brought Jesus Christ back to Planet Earth and he ran for president he would be crucified again or assassinated by other means.

    • SteveK9
      April 19, 2017 at 17:10

      No matter how many ads a candidate runs, we don’t HAVE to be taken in by bullshit. I have a new policy we should all adopt. Whoever runs the most ads … vote for their opponent. You don’t even have to pay attention to issues and you will be on the right side most of the time.

  76. Abe
    April 19, 2017 at 11:41

    The supposed “disruptor” status of the Trump candidacy and presidency was a “Reality TV” masquerade.

    All the brouhaha about alleged “Russian meddling” in the American election is a cover for the fact that “Hillary Clinton” (the political reality she represents) really won in the form of a warmongering “Donald Trump”.

    In 2015, after Hillary Clinton declared her candidacy, geopolitical analyst Ulson Gunnar wrote:

    “Hillary = Obama = Bush Jr. = Clinton = Bush Sr.

    “With Hillary Clinton’s announcement that she is running for office in 2016 with President Obama’s full endorsement, those infected with neo-liberalism and wandering the corridors of this house of mirrors see yet another distorted, ghoulish image staring back, but one they are yet again ready to embrace.

    “Here is a woman who as US Secretary of State laughed and mocked the Libyan people upon hearing their leader had been murdered by terrorists in what constituted by all accounts a war crime. Before that, she played an active role in selling the war upon Libya in 2011 to the American left (as the American right had already desired such a war for years and needed no convincing). By 2016 we may have yet another Clinton in office, and a Clinton fully dedicated to carrying on the wars of both the Democrats and Republicans that came before her.

    “To say this is continuity of agenda is a bit of an understatement. American foreign policy has been so singular in purpose and focus for the past several decades that it is clear that behind the distortions of this house of mirrors, something singular and very nasty has been there the entire time. Who or what could it be?

    “The Real President of the United States Lives on Wall Street, not Pennsylvania Avenue

    “How about we look at the people who pay for the political campaigns to put these various spokesmen and women-in-chiefs into office in the first place? Or the immense interests driving lobbying efforts that target and control both sides of the political aisle in American politics? […]

    We see complete control exerted over American politics as well as across the media, allegedly charged to serve as watchdogs and a check and balance, but instead turned into an echo chamber and instrument of mass persuasion by those who have clearly consolidated the summation of American politics in their pockets.

    “While policy might be debated over by these special interests, and groups moved in one direction or another to exert influence against competing special interests among this exclusive club, one thing is for sure, the American voter is the last voice considered in this process.

    “Since the American voter is incapable of seeing that they are in fact in a house of mirrors to begin with, and think they are ‘outside’ in reality making real decisions, their decisions are completely irrelevant to those who really do live outside in reality and are actually making real decisions.

    “We must understand that for special interests that collectively control trillions of dollars in assets, profits and infrastructure all over the planet, the last thing they are willing to do is allow for the existence of a system that might actually put into power a form of authority above their own, that would set policy predicated upon the interests of the people, rather than their own. They have the money, the power and the ability to ensure policy is set to suit them, and them alone, and they clearly have done just that.

    “This is why US troops are still in Afghanistan and Iraq, wars are still being waged either directly or indirectly against Libya, Syria, Yemen, Iran and Russia and destabilization targeting China and other targets of Washington and Wall Street’s special interests continues unabated, albeit distorted within the house of mirrors, regardless of who is president.

    “So Americans may think they are voting for Hillary Clinton in 2016, and those infected with neo-liberalism the world over may think another enlightened champion of their progressive cause has taken the reins of the free world, but they might as well have voted for another Bush. The reality is, that as along as Americans and those who look to America from abroad for leadership dwell in this house of mirrors, the special interests that intentionally built this carnival called ‘democracy’ will have their way back in actual reality.”

    American Politics: A House of Mirrors
    By Ulson Gunnar

    • April 19, 2017 at 13:39

      yep…america has been captured…the only recourse now is a NEW party with the support of the vast majority of its citizens…the Dems may have spots, the Repubs may have stripes, but those 2 dogs have been pupped by the same Dark Bitch..

      • Abe
        April 19, 2017 at 14:55

        Sheepdog Bernie, who’s long had a teat reserved on the belly of the Dark Bitch, made sure that didn’t happen in 2016. Bernie’s a busy little pup, now working it for 2020. Bad dog!

        Time to get off our knees and stop praying

        • April 19, 2017 at 16:14

          yep…he was a shrewder play than usual…took me awhile to figure him out…mostly he has better table manners.. the companies sheep dog…well behaved

        • Gregory Herr
          April 20, 2017 at 19:23

          So that we won’t get fooled again.

  77. Susan Sunflower
    April 19, 2017 at 11:38

    There are so many echoes of Gore’s loss in 2000 (dismissed as “Nader’s fault”) and Kerry’s loss to Bush in 2004, and Clinton’s loss to Obama in 2008 that suggest the rot is in the roots, and blaming Clinton’s campaign staff (beyond executive level) may be fictitiously spreading the blame around. Understandable since the blaming Third Party Candidates (Stein and Johnson) has fizzled (the numbers aren’t there … Nader 2.74% of the popular vote in 2000; Stein 2016 1.07%, Johnson 3.28), particularly in light of the theoretical offset of the “Never Trump” contingent. Nader in 2000 had built on Green Party success in 1996 base in large part on discontent with Clinton’s policies.

    I don’t know if Sanders has a chance to “save” the democratic party by creating new “grassroots” beyond the multiple astroturf “intitiatives” that have been launched at an effort at rebranding or if all these efforts, including Sanders’ will finally convince more and more people that the roots are rotten, that it cannot be saved because it has no desire to change a thing because “we wuz robbed” (again).

    • DannyWeil
      April 19, 2017 at 12:32

      If the election had been between Sanders and Trump, I think Sanders would have won. Why? Trump had to veer to the left to get votes. The seemingly anti-Russia statements, the promises to the white working class all should have been progressive issues. If Sanders ran Trump would never have gotten away with appearing to embrace these issues.

      But it was not to be. For the oligarchs in the corporate democratic party would not allow it and ran the candidate destined to lose.

      • susan_sunflower
        April 19, 2017 at 13:07

        Clinton ran proudly as the “status quo” candidate, promising 4 or 8 more years of Obama’s policies (even if we knew she was twice the war-mongerer he was) … nuff said

        Americans feel helpless — just like they’ve been taught they are — wrt the War on Terror … much of the new McCarthyism had been building for years wrt various “truths” and growing intolerance (“Illiberal liberals) of dissent. Stein and the Greens “should” have done much better than they did (particularly with Clinton’s margin of projected victory making it appear “safe” to vote 3rd party — Sadly, Uncle Bernie’s newly minted army of “socialists” appears to have obediently followed his instructions, much as Obama’s army largely faded into the woodwork as he failed to deliver on his promises …

        • nancy
          April 19, 2017 at 14:17

          Hard to fathom how supposedly intelligent “liberals” fall for these phonies. Could it be they are phonies?

      • Michael Hoefler
        April 20, 2017 at 04:16

        I think that contest would have ended with Bernie taking 60% of the vote and about 70% of the electoral college. He was by far – the best candidate in the field of either party. And the people of this country knew it.

    • D5-5
      April 19, 2017 at 14:48

      How does Sanders have any credibility left at all given his cave-in last summer at the crucial moment of the California primary followed by his program to “reform the Democratic party” and his current posture in supporting Establishment views of Syria? Apparently the man gets off on campaign rallies and big talk.

      • Abe
        April 19, 2017 at 15:14

        100% pro-Israel old dude has a thing for fawning college students: No war, kids, just lots and lots of “deeply concerned” bombing [cue fawning college student applause] and weed [thunderous applause]

        • D5-5
          April 19, 2017 at 15:55

          Chuckling! also with the Hillary = string. I feel substituting Bernie in there would have equaled out likewise no problem once the Russia-baiting had started in on him, had he actually persisted and won the election.

      • April 19, 2017 at 16:59

        yep…took awhile to figure him out…hes the company sheepdog…very well behaved…the bernie experiment worked a little too well tho and they had to trim him back…”ok bernie…now run to the podium and throw your supprt to the Harpy….good boy…now run back to the Hill and introduce legislation that doesnt even get voted on in committee”…Bernie is just a different type of political survivorman with nice table manners…and he would have caved to the Hawks as soon as Israel leaned on him…

  78. Wm. Boyce
    April 19, 2017 at 11:24

    “So, perhaps this new book about how Hillary Clinton really lost Campaign 2016 will enable national Democrats to finally start charting a course correction before the party slams another Titanic-style campaign into another iceberg.”

    We can only hope. The recent Republican victory in the Kansas congressional district vacated by Mr. Pompeo was a squeaker – when it should have been a walk. Reportedly, the DNC put no money behind their candidate in the race. Another bad decision. We’ll see if the Georgia congressional race goes better. The Democratic Party needs to get their heads around a “50-state strategy,” or it’s going to be more Republican shenanigans that carry political races.

  79. Donna Bubb
    April 19, 2017 at 11:22

    Hil the Hawk has spent her whole political life working to become one of the good ole boys, so how could anyone with any sense expect her to act in any other way than the good ole boy way with no concern for the needs of the common people. How could she ever be held up as the great model for women? She wanted to be a good ole boy. How could Bernie be so stupid as to join her?

  80. Daniel Slade
    April 19, 2017 at 11:16

    Dear Mr Parry: I have always been a big fan of yours and read Consortium every time I receive it in my E-Mails. The title of your article should really be The real reason that the @016 Presidential race was close enough for the Republicans to steal it. The Republican party stole the Ppresidency and the US senate in 2016. The election was stolen by Kris Kobach who instituted His illegal Intersstate crosscheck system in every state run by Republicans. This includes all of the swing states Wisconsin Michigan Penn, Florida Ohio etc etc. Well over 1.1million voters were illegally removed from the voting rolls in just Wisconsin Michigan and Penn alone. This is not a wild conspiracy theory it is a fact. Greg Palast the best investigative reporter in America has reported extensively on it. He even released a movie in Oct of 2016 proving the whole illegal setup he even got ahold of the secret lists that they were using tothrow people off of the voting rolls. If these people were not removed from the rolls Clinton not only would have won but with room to spare. The Corporate Media refuses to report on it. The Democrats don’t mention it because for some idiotic reason they think it willhurt their standing in the Political esablishment and hurt their vote turnout. Don’t beleive me just go to Greg Palast .com. You can also go to Greg palast interstate crooscheck. Thank You Daniel Slade.

    • Zachary Smith
      April 19, 2017 at 11:39

      The Democrats don’t mention it because….

      The Democrats probably ignored the Republican fraud you speak of for the same reasons they blew of the explosive growth of the no-verification touch screen voting machines. And I agree that whatever those reasons were, they were idiotic.

      Trump is turning into a nightmare, but the fact remains that the Democrats don’t currently offer any reasonable alternative to him. On some topics they’re even worse.

      • Bill Bodden
        April 19, 2017 at 13:31

        “Why the Democrats are Dead: DeLauro Says No to Single-Payer” by Russell Mokhiber – http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/04/19/why-the-democrats-are-dead-delauro-says-no-to-single-payer/

      • Joe Tedesky
        April 19, 2017 at 20:33

        Zachary usually when one political party doesn’t go after the other political party over infringements of a dark nature is due to the fact that they don’t want to expose their own sins in the process. I’ve always thought that after LBJ discovered Nixon’s sabotaging the Paris Vietnam peace talks, that LBJ felt helpless to retaliate because he had his own skeletons to hide, and LBJ knew Nixon knew too much and that payback would have been fatal for JFK’s replacement.

        I know you know this, I just thought I’d add this to the comment thread in order to add dimension.

    • DannyWeil
      April 19, 2017 at 12:28

      I have no doubt that elections were rigged in the US. I also have no doubt that Hillary Clinton is a criminal and war mongerer.

      So what is the point: the lack of confidence, integrity and belief in he electoral college scam has meant that people do not care if it was stolen,or millions that is. And this all portends badly for the future of a democracy,which our Republic was not set up to be, in terms of voting.

      Confidence in the entire political system is now at lows not seen for a hundred years. Look at the fact that nearly half of eligible voters did not vote in the 2016 presidential election across the US, according to data of early turnout rates compiled by the United States Election Project.

      Yes, a combination of distrust in the system and not being able to vote due to time, barriers,etc. has meant that neither candidate got over 25% of the vote. This is Banana Republic figures, In Ecuador for example one must vote, it is mandatory. Many South American countries are the same. And many others either leave the ballot blank or simply mark everything thereby annulling their vote.

      So,as the culture and economy along with the political crimes go on and on, less and less people will vote.

    • incontinent reader
      April 20, 2017 at 07:21

      Fair enough. But the Democrats did it in the primary. In New York City, for example, the names of 200,000 registered Democratic voters somehow disappeared from the Democratic party rolls, and Bernie’s people filed a federal lawsuit just before the NY Democratic primary.

  81. Adrian Engler
    April 19, 2017 at 11:14

    I think there is a number of reasons why Hillary Clinton’s campaign was not successful, and this new book could help elucidating them (I would hope that it has something to do with few candidates being so closely associated with regime change wars with disastrous consequences, but I fear that the percentage of Americans who care about such foreign policy issues is too small).

    What was most unusual about Hillary Clinton’s campaign last year was that it is was almost completely free of political issues and to a very large degree concentrated on personal attacks against her rival (see http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/8/14848636/hillary-clinton-tv-ads). That is a recipe for disaster.

    Of course, Donald Trump’s campaign also was full of personal attacks and relative poor as far as substantive political issues were concerned, but – as the studies show -, with impartial counting, Hillary Clinton managed to be much worse that him in that respect (while Trump still talked quite a lot about political issues in the ads).

    Of course, this will not matter to those who are already closely associated with one of the candidates. But people for whom it is not clear in advance for whom they will vote will often be put off when so much of the campaign consists of personal attacks against the opponent rather than political issues.

  82. Abe
    April 19, 2017 at 11:06

    “Clinton Represents Neo-Liberalism

    “When people speculate that Russia is intervening in US elections, why is Clinton’s record in Russia not discussed? The last time Hillary Clinton was residing in the White House, though only as the first lady, millions of Russians lives were ruined in what some have called an ‘economic genocide.’ Is this fact not relevant in discussing Russia and 2016 US Presidential elections?

    “It has only been since the ascension of Vladimir Putin that the situation in Russia has improved. During the first eight years of Putin’s presidency, wages doubled and the poverty rate was reduced by 14%. During this same period Russia experienced overall industrial expansion of more than 70%. The country’s Gross Domestic Product increased from $764 billion to $2096.8 billion between 2007 and 2014. John Browne, the CEO of BP has praised Putin’s policies saying ‘No country has come so far, in such a short space of time.’

    “What was the secret to fixing Russia’s economy? Putin dropped many of the extreme free market policies that had been championed by Clinton and Yeltsin. Russia’s economy re-emerged primarily due to public control of oil and natural gas. The Russian economy is now centered around state controlled natural resources with a very high rate of public ownership. Putin’s ‘National Priorities Project’ focused on building a social safety net for the population […]

    “Despite being described as ‘left,’ both Hillary Clinton and her husband are closely identified with neoliberalism and privatizations. Bill and Hillary Clinton’s political careers are closely associated with the Democratic Leadership Council, a non-profit organization that maneuvered within the Democratic Party to push for free market policies and undermine the remaining Social-Democratic and Rooseveltian factions that existed in the late 1980s. Bill Clinton signed the widely unpopular North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

    “In the aftermath of de-industrialization, which escalated under Bill Clinton’s presidency, some regions of the United States are experiencing things similar to what took place in Russia during the 1990s. Factories have closed their doors, with the stable employment and high wages they symbolized being eliminated. Heroin addiction and suicide rates across the United States are the highest they have been in decades.

    “Donald Trump’s campaign has made a point of reaching out to those who have been highly affected by de-industrialization in places like Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. According to left-wing Film-maker Michael Moore: ‘Trump is going to hammer Clinton on this and her support of TPP and other trade policies that have royally screwed the people of these four states.’

    “Hillary Rodham Clinton, as the first lady of President Bill Clinton, and Secretary of State during the first years of the Obama administration, is associated with the swift imposition of globalist capitalism and the deregulation of markets.”

    Clinton & Russia: Has US Media Forgotten the 1990s?
    By Caleb Maupin

    • Abe
      April 19, 2017 at 11:51

      “You know, I don’t think it’s too complicated.” – Hillary Clinton’s postmortem at the 2017 Women in the World Summit

    • susan_sunflower
      April 19, 2017 at 12:59

      It has always struck me as monumentally egotistical that Clinton & Company insist that it was an evil “foreign power” rather than anything – at all – on the domestic front that “sabotaged” her campaign — by releasing all too real and damaging internal communications …
      This goes double for the fact that the DNC was hacked at least twice (once as I recall for months on end the previous summer, per Crowdstrike) and with the cherry-on-top that WikiLeaks and others say it was a disgruntled/disgusted member of the campaign (maybe he or she learned of Clinton’s scrutiny of her 2008 campaign staff’s e-mails?)

      If it wasn’t Clinton’s stone-walling and prevarications wrt the server investigation (which she prolonged until it lapped into the electoral cycle), it was her imperial attitude that she was “above suspicion” (umm, no, and that didn’t sell wrt the Foundation / appearance of impropriety matters either) …

      My own “conventional wisdom” is that the endless namecalling and deliberate polarization of the “you’re either with me, or you’re ____ (fill in the blank, sexist, racist, Putin-lover, etc.) neo-McCarthyism / legendarily extreme political correctness variety, the extremes of these multiple “loyalty test” ultimatums made it strangely easy to opt-out rather than join the “I’m with her” campaign … “Basket of Deplorables” predicted a very intolerant and unpleasant Clinton administration, building on Obama’s social justice victories that left many Americans feeling unheard and repeatedly cast as “losers” by an administration that kept celebrating its “wins” over those self-same “losers.” (I wonder how Trump being able to erase so many of Obama’s presidential fiats squares with those — like the Dreamers — really believed that the change Obama promised was being delivered and was real)

      • Abe
        April 19, 2017 at 14:22

        CrowdStrike claims about “Russian hacking” have zero credibility.

        CrowdStrike, an American cybersecurity technology firm based in Irvine, California, was a primary “source” for ODNI allegations of cyber activity.

        Dmitri Alperovitch, co-founder and chief technology officer of CrowdStrike, is a Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council “regime change” think tank.

        Like Eliot Higgins and Bellingcat, Alperovitz and Crowdstrike provide on-demand “regime change” propaganda material.

        Alperovitch has been identified as the main source of the story that the Russians allegedly “compromised” Trump.

        Alperovitch has said that Crowdstrike has “high confidence” it was “Russian hackers”.

        “But we don’t have hard evidence,” Alperovitch said in a June 16 Washington Post article.

        CrowdStrike profits handsomely by its ability to see a Red under everybody’s bed.

        Allegations of Russian perfidy are routinely issued by private companies with lucrative US Department of Defense (DoD) contracts. The companies claiming to protect the nation against “threats” have the ability to manufacture “threats”.

        The US and UK possess elite cyber capabilities for both cyberspace espionage and offensive operations.

        Both the US National Security Agency (NSA) and the British Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) are intelligence agencies with a long history of supporting military operations. US military cyber operations are the responsibility of US Cyber Command, whose commander is also the head of the NSA.

        US offensive cyber operations have emphasized political coercion and opinion shaping, shifting public perception in NATO countries as well as globally in ways favorable to the US, and to create a sense of unease and distrust among perceived adversaries such as Russia and China.

        The Snowden revelations made it clear that US offensive cyber capabilities can and have been directed both domestically and internationally. The notion that US and NATO cyber operations are purely defensive is a myth.

        Recent US domestic cyber operations have been used for coercive effect, creating uncertainty and concern within the American government and population.

        The perception that a foreign attacker may have infiltrated US networks, is monitoring communications, and perhaps considering even more damaging actions, can have a disorienting effect.

        US offensive cyber warfare operations work in tandem with aggressive US and NATO propaganda efforts against governments that fail to cooperate with Washington’s diktats.

        • Dave P.
          April 19, 2017 at 16:04

          Abe: Your comments are very informing. U.S. is World Empire of very frightening capabilities. And add to it U.K., and other Western Europe. History has not seen anything like it before.

          Every day or every other day, the news coming out of Centers of this Power draws the attention of very wary World out there. Only God – if we believe in one – knows what is in store for the World!

        • Abe
          April 19, 2017 at 16:53

          There are Christian and Jewish Zionists in cahoots, claiming to know what Gawwwd or Adonai or whatever tribal demon they worship has in store for the world!

          An unmitigated heresy in both Judaism and Christianity, these creatures even profess knowledge of the (constantly updated) time table for the world’s “perfection”.

          Here’s the Trump-endorsing Pastor Countdown working the pulpit

  83. John Puma
    April 19, 2017 at 11:05

    So HRC got the idea to blame her demise on Russian hacking of DNC emails precisely because she was “hacking” emails of her own staff?!? Truly priceless but in no way a surprise.

    One of her biggest campaign turnoffs was smugly assuring us she would “work with Republicans” after she was elected. Why not? The above clearly demonstrates an essential GOP psychological predilection: projection of their problems onto others. (And, in this case made clear her apparent lack of understanding that her tenure would have gone literally nowhere without control of at least on congressional house.)

    This is a laugh: “her team’s reliance on analytics rather than on reaching out to real voters and their concerns.”
    Let’s be clear, the COMPLETE lack of concern for the concerns of real voters is not a campaign choice but rather tantamount to a genetic reality for this candidate.

  84. Hank
    April 19, 2017 at 10:58
  85. KB Gloria
    April 19, 2017 at 10:55

    “So, perhaps this new book about how Hillary Clinton really lost Campaign 2016 will enable national Democrats to finally start charting a course correction before the party slams another Titanic-style campaign into another iceberg.”

    I would not hold my breath.

    I do believe, as others who posted prior, or posted links about, that many elements, racism and sexism included, came into play to bring about the election of D. Trump–as they both engendered such intense, mostly (apparently) negative, feelings for so many people. I think, too, that H. Clinton counted far too much on a perceived promise of an automatic female voter bloc that would shoot her straight to the presidency–history has very clearly demonstrated, time and again, that a gender voter bloc works less often that other types–as Obama won with a strong voting bloc of POC–but the critical mass simply wasn’t there, and that is truly on her.

    • David G
      April 19, 2017 at 15:07

      I saw new DNC chair Tom Perez and Bernie Sanders, who are on a tour of some sort together, being interviewed on MSNBC recently.

      Leaving aside the complex and vexing Bernie issues, I was amazed how quickly Perez made it utterly clear to me that he represents absolutely no change whatsoever from the Democratic party that sputtered to a halt last November.

      He was astoundingly boring and evasive; the party has learned nothing, and made a terrible mistake in torpedoing Keith Ellison in favor of Perez.

  86. Fergus Hashimoto
    April 19, 2017 at 10:53

    Lock her up.

    • DannyWeil
      April 19, 2017 at 12:20

      Yes, I agree. There should be a full investigation into the Clinton Foundation, the Clinton Global Initiative, now dead, and Bill Clinton.

      Without having a full disclosure hearing and transparency the ‘moral hazard’ remains. And this is the issue: all these criminals are simply getting off. No one is investigated, America knows little and the neo liberal dance and wars go on.

      • D5-5
        April 19, 2017 at 13:04

        All the smoke-blowing re Russia started right here–to avoid attention on exactly these matters.

        • backwardsevolution
          April 20, 2017 at 04:49

          D5-5 – my thoughts exactly, Russia is a diversion.

  87. Gregory Kruse
    April 19, 2017 at 10:52

    I admire the economy of the phrase, “voters chose Trump’s empty-headed populism over Clinton’s cold-hearted calculations”. One can almost sense the satisfaction. Please let me know how Maddow reacts to this book, or doesn’t react to it, because I can’t bear to look at her image when she performs her shtick, which she does all the way through her show.

    • April 19, 2017 at 14:21

      Rachel Maddow is a very DERANGED WOMAN.

  88. uberediter
    April 19, 2017 at 10:44

    Huh, she ignored “President Bill Clinton, and other Democratic Party elders, who argued that the campaign needed to work harder to persuade undecided and ambivalent voters (like working-class whites and millennials), instead of focusing so insistently on turning out core supporters.”

    I’m sorry, but which “core supporters” of the Dem party did she chase? Certainly not those who prioritize healthcare, decent wages, jobs, the social safety net, and income equality….

    • Sam F
      April 19, 2017 at 11:37

      She was chasing identity voters due our imperative need for gay bathrooms and longer maternity leaves.

  89. Bob Loblaw
    April 19, 2017 at 10:38

    I remember no such dissection of the failed Gore campaign. Of course he “won” that election too, but Nader became a synonym for meddling and shrill denunciations replaced intelligent response leading to the Duhbya disaster.

    Instead of complaining about Russia democrats need to organize in a unified effort. Put bills up that establish progressive policies, when they’re shot down in GOP controlled committees use those votes against them in the next election.

    The DNC needs to abandon their corporate devotion and put Gabbard and Grayson into star roles. Politicians who speak truth instead of mealy mouthed platitudes will win back seats.

    • Sam F
      April 19, 2017 at 11:35

      The Dems will not do that because they are owned by the zionists (top ten contributors all Jewish, over $100 million), with lesser shares owned by KSA/MIC/WallSt. They will do as the money says and absolutely nothing more except as a deception. They are an oligarchy backstop in case the Repubs miscalculate.

      The solution is to have many parties that honestly represent their supporters, and form meaningful coalitions to win elections.

      • D5-5
        April 19, 2017 at 14:40

        Yes, I’m calling for five brand new parties outside the establishment, all mainstream, of all stripes of opinion left to right, staffed by bright young new personalities . . . Take out the duopoly.

        • Abe
          April 19, 2017 at 15:05

          Remember the Weimar Republic, that party proliferation experiment that ended rather badly in 1933?

          • D5-5
            April 19, 2017 at 16:38

            I think pinning the problem to the essentially authoritarian nature of the beast is probably correct, thinking of the passenger dragged off the flight recently, the 3 year old boy inserted with needle to get a urine sample . . . the nature of the beast nods at “democracy” while ever more efficient with suppression. Still I would like to see five new parties emerge, ranging from right to left, clearly disassociated from “normal,” with young bright people articulating concerns of the people . . .

          • Sam F
            April 19, 2017 at 18:52

            I would be interested to hear the case against party proliferation.

            Democracy in 1933 Germany and 2014 Ukraine failed due to economic emergency and extremism, when the radical philosophies were new. Apparently the extreme worldviews (e.g. communism, socialism, nationalism, corporatism) could not debate rationally to form working coalitions. Parties that honestly represent their supporters can usually form coalitions to make the resulting power structure clear.

            Democracy failed in the US due to corruption of its basic tools, the mass media and elections, which permitted corruption of the party leadership.

          • D5-5
            April 19, 2017 at 19:57

            Serious threats may be encountered increasingly with authoritarian suppression, in the direction of Pompeo with Assange currently, for example, as Assange’s being outside the first amendment. Pretexts, falsities, brutal police behavior lend themselves to completion of this “soft” version of totalitarianism we’re now smoothing into . . . as with computer tablets to kindergartners that study them and their habits, as another example.

          • Abe
            April 20, 2017 at 16:02

            The Weimar Republic was in existence for thirteen years (1919-1933). In that time, some 40 parties were represented in the Reichstag. This fragmentation of political power was in part due to the peculiar parliamentary system of the Weimar Republic, and in part due to the many challenges facing German democracy in this period. The multitude of political parties failed to prevent the Nazi seizure of power (Machtergreifung) in 1933.

    • April 19, 2017 at 15:04

      Yes, but unless they actually did something constructive once they won those seats, it would be for naught. And since the corporations control both parties, nothing constructive is to be expected. Nothing short of a pitchfork revolution will change anything at this point.

    • Michael Hoefler
      April 20, 2017 at 04:13

      Had Gore asked for a recount of the entire state of Florida – he would have won. When the Bush campaign petitioned SCOTUS – they were concerned that the Florida Supreme Court was going to order a statewide recount. This comes from the counsel for the Gore campaign – David Boice (sp?). SCOTUS had no business taking this on. They should have referred it back to the State SC. Funny how SCOTUS forgot to follow the constitution.

      • Skip Scott
        April 20, 2017 at 07:54

        Nothing funny (or mysterious) about it. SCOTUS arrogance and the late Scalia acted like gods instead of judges. No little document like the Constitution was going to get in their way. I wasn’t much of a Gore fan after the NAFTA debate with Perot, but I can’t help but think of an alternate reality post 9/11 if Gore had been in office.
        Maybe I give him too much credit, but Gore may have saved us from the forever war and the police state.

  90. alexander
    April 19, 2017 at 10:36

    Dear Mr Parry,

    Thank you for another great article.

    I think Hillary lost to the Donald for the exact same reason she lost to Obama is 08.

    She voted for the catastrophic Iraq war.

  91. Andrew
    April 19, 2017 at 10:36

    I like Hillary more than cancer, but slightly less than Hep C.

  92. April 19, 2017 at 10:31

    Smarmy, arrogant, self-obessed, vain, deceitful, boasting, dishonest, cruel, narcissistic, superficially charming, cunning, manipulative, shallow, callous and incapable of showing remorse or guilt, as a text book example of psychopathy Hillary Clinton isn’t a very nice person. Still, that still begs the question why anybody turned up to vote for either candidate.

    • Joe Tedesky
      April 19, 2017 at 11:05

      Bryan what you wrote here sums it up pretty well when it comes to describing Hillary. Hillary always comes off, at least in my estimation, as though she is promoting whatever it is she’s campaigning on more for about her than about you the voter. I realize a lot of politicians can come off this way, but with Hillary it’s all you see. Hillary just doesn’t have that sincerity that a politician needs to convince the voter that it is all about them the voter.

      What really sunk her ship, was her campaign not concentrating better on the Electoral College vote. Hillary by all accounts spend ten times the amount of Trump, but Trump went after that Rust Belt vote, and there in lies his winning.

      The Democrate’s had better learned a lesson, and that lesson is that the Democrate’s should not have put the screws to the candidate who could have won the White House by backing the candidate who felt the White House was theirs by right of inheritance.

      I hope the next Democrate to run for the White House will be Tulsi Gabbard. For now Gabbard looks to me to be the real deal, and I hope she can keep herself scandal free, and that she isn’t found to be unelectable. This woman, at least so far, looks like she would do all American women proud if Tulsi were to be America’s first woman president.

      • Steve Naidamast
        April 19, 2017 at 11:33

        I hope she runs as well for president. If she wins I could convince Star Fleet Command to not dissolve most of Earth’s population…

        • Joe Tedesky
          April 19, 2017 at 15:04

          Rather than convincing Star Fleet Command to wipe out all of us, just have them wipe out the Neocon’s, the R2Per’s, Zionist, and the MIC, then the rest of humanity can relax.

        • April 19, 2017 at 18:10

          lets just have them melt the Hill and the Pentagram…that would help ALOT

      • turk151
        April 19, 2017 at 12:27

        They will never allow the current Ms. Gabbard to win the election. But, I am sure they are working night and day to figure out if they can corrupt her, so she can run.

        • Joe Tedesky
          April 19, 2017 at 15:05

          I wish we could form a human chain around Tulsi, because I have the same fears as you do about her safety.

      • Dave P.
        April 19, 2017 at 12:47

        Bryan sketched up an excellent portrait of Hillary Clinton. I like to add a bit. The article says: Hillary failed to present a message . . . Perhaps Robert Parry might have added: Hillary, in her arrogance, failed to fool the electorate. What message Hillary could have delivered – the message in her speeches to the Wall Street Oligarchy. The Politicians we are talking about are not humans any more – in the way public have in their minds. They are thoroughly corrupt, dishonest, hard-hearted manipulators. They have no humane feelings left in them.

        Tulsi Gabbard has shown remarkable courage and principles. But at the appropriate time,the alligators as they are, will take care of her. Democratic Party, the working people’s party as it used to be, does not exist any more – for three decades now. It is war mongering party of the Wall Street Oligarchy, who fools the poor , and not so poor, working class every four years.

        A new progressive party – with people like Tulsi Gabbard – is what the country needs. It is essential for World Peace.

        • Joe Tedesky
          April 19, 2017 at 15:06

          Words well spoken!

        • Feliz Navidad
          April 20, 2017 at 10:18

          Although I completely agree that we need a new Third Party (the democratic super-delegates have clearly betrayed us) our laws do not permit that. Here in Pennsylvania, arguably the pedophilia capital of the world, our voting laws stack the deck in favor of two-party rule. Primaries are closed. Therefore, in most of our districts (which are each one party, but vary between the two parties across the state) the only vote that really “counts” is in the primary. Yet, rarely do voters go outside the approved ticket even in the primaries. Even worse, here in PA the DNC spent funds in the primaries fighting against popular Democratic favorite Joe Sestak for Senate, replaced by tepid and inexperienced Clintonite, Katie McGinty. McGinty was crushed by Toomey in the general, although Toomey was otherwise destined to be booted. Tellingly, although Clinton and McGinty failed to carry PA, the democratic party swept the elections in every other state category, including the courts. For anybody who can analyze the lesson is clear: Pennsylvanians rejected the “contrived” Clintonite democratic party, and found even Trump to be a better bet.

        • Jeremy
          April 21, 2017 at 07:14

          Yes…it is clear now (or has been for some time) no change will come from inside either plutocratic parties…no matter who it is or how sincere they are. My hope is for a massive awakening where people flock to the third party of their choice. However you could bet that all the same players will rush to corrupt any third party on the rise (i.e. “The Wall Street Oligarchy”). We almost need to find ways to “corrupt” those at the top, to sabotage their company’s interest in favor of humanity.

    • Ol' Hippy
      April 19, 2017 at 13:42

      Exactly! Kinda like voting between an alligator or a crocodile. Apologies to the alligators and crocodiles.

    • nancy
      April 19, 2017 at 13:54

      Eventually, no one will and then we can give up any illusion that the US is a democracy.

      • Chad
        April 19, 2017 at 14:15

        The United States is not a Democracy. It is a Constitutional Republic. Democracy is mob rule, California & New York would decide all elections stealing the voice of the rest of the country, that’s why we have an electoral college So every state has a voice in government.

        • Sam F
          April 19, 2017 at 18:30

          The old Repub propaganda fools exactly no one with an IQ over 80. Try something else somewhere else.

      • April 19, 2017 at 14:19

        Nancy, we also have to discard the illusion that the USA will NOT destroy
        the World !!!!!!!!!!!

  93. john ocallaghan
    April 19, 2017 at 10:29

    Clinton lost because of a ”born to rule” mindset, and the thought of her losing did not even come into their calculations,so i believe a lot of things were overlooked by Hillary and her team,but the voters saw what the ”team” could not…. sheer arrogance and a dynastic born to win \ rule mentality!

    • Joe Tedesky
      April 19, 2017 at 21:36

      I agree Hillary felt entitled, but where I do have a hard time is where the DNC committee did all it could to make sure Hillary got the Democrate’s presidential nomination. Debbie Wasserman Shutlz served as Hillary’s back room defender, and by her doing so Shutlz in my mind handed the presidency to Donald Trump.

      Hillary got the most votes, but she didn’t get all the crucial votes in all the right places where it would have mattered. Beyond all that neither candidate inspired enough of America to even show up to vote, at least 40% of the registered voters were a no show.

      So John you are right by pointing out Hillary’s arrogance and her believing ‘it was now her turn’ altitude was her biggest undoing. The saddest part, is because of Hillary and her reliable stooge Wasserman Shutlz’s rigging the primary, we now have a crazed nut job in the White House running our country, and threatening the rest of the world while he is at it.

  94. Noizpots
    April 19, 2017 at 10:26

    I have another, parallel theory about why she lost. and am writing a piece entitled, “The Collapse of the Hive” which I will submit to you for possible publication upon my completion.

  95. Drew Hunkins
    April 19, 2017 at 10:20

    She was a war-loving, Wall Street boot licking, Pentagon derriere kissing, Tel Aviv kowtowing candidate who turned off hundreds of thousands of stressed out working class and hard-pressed minority voters in the Rust Belt and decadent inner cities. Of course most chose to simply stay home, a rational move given the choices available.

    While she was a de facto member of her husband’s admin and during her carpet bagging career as a Senator she never saw a “free trade” (investor rights agreement) agreement she didn’t champion with wholehearted enthusiasm and she never expressed any interest in passing national single-payer health insurance for All.

    The American voters saw through her, give them some credit. She would’ve had us in a shooting war with Russia over Syria and eastern Ukraine by now if we weren’t already obliterated in a thermonuclear war.

    • evelync
      April 19, 2017 at 12:12


      her own college thesis from 1969 –
      titled: “there is only the fight” published on line in pdf format, where the key insights can be found that Mrs. Clinton understood that Saul Alinsky’s “political faith” along with that of his fellow thinkers, MLK, Eugene Debs, Walt Whitman was simply “democracy”, But in her last chapter V rejecting that “ideal” for herself, she points out that Alinksy’s solution of new deal style mass projects like the TVA to provide jobs might work in some other countries but not here in this country.

      And she affirms that sentiment with her cynical cartoon at the end of her thesis, mocking Alinsky’s idealism. When I saw that cartoon it reminded me of her mocking tone towards Obama during the 2008 campaign telling her Rhode Island audience something like “the heavens will open up, the celestial choirs will sing…”


      The link to the pdf file of the thesis with the cartoon can be found googling – there is only the fight”… Hillary Clinton Quarterly .
      Other links to the thesis don’t seem to include the cartoon.

      • Drew Hunkins
        April 19, 2017 at 13:44

        Very interesting points you bring up evelync. Thanks for the link, etc.

  96. Jim
    April 19, 2017 at 10:18

    Who cares? As long as she is gone.

    • evelync
      April 19, 2017 at 19:23

      hah hah….

      maybe this book will persuade her that she is not cut out to be president – not because she is a female (there are several women who seem like they’d be capable of serving as president, e.g. Tulsi Gabbard, Mazie Horonos, Patty Murray, Tammy Duckworth….maybe Barbara Lee in the House because of her courage standing up to the endless wars…

      But Clinton seems totally detached from what the job is about or at least what I think most people expect it to be about.

    • Jay
      April 20, 2017 at 15:41


      I don’t think she’s (Hillary) is gone, the NY Times has been pushing her public appearances for months now.

      I see this book is sold out at Amazon and Barnes and Noble dot com.

      Perhaps this stunning first 48 hours in sales will retire Hillary Clinton from the public stage.

  97. Douglas Berg
    April 19, 2017 at 10:15

    I agree that H ran a very poor campaign, but i wish people would also stress the fact that voter id laws and operation cross check cost H and senate dems another 6 million votes. I dislike Hillary, but she actually won by 3 million votes and you can realistically add 6 million more.

    • Bill Bodden
      April 19, 2017 at 12:43

      Clinton lost because of an undemocratic anachronism – the Electoral College. In addition to it being undemocratic it was also unfair – and poetic justice. Despite Trump being the costly price we will have to pay for dodging the Clinton bullet I am sure there are many people who believe, and are probably right in believing, that a president hillary would have been much worse.

    • Jeremy
      April 20, 2017 at 13:56

      Live by the sword die by the sword is what I say. While i agree with you, it would be totally inadequate to discuss the factor of voter suppression and how this harmed Hillary without also acknowledging that the DNC did the same thing to Bernie in the primaries. As reported by Greg Palast, thousands of independent voters were given provisional ballots (which he calls placebo ballots), even though California has no restriction against independents voting in primaries. Furthermore, I don’t think I have to remind everyone here about Nevada, New York, and Wyoming (to name a few)…and just that generally speaking exit polls showed far different results than acutal vote counts at Bernie’s expense. The point is that Hillary (or the Clintonites) cannot complain about an unfair general election after benefiting from an unfair primary. Why Hillary lost???…because she wasn’t Bernie Sanders. If the DNC would have seen the writing on the wall and allowed the people to choose their candidate, then those same people would have showed up to vote in the general. If there primary goal was defeating the Republicans, they would have welcomed the opportunity to grow their party with Bernie by pulling in millions of independents and newly registered young people. But as has been stated many times before, their interest is in preserving the status quo, not in growing the party. How this is not self evident to so many by now given how the primaries went down, given the content of leaked emails…well you have to give it to the DNC…the misdirection of the masses has been quite the show to see. Thank you CN for being the voice of reason in the poisonous soup we now find ourselves in.

    • Bob In Portland
      April 21, 2017 at 14:19

      The DNC under Wasserman Schultz certainly wasn’t short of cash. If they’d spent some of it on things like voter registration, and did things like run electable candidates (that is, candidates that actually address issues like pay, healthcare, ending the drug war, college education costs, etc., maybe those states with Republican governors and legislators screwing with voting rights wouldn’t be in power. It doesn’t all lay at H. Clinton’s feet, but enough that her supporters should have recognized that slap in the face and decided to change course. But no, the best we get are Deep State wonks like the guy in Georgia. Ossoff wrote his dissertation for the London School of Economics on trade and studied under Mad Albright at Georgetown. Good luck with that guy.

  98. Tom
    April 19, 2017 at 10:04

    Don’t need a book to tell me why Clinton failed.

  99. Exiled off mainstreet
    April 19, 2017 at 10:03

    The Clintons represented a hostile takeover of the Democratic party. Unfortunately, her defeat has not ended the situation. Even the least regressive elements, like Bernie Sanders, follow the new cold war and neoliberal mantra. Trump’s el foldo into another war president, possibly to give him political survival space in the framework of the yankee deep state and media power structure reveals that the present system of two choices of fascist parties can be reformed from within. He got in only because he was not the obviously corrupt, flawed and dangerous war criminal.

    • Bill Bodden
      April 19, 2017 at 12:36

      The Clintons represented a hostile takeover of the Democratic party.

      The Democratic (?) party was a corrupt organization long before the Clintons made themselves a home there and made the part much worse. Check out Walter Karp’s compendium of essays: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Walter_Karp/Walter_Karp_page.html

    • Ol' Hippy
      April 19, 2017 at 13:33

      Not to be undone he quickly has become another one in the long lines of US leaders as war criminals.

    • evelync
      April 19, 2017 at 16:33

      re: “Even the least regressive elements, like Bernie Sanders, follow the new cold war and neoliberal mantra.”

      I’m not sure why you think Bernie Sanders follows the cold war mantra.
      And I say that because I have not heard Bernie espouse those views but he speaks out against them.

      In the Miami debate, Bernie attacked Clinton for her admiration of Henry Kissinger. And, later in the debate Clinton went Cold Warrior on him for what he said as Mayor of Burlington that moderator Salinas used to Red Bait him:.

      Here’s a part of the transcript covering what I think represents Bernie’s anti cold war positions:

      “SANDERS: Well, I’m not going to comment on the Benghazi tragedy, but I will say this. A series of articles in the New York Times talked about Secretary Clinton’s role in urging the administration to go forward with regime change, getting rid of Gadhafi in Libya.

      Gadhafi was a brutal dictator, there’s no question. But one of the differences between the secretary and I is I’m not quite so aggressive with regard to regime change. I voted against the war in Iraq because I had a fear of what would happen the day after. [applause]

      And Secretary Clinton talks about Henry Kissinger…

      RAMOS: Thank you, Senator.

      SANDERS: … winning the praise of Henry Kissinger, I don’t want Henry Kissinger’s praise at all. [applause]

      RAMOS: We’re going to — we’re going to take a break.”

      A bit later in the debate, moderator Salinas attacks Bernie’s anti cold war stance:

      ”SALINAS: Let’s continue with another question, Senator, if you don’t mind.

      SANDERS: Sure.

      SALINAS: In 1985, you praised the Sandinista government and you said that Daniel Ortega was an impressive guy. This is what you said about Fidel Castro. Let’s listen.”


      Here’s Sander’s response to Salinas effort to Red Bait him:

      “SANDERS: You may recall way back in, when was it, 1961, they invaded Cuba, and everybody was totally convinced that Castro was the worst guy in the world. All the Cuban people were going to rise up in rebellion against Fidel Castro. They forgot that he educated their kids, gave them health care, totally transformed their society.

      [end video clip]

      SALINAS: In South Florida there are still open wounds among some exiles regarding socialism and communism. So please explain what is the difference between the socialism that you profess and the socialism in Nicaragua, Cuba and Venezuela.

      SANDERS: Well, let me just answer that. What that was about was saying that the United States was wrong to try to invade Cuba, that the United States was wrong trying to support people to overthrow the Nicaraguan government, that the United States was wrong trying to overthrow in 1954, the government — democratically elected government of Guatemala.

      Throughout the history of our relationship with Latin America we’ve operated under the so-called Monroe Doctrine, and that said the United States had the right do anything that they wanted to do in Latin America. So I actually went to Nicaragua and I very shortly opposed the Reagan administration’s efforts to overthrow that government. And I strongly opposed earlier Henry Kissinger and the — to overthrow the government of Salvador Aliende in Chile.

      I think the United States should be working with governments around the world, not get involved in regime change. And all of these actions, by the way, in Latin America, brought forth a lot of very strong anti-American sentiments. That’s what that was about.

      SALINAS: Senator, in retrospect, have you ever regretted the characterizations that you made of Daniel Ortega and Fidel Castro that way?

      SANDERS: I’m sorry. Please say that…

      SALINAS: In retrospect, have you ever regretted the characterizations of Daniel Ortega and Fidel Castro that you made in 1985?

      SANDERS: The key issue here was whether the United States should go around overthrowing small Latin American countries. I think that that was a mistake…

      SALINAS: You didn’t answer the question.

      SANDERS: …both in Nicaragua and Cuba. Look, let’s look at the facts here. Cuba is, of course, an authoritarian undemocratic country, and I hope very much as soon as possible it becomes a democratic country. But on the other hand…[applause]…on the other hands, it would be wrong not to state that in Cuba they have made some good advances in health care. They are sending doctors all over the world. They have made some progress in education. I think by restoring full diplomatic relations with Cuba, it will result in significant improvements to the lives of Cubans and it will help the United States and our business community invest. “

      And during a later question, Clinton returns to attack Sanders:

      “CLINTON:And I just want to add one thing to the question you were asking Senator Sanders. I think in that same interview, he praised what he called the revolution of values in Cuba and talked about how people were working for the common good, not for themselves.

      I just couldn’t disagree more. You know, if the values are that you oppress people, you disappear people, you imprison people or even kill people for expressing their opinions, for expressing freedom of speech, that is not the kind of revolution of values that I ever want to see anywhere. [applause]

      SANDERS: Well, as I said earlier, I don’t believe it is the business of the United States government to be overthrowing small countries around the world. And number two, when you get to Puerto Rico, there’s an issue that we have not talked about. That little island is $73 billion in debt and the government now is paying interest rates of up to 11 percent.

      And many of the bonds that they are paying off were purchased by vulture capitalists for 30 cents on the dollar. And what I have said in talking to the leaders of Puerto Rico, we’ve got to bring people together. And it’s not the people of Puerto Rico, or the children or the schools.

      TUMULTY: Senator, OK

      SANDERS: But maybe some of these vulture capitalists who are going to have to lose a little bit of money in this process.

      TUMULTY: We need to move on to another topic.”


      • Michael Hoefler
        April 20, 2017 at 04:04

        Thank you for presenting this. I had forgotten some of this. Bernie is clearing the statesman here.

        Enough of overthrowing governments around the world. We have made enemies at every turn. I like what FDR said about wanting to be a Good Neighbor.

      • Skip Scott
        April 20, 2017 at 07:40


        Thanks for this. I concur with everything Bernie says there, but I can’t help but wonder why he got on board regarding “the evil Ruskies” stole our election, and “The evil Assad” has got to go? Is he too close to the beltway to see the naked propaganda for what it is?

        • evelync
          April 20, 2017 at 11:36


          Is he on board? I am unclear on what he has been saying recently – I’d be surprised if he thinks that we should be involved militarily in a coup against Assad. I may have heard him say something about the Russian involvement in the election although I don’t remember what. But I do remember calling his office and Senator Leahy’s office and referring their staff to the articles on this web site challenging the ‘Russia stole the election meme’. I shared Ray McGovern’s articles with those 2 offices and with other elected officials.

          And I’ve also try to share the writings and speeches of retired colonel and Boston University history professor, Andrew Bacevich with Sanders and Leahy’s and others. Bacevich has spoken out against our military regime change trajectory that has created a “mess” and is making this country less safe.

          ( This link has the video of one of my favorite talks that Bacevich gave, especially his comments during the Q&A at the end:

          Bacevich is, I think, a conservative Republican. He spoke out against the Iraq War before it started, tragically lost his son in Iraq and has spoken out strongly against neocon/neoliberal failed foreign policies. )

          So, if Bernie is saying things in support of the neocon/neoliberal policies I agree he should be challenged on that.

          • Skip Scott
            April 20, 2017 at 15:03



            “In a world of vicious dictators, Syria’s Bashar Assad tops the list as a dictator who has killed hundreds of thousands of his own citizens to protect his own power and wealth. His regime’s use of chemical weapons against the men, women and children of his country, in violation of all international conventions and moral standards, makes him a war criminal.”

            Notice Bernie accepts the “Assad did it” MSM propaganda without question.

            CNN interview on Russian hacking:


            It’s a bit dated, but notice how he accepts that it was the Russians, and not an inside leak from within the DNC.

        • Gregory Herr
          April 20, 2017 at 18:50

          Except that Gaddafi was not a brutal dictator. Assad is not a brutal dictator. Either Sanders is woefully ignorant about Libya and Syria or he is a liar.

      • Feliz Navidad
        April 20, 2017 at 10:00

        Thanks for this. The Clintonites in the democratic party want us to paint Bernie with her brush.

  100. April 19, 2017 at 10:00

    Nobody on the Left seems to realize that Americans rejected HRC en masse because they were sick of the Clintons and D.C. corruption, fraud and lies that they represented. Americans were kicked to the curb decades ago and the dormant Howard Beale Syndrome exploded on the 2016 political scene and vaulted Donald Trump into the White House.

    • Michael
      April 19, 2017 at 10:43

      Yes Howard Beale rose from the muck. The question is where we go from here… gridlock!?! (Will the R’s blow their majority rule like the D’s did under Obama? ) Can the deep state be diverted from their rush to the cliff? Without a serious Peace Now – Jobs Now tack by Trump I think we will get the recession we have been avoiding, probably sparked by an international event. Plenty to choose from.

      • April 19, 2017 at 11:02

        And HRC would have prevented those possibilities????

        • Ol' Hippy
          April 19, 2017 at 13:29

          Absolutely not.

      • Ol' Hippy
        April 19, 2017 at 13:28

        The next recession looming on the horizon will make the other ones of the ’30’s and ’07-’08 one’s pale in magnitude. It’s not a matter of if but when.

        • April 19, 2017 at 14:06

          And the Nuclear War looming on the horizon will make thoughts about a Recession vanish in Nuclear Winter.

    • afrobleu
      April 19, 2017 at 10:51

      they “vaulted trump into the white house and now they are regretting it.

      • April 19, 2017 at 11:05

        The entire world would have regretted Hillary in the White House.

        • DannyWeil
          April 19, 2017 at 12:16

          This Hillary versus Trump mantra is the wrong message,as this article notes. It is about the message not the messenger at this point. Either there is a progressive message to begin to counter the narrative of the deep state or we are through.

          • Gregory Woods
            April 19, 2017 at 13:11

            The Clinton IS part of the Deep State…

        • Jessejean
          April 19, 2017 at 21:00

          Harry. Agreed! I was really surprised at my visceral reaction to Hillary’s loss: I was so relieved the next morning when I learned we weren’t going to have to live under her. And I VOTED for her. I’m ashamed to say I fell for the Clinton scare tactics AGAIN, and held my nose etc etc. now I’m doing all I can to help Bernie right the ship, but jesus what a mess!

          • incontinent reader
            April 20, 2017 at 06:25

            Sorry to say, but Bernie is a moron on foreign policy, and to have caved as he did to the DNC dictates tells me he could very well sell out again if push came to shove. Why not instead look to a real progressive who has both experience- and in the theater of war, no less- and humanity, judgment, and the courage to speak truth to power and hold to her values- namely, Tulsi Gabbard.

          • Feliz Navidad
            April 20, 2017 at 09:53

            Me too!! I voted for Hillary although I loathed her, and was hugely relieved when she lost. I think with Trump, we are “permitted” to view his flaws, whereas had Hillary won, we would have been forced to continue eating hers and “liking” it.

            Bernie is the ONLY leader in America with wisdom. The S word and the O word are already being used against him. (Mandella was OLDER.) Only Bernie can reverse the suicidal course we are on. His running mate should be Rand Paul.

          • dave
            April 20, 2017 at 14:07

            +1 for Tulsi Gabbard!

    • nancy
      April 19, 2017 at 11:24

      Exactly. We were sick of Obama and his lies too. The Democrats don’t represent the working class and we are starting to realize it. Neither do the Republicans. It’s time to quit playing this game of swinging back and forth between them.

      • Bill Bodden
        April 19, 2017 at 12:32

        Very well said, nancy. When it came to Clinton vs. Trump or now comes to the Democratic (?) and Republican parties there wasn’t and still isn’t a lesser evil. The question now is, “Which is the greater evil?”

      • D5-5
        April 19, 2017 at 12:51

        Right on. I’m dreaming of five new parties to emerge for 2018 and take the congress, all dedicated to the people, with new young leaders like Tulsi Gabbard.

        • April 19, 2017 at 14:09

          Hey, D5-5, there won’t be a 2018, the way the USA is now threatening
          North Korea, Russia, China, et.al.

          • D5-5
            April 19, 2017 at 15:03

            Yeah, “dreaming” all right. I’m worried there is going to be a blood-spilling incident coming right up to get the American people enraged and behind the Current Order so that even if new parties did emerge they would be shouted off with new flag-waving anyway.

        • April 19, 2017 at 20:47

          here is a fellow who sees the situation pretty well…very refreshing to see these observations from a former republican and current US pastor…


        • Michael Hoefler
          April 20, 2017 at 03:58

          Tulsi Gabbard has the courage to say the truth and “damn the torpedos”. We need a lot more like her.

          I hope she runs for president in 2020. She has the makeup of a very serious and fair politician. She understands the consequences of war. She was in the US military.

      • Wallace McMillan Jr
        April 20, 2017 at 01:55

        True! Obama told us we would have “Change we could believe “. Instead we got the preservation of empire and the 99% got the shaft. People really wanted change and Ms. Clinton reminded us of the same old same old. Somebody like Trump who is a good showman took advantage of that discontent.

    • Sam F
      April 19, 2017 at 11:24

      Very true; they were apparently just as sick of the Repub demagogues, and wanted anything to destabilize the oligarchy, even an oligarch if that the the only option.

    • April 19, 2017 at 14:17


      • Skip Scott
        April 19, 2017 at 14:52

        Many people didn’t vote, because they had no one to vote for. The lesser of evils is still evil, and I would argue there wasn’t even a lesser evil in this case, just a different evil. Also having the election on a Tuesday is an obvious slight to the working man. Election day should either be a Holiday or on a weekend. Also National debates should be with all the candidates on the ballot, held more frequently, and for free as a public service of the TV networks.

        • D5-5
          April 19, 2017 at 15:06

          I think the abstraction “evil” translated out to “the biggest liar” and “the least incompetent” as the choice to be made on what was offered for a lot of people.

      • David HP
        April 19, 2017 at 17:19

        Enough with the all caps. How about making a point that is readable.

        • Bob In Portland
          April 21, 2017 at 14:04

          Also, it’s okay to use paragraphs.

      • Feliz Navidad
        April 20, 2017 at 09:57

        All Trump was (and is) is a Trojan Horse for the Republican party. Is anybody surprised, really, that all of his so-called populist positions (except rounding up immigrants) have been reversed? They were never anything but fool’s gold to begin with.

    • N.Green
      April 19, 2017 at 14:30

      Exactly! I could not bring myself to vote for Clinton and I even left the Democratic Party because the extent of nepotism and self-dealing within her campaign was so extraordinary. I believe Clinton’s pay-for-play schemes and the proven Clinton/Podesta Russian collusion did more to put our country at risk, than anything Trump has ever done. I want the Democrtas to own it, admit it, and change. Their arrogance so farm suggests they will never change.

    • Jay
      April 19, 2017 at 16:43

      Harry everyone (well except Marcotte) realizes this. And that same everyone realizes Trump is just as corrupt, if not more so, than the Clintons.

    • Peter Loeb
      April 20, 2017 at 06:39


      The Democratic Party doesn’t deliver any of the basic goods, the expectations
      of a good life. It gives tax breaks and panders to its donors.

      Obama was a warrior President of which “liberal” (?) Democrats could
      be “proud”. His base was worried “good” white people and minorities
      of imitated them. There is no “left”. Elizabeth Warren (Senator,D-MA),is
      a captive 100% per cent of the Israeli lobby and probably of the military
      industrial complex as well, is not “left” at all. Better to keep her
      in the US Senate as a sometime if half-hearted advocate. Her best input
      would be in Senate committee work.

      The American “left” (if it is at all) has marginalized itself
      by defining change-agents as those in the US who do not
      have male genital organs.

      So..another wild goose chase. As I have said previously, the
      result in 2016 was Donald J. Trump. With the neocon base within
      the smooth-talking Obama Administration, it could just
      as well have been someone else.

      “Left” does not, cannot ever mean “anti-Trump”. And only that!

      Note: Elizabeth Warren joined all other Senagte colleagues in
      support of Israel. And Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is her
      boss. “THE PLEDGE!!”

      Does Warren oppose the military-industrial complex?
      (Bernie Sanders was in full support of it providing its factories
      were located in his state, Vermont, where they would give
      jobs, healthcare etc. etc.). iS THIS “OUR REVOLUTION”???

      —-Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA

    • Hannah
      April 22, 2017 at 10:47

      The real left knew very well HRC was a corporatist warmonger, so the real left rejected her and went with Stein. The Dems are not the left. They are mainly center\center right.

  101. Jay
    April 19, 2017 at 09:40

    But here’s Amanda Marcotte whining at Salon that “it was really racism that won Trump the election”, some how racists who’d voted for Obama twice voted en mass against Hillary.


    I can’t keep track of these excuses coming from Hillary defenders. It’s as if Marcotte saw the NY Times review of “Shattered” and had to reach for yet another excuse. (I know that the Washington Post was pushing this racist crap few days ago.)

    Let us hope that the claim in “Shattered” that Hillary Clinton promised to never run for president [of the US] again holds true.

    I too was disappointed that Michiko Kakutani inserted “Russian meddling” into her NY Times review–however it’s clear she thinks the book makes a strong case that Hillary ran a terrible campaign and lost because of it. (That the book wasn’t trashed by Kakutani is progress on the subject by the Times. If the Times had wanted to denigrate the book, the review would have been by Maslin, who doesn’t bother to read this kind of thing.)

    • afrobleu
      April 19, 2017 at 10:48

      I think you are off your rocker. which racists voted for Obama. you sure did not.

      • Joe Tedesky
        April 19, 2017 at 11:46

        I thought Jay was being facetious. In other words even the non-racist Obama voter voted for Trump. Although if there was a candidate for the racist voter it would definitely have to be Trump. Let’s face it afrobleu this past presidential election put a strain on everyone, due to the poor choices of candidates we had to choose from.

        • DannyWeil
          April 19, 2017 at 12:13

          However, the Times’ review still focuses on the book’s larger message: “In fact, the portrait of the Clinton campaign that emerges from these pages is that of a Titanic-like disaster: an epic fail made up of a series of perverse and often avoidable missteps by an out-of-touch candidate and her strife-ridden staff that turned ‘a winnable race’ into ‘another iceberg-seeking campaign ship.’

          The dysfunctionals versus the deplorables. Where is the American left or is there one?

          • Joe Tedesky
            April 19, 2017 at 14:54

            Yes where is the American left?

          • Rudy Jubecza
            April 19, 2017 at 15:30

            I think the left left.

          • Terry Johnson
            April 19, 2017 at 17:21

            Two major analyses have been done. One shows income was less of a factor than previously thought. Education, measured by the number of degrees in each county, was a factor. The second was racism. You can believe what you like but I still prefer statistics over anecdotal evidence. Trumpism was a quick catchy phrase but the truth was that Trumpism = racism. I did not care who won the Democratic nomination as long as they could beat the Republican nominee. I was more afraid of Rubio being the nominee because of his Latino heritage but he was not speaking to nationalists, white power, right wing extremists. The media gave Trump an almost free ride until the last 4-6 weeks of the campaign while hammering Clinton daily. I also subscribe to many progressive and liberal sites and I began to notice early in 2016 that any comments in favor of Clinton were almost immediately attacked. Then I noticed a movement that supported the idea that a Trump Administration would be tolerable since Republicans in the House and the Senate would be able to control him. How is that working out? When people like me replied that the Republicans were so power hungry that they would bend over and say “don’t hurt me too much” we were attacked despite our contention that most important aspect of the election was ensuring a Democrat president would be able to appoint the next SCOTUS justice it just didn’t seem to matter. I am convinced even more now than I was more than a year ago there were a substantial number of trolls in those sites. I also believe, based on the information that has come forth, that many of them were Russian or Russian influenced. Lastly, all the polls showed Clinton winning the election – so much so that the campaign actually started to spend money in states they believed were in play. So how did she lose? Did the “deplorables” comment by Clinton cause some independents or Democrats to stay at home or vote for Trump because they lack the intellectual skills to question what is true or false or did they not like being called racists and wanted to show her? Or did many not vote because they thought the election was a foregone conclusion and/or didn’t want to deal with voter suppression and/or long lineups and inconvenient hours in many Red States. Given the latter, gerrymandering and the underweighting or overweighting value of a Senator’s vote the USA is a sorry excuse for a democracy. Throw in unlimited spending by corporations and America is definitely not a democracy – unless gold plating is one of the features of a democracy! We are all angry so blame the pitcher, the goaltender, the quarterback. But look at last night’s baseball game between Atlanta and Washington. The umpire said the ball was tipped and reversed the strike out. Look at the video. The batter missed the ball by a foot. Maybe some unbiased introspection and further examination of the analytics will reveal, yes, Clinton made some mistakes but they were not fatal in themselves. Other factors, already cited, as well as the involvement of the FBI at a critical time played major roles in the election of the abomination we have in the White House now.

          • Realist
            April 19, 2017 at 18:33

            Who are the plausible presidential candidates amongst the Dems for 2020? They say Hillary wants another go round… Heaven forbid that madness! Essentially all of the usual suspects on the Democratic short list are as mad as Hillary in that they i) blame Russia for the election of Trump, ii) blame Russia for the “invasion” of Ukraine, iii) accuse Russia of planning to invade Poland and the Baltics, iv) accuse Russia of committing war crimes in support of Assad… See a pattern here? The only thing they haven’t tried to pin on Russia and Putin is North Korea’s attempt to defy American aggression in the Far East. For that they blame China.

            Do these maniacs think they will have a winning formula to retaking the White House with that pack of crap? Are they so clueless in their assumption that bringing down Trump through an impeachment, resignation, assassination or a world war will guarantee the White House reverts to its rightful ownership?

            Hillary still thinks of herself as the once and future Queen, as do other ancient hangers-on from the Obama crew, most notably Joe “Ukraine Project” Biden who assumes any war with Putin is the winning ticket.

            Then there are the whippersnappers like Corey Booker, Keith Ellison, Deval Patrick and Kamala Harris who fancy themselves the proteges of Obama, at least in terms of their pragmatic shape-shifting to both accommodate the entrenched elite and embrace identity politics. They are no enticement to the abandoned working class. Pence pantses them in probably 40 states.

            Young white “liberals” like Amy Klobuchar, Kirsten Gillibrand, Chris Murphy, Andrw Cuomo, and Al Franken are going nowhere with their bellicose anti-Russia agenda.

            Bernie Sanders is past his sell date… and also endorsed Hillary. Elizabeth Warren and Tulsi Gabbard are far too “liberal” for the unreconstructed DNC to allow to be its preferred center-right candidate. Michelle Obama and Oprah Winfrey would lead to civil war as sure as Abraham Lincoln’s election did. Ain’t gonna happen or be allowed.

            The Dems got nothing. Their only ploy is to sabotage the current Republican administration, which they are presently trying mightily to do, and hope that their candidate can accidentally get elected in the ensuing chaos, much as Trump did in 2016. A third party might actually have a real chance to do the same if they could find a credible candidate. My suggestion: Rand Paul leaves the GOP, registers as a Libertarian and recruits Tulsi Gabbard or Dennis Kucinich to be his running mate.

          • Tannenhouser
            April 19, 2017 at 18:57

            @Terry. Delusional Delusional Delusional. Clinton lost because she was the shitty ER candidate, No more no less.

          • JWalters
            April 19, 2017 at 20:30


            Your points are fair as far as they go. But you omit the bigger picture. A great MANY people on both left and right are seeing that a small group centered in Wall Street is controlling the country and shafting most everybody else.

            To many less-educated Republicans (the bulk of their voting base) this Oligarchy engineers the wave of illegal immigrants for their cheap, easily bullied labor. These immigrants are not only farm workers, but have replaced American citizens in restaurant kitchens and construction crews. And their low wages have kept wages down for other jobs as well. A large swath of American workers have been hurt by this plot.

            To many, including educated Democrats, this Oligarchy also engineers the wave of wars in the Mideast for vast profits, e.g. War Profiteers and the Roots of the War on Terror.

            Hillary steadfastly refused to indict either Wall Street or the Mideast wars. She was massively funded by both, and made every effort to conceal that funding and her ties to both.
            Top donor to Clinton super PAC is Haim Saban
            Emails show Clinton crafted BDS letter for pro-Israel donors, as counter to her support for Iran deal
            Anti-Muslim bigotry is being funded by the Israel-right-or-wrong crowd

            This Wall Street Oligarchy also engineered the Great Recession, and reaped “record profits” while most Americans lost homes, savings, and jobs.

            Tom Perez is just like Hillary. He was interviewed by Chris Hayes last night, along with Bernie Sanders. Hayes pointed out that both Trump and Sanders explicitly blamed a wealthy elite for the problems of ordinary Americans, and asked Perez directly if he did also. Perez dodged and evaded like a professional, smooth talking swindler. (He even looks like a gangster.) He is clearly the mouthpiece of the criminals in charge, mouthing mom & applie pie goals, but without addressing the REAL source of the country’s problems – a criminal financial oligarchy. That oligarchy is described by former chief economist of the IMF Simon Johnson in The Quiet Coup.

            Trump went after the GOP’s carefully cultivated base of emotional, hot button voters instead of its Wall Street gang like Jeb Bush. And yes, that included the GOP’s racist voters. But I and many others could not vote for Hillary because of her deeply corrupt trajectory, so I voted Stein. And I’ve talked with clearly non-racists who voted for Trump because they wanted to stabilize the country’s workforce. Not because they think individual illegal immigrants are bad people, but because of the systematic degrading of the country’s standard of living that is being imposed by the ultra-wealthy in control. As long as those people continue to control the Democratic party, it is sunk.

          • Lizanne Whitlow
            April 19, 2017 at 23:00

            Terry Johnson, I concur with your comments. Another aspect that is not mentioned enough is that HRC was the sole QUALIFIED candidate because of her education, training and experience. The presumed core competencies necessary to fulfill the role of President were there indeed. For that reason, tRump should NOT have been a candidate and should NEVER have been on the ticket. Period. Every normal job has a job description with core competencies outlined. Minimal training and experience requirements need to be listed. Minimum formal education requirements need to be listed. Isn’t it time we the people asked for a job description for the most important job in the world? Current competence needs to be demonstrated by any candidate for the Presidency.

          • Michael Hoefler
            April 20, 2017 at 03:53

            I wanted to put this comment right under JWalters as I think that he nails it better than any other comment.

            When the Dems stole the nomination from Bernie – they insured their demise by putting up a 2nd rate candidate. If you want to win something – go with your best candidate or in sports – put your best players on the field and put them in the best position to win. We had a lousy field of candidates to pick from and we got a lousy president. The Clinton machine and Hillary’s massive ego blew it for the Dems. I hope she and Bill drop from sight and stay there.

            I held my nose and voted for Hillary as I could not bear to vote for a repub.

            Were Bernie president – we would be having battles – but there would be a clear direction that he would be taking to make this country stronger and better by doing the things that he talked about.

          • Brad Owen
            April 20, 2017 at 04:36

            To jwalters;
            Right on, to everything you said. There is an even bigger picture though, in which the Wall Street oligarchs are only a part of the whole scheme. Please go to Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), go to their search box, type in “return of the Monarchs” to see what we’re up against. The immiseration we are enduring is deliberately engineered and is meant to prepare us for “the solution” to all our suffering. In the future, there will be no hillaries sanders or trumps, standing for election, if the ancient dynastic families have their way, and we are ” properly prepared” to receive it.

          • Tannenhouser
            April 20, 2017 at 13:53

            @Lizzanne. Actually the only so called competency is status as a citizen of the USA. Period. There are no other so called competancies to run for POTUS. Your belief in an observable and demonstrable fallacy does not make it so.

          • April 20, 2017 at 14:48

            There is an American left, but it doesn’t control the Democratic Party. AT ALL.

            Bernie Sanders thinks he can change that.

            I’m not so sure. He, progressives, and anyone who doesn’t have a couple of million in in the bank should give the Democratic Party an electoral deadline to shed their corrupt, Wall Street first ways or we will all pack up and start a new party or take over an existing small one.

          • Steven Smith
            April 21, 2017 at 03:34

            Actually, Tulsi Gabbard is a viable candidate. Veteran, America loving, beautiful and liberal.
            If the DNC don’t take her up the Greens are pushing hard for her to skip over to us and run our ticket.

          • Maria Garcia-Eggly
            April 21, 2017 at 12:28

            Terry Johnson you are an example of the tone deafness of the HRC platform and the way they/she herself “managed” HRC.

            ” When people like me replied that the Republicans were so power hungry that they would bend over and say “don’t hurt me too much” we were attacked despite our contention that most important aspect of the election was ensuring a Democrat president would be able to appoint the next SCOTUS justice it just didn’t seem to matter. I am convinced even more now than I was more than a year ago there were a substantial number of trolls in those sites. I also believe, based on the information that has come forth, that many of them were Russian or Russian influenced. ”
            Us “trolls” as you call us are regular American Bernie supporters who WARNED you guys time and again how “she can’t beat Trump. She will LOSE”. We explained over and over agin the stats, the polls, the momentum behind Berine was GROWING not slowing yet you guys just started LYING, about: Bernie Bros, White people for Bernie, misogynists for Bernie, Bernie is a Jew, etc… We presented you with FACTS about HRC, her meddling in Honduras resulting in the murder of human rights activist Berta Caceres, the removal of an democratically ELECTED president in Honduras. The attempted stealing and denial of use of the minivan app we used to contact voters by Debbie Wasserman Schulz early on. We KNEW HRC and the DNC was cheating, we just couldn’t prove it….until wikkileaks. Assange is an AMERICAN HERO. To think any red blooded American would support someone who CHEATED in an election is mind boggling. HRC and her team should be BANISHED from politics FOREVER!

          • Alice De Tocqueville
            April 21, 2017 at 14:47

            The American left is in the Bernie camp.

          • Al Wilson
            April 26, 2017 at 11:57

            “Realist”:You were doing so well until the last paragraph, where you lose all creds. Rand Paul???

        • April 20, 2017 at 01:52

          “Another aspect that is not mentioned enough is that HRC was the sole QUALIFIED candidate because of her education, training and experience.”

          Failing in a job is experience that is disqualifying. Ruining the country rather than running it, is a repeat experience we don’t need.

          • Gregory Herr
            April 21, 2017 at 14:25

            Thank you. This needs to be said every time Clinton’s “experience” is brought up.

          • Alice De Tocqueville
            April 21, 2017 at 14:54

            Absolutely. None of the Sanders supporters I know (many) opposed her because of the Russia business, but because of her RECORD. Honduras, Haiti, (which her fans know nothing of), and Libya, Saudi favoritism, Wall St. favoritism, promoting FRACKING, ya know, stuff like that.

        • richard vajs
          April 23, 2017 at 08:13

          There was an element of racism in my vote – it wasn’t anti-black though – it was anti-Zionism. I strongly feel that Israel is the moral pariah of our times. How the state of Israel treats their native Palestinians is to be absolutely opposed. The Democratic Party (especially the Clintons) refuses to criticize the apartheid state of Israel. The infamous striking of the Sanders’ Platform proposal (championing Palestinian statehood) during the crafting of the Democratic Platform makes this pandering for Jewish campaign cash/votes impossible to dismiss. I will never forget Bill Clinton’s promise to get down into a “trench to defend Israel” – notably a move that he would never make to defend America. This is the “racism” destroying the Democratic Party – their embrace of the racist state of Israel for Jewish cash/votes which is destroying the Democratic Party, not a bunch of low IQ types voting Trump. True progressives/true liberals can’t stand racist Israel

      • Bob In Portland
        April 19, 2017 at 15:36

        One purpose of playing identity politics is to alienate the different groups from one another. By calling someone a sexist or racist they have ended discussions. Clinton lost and it’s your fault. Just accept it.

      • Jay
        April 19, 2017 at 16:38


        I think you need to re-read my comment.

        Racists never voted for Obama, and then didn’t swing to Trump in 2016. They voted for McCain and Romney.

        Hillary drove voters away in 2016.

        None of the the “racists elected Trump” lies can point to some up-surge of non-voters from 2008/12, who are also racists, coming out to vote for Trump in 2016.

        Marcotte is desperately clinging to a pack of lies. And Salon keeps publishing her garbage. Then Alternet usually picks up the Salon essay the next day.

        Now what does exist: the well to do and the middle class vote in much greater percentages than the poor, and voter turn out was down in 2016 so if you’re middle class, and racist, your vote counted more in 2016 than it did in 2012 assuming you voted in 2008/12. But the failure to attract voters in Michigan, Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina is on Hillary.

        She, as “Shattered” makes clear, (okay I couldn’t find a copy at my local B&N so I’m going by the review in the NY Times) could not articulate a reason for her to be president.

        • Steven Smith
          April 21, 2017 at 03:45

          There are the died in the wool Duke racists who never voted for Obama and then there are the implicit bias racists who ‘don’t see color’ who voted Obama because it confirmed that they can’t possibly be racist. He was half-white and very well educated so it was a safe bet.
          Those implicit racists certainly had no problem jumping from Sanders side and arguing that Trump will be a dove and he might accomplish some of his rhetoric about jobs. These crossovers and whites that voted for the Black-ish Obama, certainly had no issue ignoring Trump’s racism expressed in many ways over the campaign. They didn’t have as much to lose as the people that are sitting in county jails because of driving-while-black charges, unable to pay their fines.

          The rhetoric about poor whites voting for Trump was a lie. The voting results showed the Trump voters were people earning over $50,000 a year. White people (on average) under $25,000 a year, went for Clinton. The white men went for Trump in all categories but less in the under $25,000 group.

          • Steven Smith
            April 21, 2017 at 05:02

            My last section of my comment was flawed.
            It’s not income levels that determined who voted for Trump.

            It’s education levels. The poorly educated whites voted for Trump in high percentages. There are still many white counties with low education levels but greater than $40,000 yearly earnings (Long Island where Obama won by 4 and Trump by 8). So the white middle class voters who never went to college are Trump voters but poor whites with college (young, unemployed, college, arts or government towns) voted Clinton.

            See 538’s analysis:

          • Maria Garcia-Eggly
            April 21, 2017 at 12:49

            Tone deaf.

      • Patrick Lucius
        April 19, 2017 at 20:13

        Is there a question mark in there somewhere? So afro Bleu is calling Jay racist? Wow…

      • delia ruhe
        April 22, 2017 at 00:34

        You need to learn how to read.

      • Michael Weddington
        April 24, 2017 at 15:50

        You don’t understand the point. There were enough non-racists to elect Obama, so there should have been enough non-racists to elect Clinton (who is white) baring other factors.

      • Chris
        May 3, 2017 at 01:22

        His point was that more minorities voted for Obama than voted for Clinton, and that Trump won more minorities than either Romney or McCain. That strongly suggests that racism was not a dominant factor. It means that Hillary failed to reach the people everyone thought she would, because as should be totally evident from this article’s depiction of the book, they took a lot of things for granted. Hillary appealed primarily to middle and upper class white liberals as well as liberal women of all incomes. At best you can make a sexism case, but not a racism case.

    • Bob In Portland
      April 19, 2017 at 15:33

      The actual function of identity politics is to divide up the underclass by identity groups. If you recall, Marcotte was all in on the faux Duke lacrosse rape case in 2005, calling people who actually wanted to see the evidence “rape-loving scum”. If you recall the story, the woman who accused the players of rape was actually a psychotic hooker off her meds who eventually went to jail for killing her common-law husband. When Marcotte ended up at Salon she was on the groundfloor of the “Bernie Bros” meme, presuming anyone who would choose Sanders over Clinton must be a sexist devoid of human compassion. Salon, eight years earlier, had a “Obama boys” meme which was essentially the same, but with racism inserted. Pointing these things out got me banned from commenting on news stories there.

      In short, Marcotte should be identified with other toilers for the Mighty Wurlitzer, in the feminist field. I would point out that in the last week there have been endless stories of gay men being rounded up into concentration camps in Chechnya, all of these stories without any proof. This is the kind of propaganda meme that the CIA likes to use. It’s vague enough that there aren’t any details to examine or contradict. It is aimed at the gay/feminist political alliance. It’s the “Russians” who are behind it, according to the thin stories, but without naming which Russians. This may be the first move in reopening up a Chechen front, where, in the minds of neoliberals, Salafists will come to rescue gay Chechen men.

      • Jay
        April 19, 2017 at 16:41

        Bob in Portland:

        I’ve seen reference to Marcotte and the Duke Lacrosse case.

        However her blogging on the subject has been deleted, so I’ve not seen many exact quotations.

        Do you have a link to a cache?

        I’m well aware of Marcotte’s “Bernie Bros” and “sexism” garbage.

        • Bob In Portland
          April 19, 2017 at 20:25

          I don’t have anything, but if she removed it she was wise to do so. History has a way of providing the corrections to not-so-deep thinkers.

          By the way, Salon doesn’t block you from making comments, but rather blocks anyone else from reading them. I also have noticed that HuffPo has fewer and fewer stories where readers are allowed to comment. Must be afraid of the citizenry spouting fake news.

          • Jay
            April 20, 2017 at 15:38

            Bob in Portland,

            Right, Salon blocks/hides comments under the old Salon sign in system.

            However, they have now started a Facebook based comments section.

            I’ve used it a bit, but not as frequently as when it was an independent system.

      • Joe Tedesky
        April 20, 2017 at 01:30

        Last Saturday night I got caught off guard Bob when I was asked to what I thought about Putin rounding up gays in Chechnya. I brought this Chechnya story up on a couple of articles posting what I had heard on this comment board, and some here told me what they thought, or knew. The names associated with the Chechnya gay concentration camp story are Putin’s opposition. Navalny people mixed with Yeltsin left overs, are the ones who reside inside these propaganda outlets. America is being represented in this latest Demonize Russia Campaign by none other than Ellen Degeneres. So far as I know this story hasn’t gone up on the cable tv news networks, as it seems to be a Twitter Internet kind of whisper campaign attack going on here.

        If Trump is now being forgiven, then somebody better tell Rachel Maddow. Tonight Rachel started out talking about Eric Prince then while her arms waving Rachel meandered her conversation to Rex Tillerson and when he was with Excon-Mobil and Rex did a deal with Rosneft for a joint drilling effort by the two countries large oil companies to yield 90 billion barrels of crude, when boom bam boom Obama slapped sanctions on Russia. Then Maddow made it sound, using her cute condescending voice, that something shady if not treasonous was going on between Trump and Putin to make these two leaders get rich off that joint oil drilling.

        While some, since Trump started firing missiles, have eased up a bit on Trump over this Russian stuff, there are still those who seem to be pushing this unwanted nonsense. I think most of the diehards are from the Hillary camp and they are still on to this Russian interference with our U.S, democracy theme, and they want to bring Trump down. My guest is the Deep State (for the lack of a better title) would still rather have a Pence over having Trump. Think about it, if the Oz behind the curtain can’t have our Queen of Chaos Madam Hillary, then get Pense and put up with Jesus for his term, and be glad you sacked the Donald cause he’s too damn loose. Just say’n.

        I would like to warn all like minded people like me, how it would be good to get acquainted with this Chechnya story so as not to get caught off guard like I was. While I don’t want to advertise it, I will tell you this gay concentration camp story is already out there, so it would be good to prepare yourself for a surprise attack…maybe there are reasonable explanations already out there. If you hear of any share the link, and Bob let me know.

        • Stan
          April 20, 2017 at 11:29

          The Gay concentration camp story is much too convenient in purpose and timing. The story is nonsense of course as is every belief about Russia held as absolute truth in the US. One story after another that have two elements in common: They have no evidence and they all are anti-Russia, Not one of “Russia did it” stories or the “Russian Aggression” stories hold up up to even 5 minutes of background checking. I remember as a kid in the 50s at 10 years old and listening tor international short wave broadcasts from all over the world and became aware of propaganda very early. Later I traveled to most of the countries, 90 so far, and have to say, the level of deceptive propaganda generated by the US government and the corporate media makes those early broadcasts seem so benign, they were.. Now, we have a government that spares no expense to control opinions with multi-facet world wide deception. It is working however, the US population is so isolated from reality, the whole country is a weapon threatening the entire world.
          Clinton lost because she was too well known by the voters. We knew her track record as the most bloodthirsty SoS ever to hold that position. I was not for Trump but worked my ass off to convince everyone who would listen to reject Clinton. I stopped calling myself a dem after donating 40 years to the party, I ended up voting for Stein but was more pleased that Clinton lost than Trump winning. After seeing the behavior of the dems after the loss and push for war, I suspect a lot of the one time worker/middle class/liberal traditional base are forever lost to the dems. No one can trust them or their media for teaming up with wall street/MIC/Neo-cons, corporations to become the war party. They will never win a national election again.
          Trump won for a few very plain to see reasons: He promised job, and peace. Clinton never had a message other than “I am not Trump”. Sure, the millions of independents and ex-liberals who wanted peace were screwed but they took the risk for the slim chance that Trump was telling the truth as opposed to being 100% sure of major wars with Clinton. Millions of desperate once middle class and workers took that slim chance. What else could they do? The dems vilify them as racist while ignoring the topics people were craving to hear…jobs and peace.

          • Joe Tedesky
            April 20, 2017 at 16:05

            Thanks for adding to my comment. I’m not as experienced as you with your having traveled to 90 countries, but when I was in the Navy and visiting different foreign ports I started to come out of the American propaganda bubble. Also your description about Hillary’s losing is worded really well.

      • backwardsevolution
        April 20, 2017 at 04:30

        Bob – great comments!

    • john wilson
      April 20, 2017 at 05:07

      The real reason Hillary lost was because the media in its frenzy to discredit Trump, gave him wall to wall publicity that most aspiring politicians could ever dream of. The man’s face was never off the airwaves and what we did see of Clinton, was this silly woman doing her daily sting of Putin bashing. Never underestimate the power of the media to influence Jo public.

      • Maria Garcia-Eggly
        April 21, 2017 at 12:54

        Yes it was obvious. All that air time for cheetoh and HRC. No airtime for Bernie. Hmmm. I wonder why? NOT! HRC had the msm in the bag, let’s not forget Donna Brazille giving her the debate question s before hand and Rachael Maddows lust for HRC.

    • Todd Wick
      April 23, 2017 at 00:16

      Hillary lost. Lots of reasons. Maybe she should a listened to Bubba and talked to the working class folk like he wanted to do. Gore didn’t want him, he lost. Hillary really needed him – Robbie Mook wouldn’t listen – she lost. But definitely Russian Meddling hurt.

    • Izzy
      April 25, 2017 at 02:13

      She announced recently she won’t run for public office again. Not just president – ALL public office positions.

Comments are closed.