Some "Bernie Bros" are still saying they will not vote for Hillary in the general if Sanders loses the nomination, no matter what.

Courtesy of Yahoo: 

Bernie Sanders has dubbed his presidential campaign a “political revolution,” but some of his supporters are rebelling against the very party he is hoping to lead. 

A voluble group of die-hard Sanders backers is vowing online that it’s “Bernie or Bust,” saying they will never support his presidential primary opponent — and, at this point, likely Democratic nominee — Hillary Clinton. 

Despite these glimmers of reconciliation with his rival, Sanders may have unleashed a rebellion that will be beyond his power to control when it comes time to unify the party. Some “Bernie or Bust” stalwarts say they won’t back Clinton even if Sanders joins her ticket.

Now see this is why I have a problem taking many of Bernie's supporters seriously. 

Hillary supporters are going to vote for the Democratic nominee, even if it is not their candidate, because that is what grownups do.

I mentioned that I spoke to a couple of Sanders supporters at the caucus in Anchorage yesterday.

All of them, including the guy too stoned to talk to me, admitted that this was the first time that they had been politically engaged.

When I asked them why they supported Bernie they essentially rattled off a laundry list of policy positions, most of which Hillary also shares with Sanders.

However it became pretty clear that these folks ONLY wanted to vote for Bernie, and really did not care about any Democrats down ticket who would also benefit from their support.

Sanders is NOT attracting new Democrats to help elect a Democratic majority to take back control of the House and the Senate from the Republicans, while also retaining control of the White House.

For the most part he is attracting young anarchists who really just want to see the entire system upended so that they can see a new, more socialist form of government take its place.

I am not sure how that really helps any of us moving forward.

I am going to include this article from Investor's Business Daily here at the bottom for you to read.

I want to say upfront that I consider it a hit piece on Sanders and should be read with that thought in mind, however it also brings up a number of points that will surely be used in political attacks against Sanders if he were to win the nomination.

Rand Paul just lost the youth vote.

Courtesy of Raw Story:

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has thrown his support behind legislation that Republicans could use to force President Barack Obama to crack down on legal marijuana in states like Colorado and Washington. 

Speaking to Fox News on Thursday, the libertarian-leaning senator said he supported the Enforce the Law Act, which has been approved by the House. The legislation would allow Congress to sue the president for failing to faithfully execute laws. 

Paul said that Obama appeared to be “writing his own laws whenever he feels like it.” 

“He also does need to enforce the law. We write laws and he is just deciding willy-nilly if he likes it he enforces it, if he doesn’t, he won’t enforce it, and we really think he needs to be chastened, rebuked, and told that he needs to obey the constitution,” he added. 

Republicans have championed the bill as a way to make President Barack Obama enforce immigration and health care laws, and prevent the executive branch from overstretching its regulatory authority. 

But a committee report submitted by a co-sponsor of the bill suggested Republicans would also use the law to try to force Obama to crack down on marijuana in states that have legalized its possession and sale.

Lately there has been a lot of talk that Rand Paul presents the best option for the Republicans to challenge Hillary Clinton. 

The theory is that Paul, much like his father, has a strong following among the youth, and that Hillary will be seen by that demographic as an establishment figure who they will find less than inspiring.

I am not sure I agree with that assessment, but what I do know is that if Rand gets himself linked to legislation which threatens to force the President Obama to punish citizens legally using marijuana in states where that is an option, he will lose the youth vote overnight.

Personally I don't think that Paul would even survive the increased scrutiny by the MSM if he were nominated, much less make it though a debate with Hillary in one piece, however I am also aware that the prospects for the Republican party are limited, so it is not entirely impossible that Paul might indeed ultimately be their choice.

If so, this is going to be a bloodbath.

"It's billionaires vs students." Elizabeth Warren introduces new plan to tax the wealthy and use the revenue to help students with college loans.

Courtesy of Think Progress:

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) laid out a new plan that would tax millionaires and use that revenue to help students refinance their student loans. 

Delivering the keynote address at the Higher Ed Not Debt Campaign launch event on Thursday at the Center For American Progress, Warren argued that America faces a choice: “Do we invest in students, or millionaires?” Warren plans to introduce a bill that would create an “America that invests in those who get an education” by revising the tax code and enacting the Buffet rule. 

The Buffet rule is named after billionaire Warren Buffet and would establish a minimum tax on income in excess of $1 million. The measure, which never got out of Congress, raises approximately $50 billion in revenue and ensures that millionaires do not pay lower tax rates than middle-class families. 

Congress acted to lower the federal unsubsidized student loan interest rate to 3.86 percent for the 2012-2013 academic school year. But unless it acts again, the rate will increase back to its original 6.8 percent for the next school year. 

Warren’s plan would maintain the 3.86 percent rate for the federal unsubsidized student loan. The cost of the change would be covered by a “dollar for dollar” effort where for “every dollar the Buffet rule brings in, we use that dollar to refinance student loan debt,” she explained. She estimated that recent graduates who borrowed the maximum in undergraduate loans could see their payments drop by $1,000 a year and total interest paid over the life of the loan could be cut nearly in half. Students with graduate loans or borrowers from private lenders would save even more, Warren projected.

You know sometimes it feels as if Elizabeth Warren is the last real liberal standing in this country. Or at least the last one who openly embraces the liberal ideals at every opportunity.

I am not one of those who think she will, or even should, run for President. But I have to say that if she did she would have the youth vote all tied up.

(Here is the video of Warren's remarks.)

Michele Bachmann explains, truthfully, why the conservatives are so fearful of a successful immigration bill.

Courtesy of Mediaite:  

According to Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), if this current iteration of immigration reform passes through Congress, there will never again be a Republican president; and, instead, the United States will be governed by a permanent “liberal progressive” majority. 

Speaking with WorldNetDaily, Bachmann warned that while her beliefs “may sound melodramatic,” she insists the dire consequences of immigration reform would be “that big and that important” to warrant sounding the alarms. (By the way WND is where crazy people go to be interviewed.)


“This is President Obama’s number one political agenda item,” she said, “because he knows we will never again have a Republican president, ever, if amnesty goes into effect.” She added: 

“We will perpetually have a progressive, liberal president, probably a Democrat, and we will probably see the House of Representatives go into Democrat hands and the Senate will stay in Democrat hands.”

First off Marco Rubio himself refutes the idea that his Immigration Reform Bill will bring in 11 million new Democratic voters, so Bachmann is just wrong on the facts. (I know, big surprise right?)

But even more importantly is that in some ways Bachmann is right about the changing voter demographic, except she is wrong about where the new Democratic voters are coming from.

They are not coming from across the borders, they are coming from the uterus's of American women all over the country. It is the increasing number of younger voters who have overwhelmingly embraced the Left's policies and who would not be caught dead voting for a Republican.

So I guess if Bachmann and her cohorts want to stem the tide of liberal voters coming into this country they will have to "build the damn fence" right in front of every vagina in America. (Well that certainly takes the "war on women" to all new levels doesn't it?)

By the way the irony is not lost on me that the Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to make sure that every conception leads to a birth, and yet bitching that those grown up fetuses refuse to vote for them. Ungrateful little zygotes!

New report says younger voters see Republican party as "closed-minded, racist, rigid, old-fashioned." Sounds about right to me.

Courtesy of Politico: 

The 95-page study, which looked at the party’s views on social and economic issues, as well as its messaging and outreach, echoes a March report on the election debacle issued by Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, which presented a devastating assessment of the party’s current state of affairs. 

But in some ways the new report from inside the GOP tent is even more scathing and ominous — since it comes from the party’s next generation. 

Titled the “Grand Old Party for a Brand New Generation,” the report is sharply critical of the GOP on several fronts. The study slams some Republicans’ almost singular focus on downsizing Big Government and cutting taxes; candidates’ use of offensive, polarizing rhetoric; and the party’s belly-flop efforts at messaging and outreach, even as the report presents a way forward and, at times, strikes an optimistic tone. 

In the report, the young Republican activists acknowledge their party has suffered significant damage in recent years. A sampling of the critique on: 

Gay marriage: “On the ‘open-minded’ issue … [w]e will face serious difficulty so long as the issue of gay marriage remains on the table.” 

Hispanics: “Latino voters … tend to think the GOP couldn’t care less about them.” 

Perception of the party’s economic stance: “We’ve become the party that will pat you on your back when you make it, but won’t offer you a hand to help you get there.” 

Big reason for the image problem: The “outrageous statements made by errant Republican voices.” 

Words that up-for-grabs voters associate with the GOP: “The responses were brutal: closed-minded, racist, rigid, old-fashioned.” 

“[The] Republican Party has won the youth vote before and can absolutely win it again,” the report says, pointing to presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush who were competitive with that demographic. “But this will not occur without significant work to repair the damage done to the Republican brand among this age group over the last decade.”

This is a report put together by the College Republican National Committee so it attempts to maintain a sunny, hopeful disposition in the face of rather overwhelmingly bad news about the future of the GOP.

I think the idea that the youth flocked to Ronald Reagan has been much exaggerated. I lived through those times and Reagan was really a President for our parents more than for those of us in a younger demographic. We may have voted for him against Fritz Mondale for his second term but that had more to do with Mondale than Reagan. And after Reagan's lack of response on the AIDS epidemic during that second term his stature among the younger set was essentially that of Mitch McConnell today.

I do not see a way forward for the Republicans among the younger voters right now, unless they were to TOTALLY reinvent themselves and openly accept Hispanics, women, and gays into the party while also advocating getting out of the war business and going after big banks.

Not exactly a scenario that I see happening anytime soon.

No the Republicans will continue to be competitive in local races located in very conservative areas, but nationally they are finished unless the Democrats screw up in a big way.

Stephen Colbert mocks the GOP Growth and Opportunity Project.

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Indecision Political Humor,Video Archive

"Republican leaders should participate and actively prepare for interviews with the Daily Show, the Colbert Report....." 

Oh yes, this is a FABULOUS idea!  I can only imagine much quicker the youth will move away from the Republican party after watching them flail away in an attempt to make their point while sitting opposite Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert.

Gonna be a bloodbath. A very, very humorous bloodbath.

In the category of "More bad news for the Republican party," there is evidence to suggest that President Obama may have created an entire generation of lifelong Democrats.

Courtesy of the Atlantic:  

Has Obama turned an entire generation of voters into lifelong Democrats? The answer, according to political scientists who study partisanship, may well be yes. Voting for a party is a habit, they say, and the habit tends to stick. The Americans who came of age under FDR leaned more Democratic than the electorate as a whole for the rest of their voting lives. Many of today’s oldest voters—who broke for Mitt Romney by a wider margin than any other age group—cast their first, formative ballots in the Eisenhower years. And the Reagan era (spanning his 1980 election, his 1984 reelection, and the 1988 election of his vice president, George H. W. Bush) had a particularly marked effect on the rising voters of the 1980s. The Americans who entered the electorate during that time have remained disproportionately loyal to the GOP compared with voters overall. 

In their 2002 book, Partisan Hearts and Minds, the political scientists Donald Green, Bradley Palmquist, and Eric Schickler argue that party loyalty is a tribe-like social identification. Despite parties’ shifting stances on issues, and despite changes in personal beliefs over time, voters tend to continue to affiliate with the same political party. (Think of the “yellow-dog Democrats” of the South, segregationist conservatives who, it was said, would vote for a yellow dog before they’d cast a ballot for a Republican. After national Democrats switched to championing civil rights in the 1960s, these voters did eventually begin to vote with the GOP—but it took decades for them to relabel themselves as Republicans.) 

There’s even intriguing new evidence that the act of voting can itself strengthen party loyalty. In a not-yet-published paper, Elias Dinas, a scholar of U.S. politics at the University of Nottingham, compared first-time voters in the 1968 presidential election with people who were otherwise similar but who didn’t vote that year. Dinas found that Nixon voters were subsequently more Republican, and Humphrey voters more Democratic, than peers who hadn’t voted—an indication that casting a ballot makes a person more partisan. 

To be sure, not every president bends the electorate toward his party. Pols like Nixon, Clinton, and Bush, who were hardly known for inspiring youth movements, left the electorate much the way they found it. But to Laura Stoker, a UC Berkeley political-science professor who studies partisanship, the fact that young Obama supporters have affirmed their allegiance in two consecutive presidential elections may herald a generation of Democratic-leaning voters that will skew the composition of the electorate far into the future. “The consistency of young people’s support for Obama in 2008 and 2012 suggests a pattern similar to the 1980s,” she told me. “They are going to be more Democratic than they would have otherwise been, because the character of the first votes cast produces or reinforces a Democratic leaning.”

Like I said before this President will go down in history as perhaps one of the BEST Presidents this country has ever seen.

Anybody care to argue that?

Deeply red Montana prepares to turn blue. Can other Republican strongholds be too far behind?

Courtesy of the New York Times:

This funky college town, nestled along two rivers where five mountain ranges converge, has long been a liberal pocket, an isolated speck of blue in a deeply red state. Now Montana is electing more politicians who lean that way, thanks to a different-minded generation of young voters animated by the recession and social issues. 

It is no secret that young voters tilt left on social issues like immigration and gay rights. But these students, and dozens of other young people interviewed here last week, give voice to a trend that is surprising pollsters and jangling the nerves of Republicans. On a central philosophical question of the day — the size and scope of the federal government — a clear majority of young people embraces President Obama’s notion that it can be a constructive force, a point he intends to make in his State of the Union address on Tuesday. 

“Young people absolutely believe that there’s a role for government,” said Matt Singer, a founder of Forward Montana, a left-leaning though officially nonpartisan group that seeks to engage young people in politics. “At the same time, this is not a generation of socialists. They are highly entrepreneurial, and know that some of what it takes to create an environment where they can do their own exciting, creative things is having basic systems that work.” 

Here in Montana, a state that backed John McCain in 2008 and Mr. Romney last year, voters under 30 have helped elect two Democratic senators and a new Democratic governor. Nationally, young voters have since 2004 been casting their ballots for Democrats by far wider margins than previous young generations — a shift that could reshape American politics for decades.

You know WHENEVER I read about a red state becoming purple, or that it is on the fast track to embracing progressive ideals wholeheartedly, I always get very excited about the future of the country and cannot help but imagine a time where the divisive issues of abortion, gay rights, and immigration are no longer considered appropriate issues to use in order to get political leverage. by EITHER side.

Wouldn't that be wonderful? To have actual grownup conversations about which direction to take the country without politicians feeling the need to frighten people into supporting them with talk of "the end of traditional values," or  "killing babies," or"keeping those Mexicans from taking jobs away from hard working Americans?" I don't know about you but I can hardly wait.

Hell if Montana is ready to turn blue can Alaska be far behind?

Not according to Nate Silver it's not!

Can I just say again how great it is to be a liberal in 2013?

Mitt Romney ponders the reasons for this defeat.

Hey, we warned the Republicans about the youth vote, but did they listen?

Nope.

Could this be the cellphone election?

Courtesy of National Memo:

The first and most profound way cellphones are changing American politics is through polling. 

“We think the polls this year seriously underestimate the Obama vote,” legendary pollster Stan Greenberg said in a video posted on The Carville-Greenberg Report Monday. 

“A majority of Hispanics are cellphone-only; 4 out of 10 African-Americans are cellphone-only. Young people, of course, are mostly cellphone only,” Greenberg explained. This greatly complicates polling since only live pollsters call cellphones. 

“You know, if you’re reached on a cellphone, you’re 11 points more likely to be voting for President Obama,” Greenberg said. 

Greenberg isn’t the only one who has observed the president’s mobile advantage. The New York Times’ poll guru Nate Silver has noted the same phenomenon and suggests that polls that include cellphones tend to be much higher quality. 

A second way cellphones are changing the political landscape is through donation by text. 

President Obama’s campaign was the first ever to accept donations by text. Governor Romney’s campaign joined him shortly thereafter. Though carriers capped the amount of donations an individual could give through this method, it proved to be highly effective for the president. 

Early estimates suggest that Obama outraised Romney by a 500-to-1 ratio via text message. This helped the president catch up with the Republicans on fundraising and presents a unique opportunity.

You know reading that, and I have posted similar information about cellphones before, should give all of us a lot of hope that even as the Republicans are attempting every dirty trick in the book to steal this election, that the numbers, just like in 2008, will be too much much for them to overcome.

By the way I have to give a big ole hat tip to my pal Dennis Zaki who was the first person, and this is going way back to the beginning of the year, to tell me not to trust the polls and that they will not reflect reality so long as they leave out cell phones. He has said over and over again, that nobody seems to be aware of just how many people in this country are cell phone only users.

And do you know what? I think he is most likely right on target.

Paul Ryan to young man asking how deregulating business will help create jobs: "Would you like some candy?"

Look I am going to give Ryan a little bit of a break here.

It must be a HUGE pain in the ass to have somebody confront you like this while you are with your family and not expecting it, however his response was SO arrogant and dismissive that it is hard to feel TOO sorry for him.

There are a number of ways in which Paul Ryan could have handled this more effectively, and asking this young man if he wants candy is certainly not one of them.

The only headline I could come up with is "Holy Shit!" Update!

I missed these pictures of the President meeting with college students in Charlottesville, Virginia from last Wednesday, which is a shame because they are amazing!

On a day where temperatures reached 84 degrees, the President still managed to attract a crowd that numbered close to 7,500.

Enthusiasm gap my ass!

You know seeing these pictures really makes me hopeful that even with ALL of the bullshit that the GOP is throwing at the voters of America, that they will STILL do the right thing for this country.

Well let me update this bad boy: Here are a few pictures from the President's visit to Urbandale, Iowa just today.

Damn, that's impressive!

(H/T for the photos goes to the Obama Diary.)

Let's end the day on a high note. Such as President Obama's visit to Washington-Lee High School.

The President also sat down for a round table discussion with the students to discuss college affordability, which you can see here.

I keep hearing the Right Wing say that Obama has lost the youth vote, or that they are not as enthusiastic as 2008, but I have yet to see it.

The Atlantic thinks that Obama's strategy of reaching out for the youth vote might have also have another, more subliminal, agenda:

What Obama's really doing may be more about optics: the symbolic value of all those pictures and video where he's surrounded by fresh-faced, enthusiastic young adults. Every one of those images, and their repetition, drives home his association with the new generation, the future, and the transformative promise of progress -- the mantle of hope that he's straining so hard to reclaim after a strenuous, wearing first term. It's of a piece with his new slogan, "Forward," and his campaign's portrayal of Mitt Romney as the candidate of the past. The cheering crowds of young people are there to serve as a stirring, hopeful sight to older voters, whether they're remembering their own youthful aspirations or thinking about the future that awaits their children and grandchildren. And it's an effect Romney can't summon, as evidenced by his appearance at an Ohio college last week: Some students appeared to struggle to remain conscious as Romney delivered a lengthy riff on office supplies.

Well if that is indeed Obama's strategy, I think it's working.

(Photos courtesy of the Obama Diary.)

Unprecedented uptick in support for gay marriage. Just another thing to piss the conservatives off!

Courtesy of Business Insider:

Support for same-sex marriage has undergone a dramatic and unprecedented shift in the past decade, with more people now firmly supporting it than opposing. 

The Pew Research Center recently took a look at its polls on the subject from the past 10 years. The key number is the combined 26-point swing over that period. Ten years ago, 57 percent of Americans opposed gay marriage, compared with 35 percent that supported it. 

Now, it's reversed. Today, 47 percent of Americans support gay marriage. And only 43 percent are opposed. 

"The change in attitude is certainly unprecedented," said Greg Smith, a senior researcher at the Pew Research Center. 

No matter how hard the conservatives try to drag us back to the past, the facts show that the country is moving toward progress, and picking up speed as it goes.

Kind of makes you wonder just how much longer the GOP will be a viable political party doesn't it?

Young people abandon Evangelical churches in droves.

Courtesy of Laura Stepp for CNN:

Republican conservatives should be worried. Evangelical churches that frequently support conservative candidates are finally admitting something the rest of us have known for some time: Their young adult members are abandoning church in significant numbers and taking their voting power with them. 

David Kinnaman, the 38-year-old president of the Barna Group, an evangelical research firm, is the latest to sound the alarm. In his new book, "You Lost Me: Why Young Christians Are Leaving Church and Rethinking Faith," he says that 18- to 29-year-olds have fallen down a "black hole" of church attendance. There is a 43% drop in Christian church attendance between the teen and early adult years, he says. 

I'm not surprised. These young dropouts value the sense of community their churches provide but are tired of being told how they should live their lives. They don't appreciate being condemned for living with a partner, straight or gay, outside of marriage or opting for abortion to terminate an unplanned pregnancy. 

Consider the following facts about millennials in general: 

• Seven in 10 millennials say sex between an unmarried man and woman is morally acceptable (PDF). (According to Kinnaman, young Christians are as sexually active as non-Christians.) 
• Most women in their early 20s who give birth are unmarried. 
• More than six in 10 millennials (including 49% of Republican millennials) support same-sex marriages. 
• Six in 10 millennials say abortion should be legal (PDF), a higher proportion than found in the general population. A higher percentage say abortion services should be available in local communities. 

Millennials also part ways with conservative orthodoxy on wealth distribution and caring for the environment. According to a report in The Christian Science Monitor, three out of four say that wealthy corporations and financiers have too much power and that taxes should be raised on the very wealthy, and two out of three say financial institutions should be regulated more closely. In addition, most say that creationists' view on evolution is outdated. 

Sounds a lot like Democratic ideology to me.

As we all know, the Evangelical vote is the very foundation of GOP support.

With fewer young people willing to put their intellect in neutral in order to be directed as to how to think, and of course how to vote, the smaller the impact the Fundamentalists will have on the elections in this country. 

Adding this information to what we now know about the rapidly aging demographic of Fox News viewers, and the even older listeners of Right Wing radio, I think that we can now predict, with much confidence, that this country is DEFINITELY heading in a much more progressive direction.

Now we have actual data to use that disproves the Right Wing's irrational claim that America is growing more conservative. In fact it seems to be picking up speed as it rushes to embrace ideals that have long been the foundation of the Democratic party.

Have I mentioned lately how proud I am of this younger generation?

Perhaps THIS is why the Republicans keep trying to disenfranchise more and more young voters, and working to find ways to steal elections. 

Because they know that their time is coming to a close, and that someday the Republican party might well go the way of the Whig Party, and end up on the scrap heap of history. And what a great day in America THAT will be!

By the way I finally found a scientific illustration of how the fundamentalist religions work.

Yeah, that is kind of how I always pictured it.

More hope for our future.

Who could elicit such a adoration from these young ladies?

Justin Bieber?

Lady Gaga?

Or could it be somebody else?

 Surprised?

They might be a little young to vote in the 2012 election, but they are only a small sampling of the young people in this country who are ardent supporters and even fans of this President. And many of them WILL vote.

(H/T to the Obama Diary.)