Nicole Wallace Hits Hillary-DNC Rigging of Dem Presidential Primary

Moments before Donald Trump delivered his victory speech in the Nevada Republican presidential caucuses last night, Nicole Wallace laid out a problem the Democratic Party presidential nominee faces in the general election campaign, if the nominee is Hillary Clinton.

Wallace, a former White House director of communications in the Bush adminstration and a panelist on MSNBC covering the Nevada Republican caucus results, pointed out the Republican Party presidential primary race is set up to award the nomination to the winner of the popular vote and individual states, and the Democratic National Committee is rigged to coronate Hillary Clinton.

Instead of a grassroots favorite like Donald Trump who appears to be the presumptive Republican nominee now, Democratic Party bosses and insiders are working to frustrate Democratic voters by substituting the will of the high number of superdelegate insiders for the American people who show up at Democratic Party primary and caucuses to cast their votes.

"Most Republicans look at the superdelegate process as a corrupt way for Hillary Clinton and [Democratic] Party leaders to put their finger on the scales against a guy in Bernie Sanders who most grassroots liberals adore. The fact that our [Republican] process plays out without Party bosses is something that I would expect liberals to find a nice thing about the Republican presidential [nominating] process," said Wallace.

Putting aside the fact RNC Chair Reince Priebus is an empty suit, Wallace is spot-on.

Guaranteeing Democratic Party voters, in Wisconsin (April 5 presidential primary), Ohio (March 15), Florida (March 15) and Pennsylvania (April 26) for example, their votes count in the Democratic Party presidential primary would be nice, and democratic.

Telling these same voters the DNC, Hillary Clinton and surrogates will be the deciders is not nice and corrupt, and if these facts are effectively communicated by the GOP could be catastrophic for the Democratic Party.

Consider post-Citizens United (see Justice Stevens' narrow concurrence), the dystopian world of dark money, the Koch brothers, congressional corruption, the Republican-led U.S. Senate improperly blocking a a presidential nominee to SCOTUS, ("the Senate has no pre-nomination role at all in the appointment process," (Fallone, Marquette University Law School) and
(SCOTUSblog Obama, A Responsibility I Take Seriously); and still the Republican Party occupies the high ground on the democratic nature of their party's presidential nominating campaign.

Only Hilliary Clinton and Debbie Wasserman Schultz can surrender the high ground to the Republicans.

Democratic Party May Win in a Rout, or Blow a Historic Election

A Common Effort, or Super-Delegates Will Take It from Here

The Democratic Party should facilitate organizing on a community level—Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Cleveland and so forth—as state Republican governments around the country continue their goal of decimating local democracy.

Local democracy is not just a critical democratic value in itself, it's the key to the composition of the U.S. Senate. See Dreier at The American Prospect, rating Wisconsin number two as a likely party flip of a senate seat in what appears to be a likely Democratic Party retaking of the U.S. Senate.

Think fast, what is the DNC and the Democratic Party of Wisconsin doing right now to facilitate voting in Milwaukee and Racine?

About the only thing that can stop a progressive rout in November is a foolish DNC coronation of Hillary Clinton, telling voters their voices, local organizing efforts and work for their preferred candidates are not needed and super-delegates will take it from here.

This is precisely the message Hillary's lackeys delivered this weekend as Harry Reid engineered a narrow victory in Hillary's alleged impenetrable Nevada firewall.

The folks in Wisconsin (April 5 presidential primary), Ohio (March 15), Florida (March 15) and Pennsylvania (April 26) may not appreciate the communications from the DNC, Hillary Clinton and surrogates their states' presidential primary votes won't count.

If you think general election migrations from nominally Democratic Party-voting people to Donald Trump in a general election are merely anecdotal, you're kidding yourself.

The DNC message to voters to fuck off is not a compelling nor winning message for president and down-ticket in a general election that should be a rout, (Snell, Washington Post).

This is the message of the weekend and apparently for Super Tuesday (March 1) being sent priority mail to a volatile and less-than-trusting electorate.

And Hillary, your name ain't the greatest, you need to be doing it cleaner and better than the other guy, (Fournier, The Atlantic).

Bernie's Plan Will Work

Update: Poll: Trump beats Clinton head-to-head. "Bernie Sanders is closing the Democratic primary gap and is stronger than Hillary Clinton in the general election," David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center, said in a statement.

Hillary Clinton knows the number of frack-you cards sent her way via the American people. They don't like her decades-long embrace of Mega-banks and Health Insurance corporations over people.

What Hillary Clinton will never get is all minorities and the white working class want is an equal shot, what they will get under Bernie Sanders. From Paul Krugman in a graph:

The clock is ticking on Clinton's latest big lie she's a friend of the working class, and she wants the game called now because of the very real possibility of her Big Con being blown.

Sanders Takes 48 Percent in Clinton 'Firewall;' D.C. Insiders Call Game

The Williams family is pictured above. Douglas
Williams penned an open letter to John Lewis in
In These Times: "The movement that you, my
grandmother, Senator Sanders and
countless thousands were a part
of was the largest grassroots movement
for social, political and economic change
that this country has ever seen.
It was a movement that was bigger
than any one participant in it; a movement that,
at its best, was unapologetically radical and
driven by the Black working class.
We should live every moment in awe
and praise of all of those people
and not sweep them under the rug
when it is politically expedient.
Hillary Clinton ain’t worth that."

Bernie Sanders takes 48 percent in Nevada, Clinton's acclaimed firewall, and Party insiders are telling the world the game is over for the Democratic Party campaign for the nomination for the presidency.

Who knew two caucuses and one primary make an entire 2016 Democratic Primary? (2106 Primary Schedule)

One slight omission in the Clinton spin, dutifully reported by Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC), is the fact Bernie Sanders overwhelmingly leads in the total of actual people who voted in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada.

Voters may matter in the Democratic Party campaign for the nomination of  the presidency, but not if Hillary and Party insiders get their way.

How do you think this fact would play in a general election against a Donald Trump?

This is Clintonomics math. The same math that is the foundation of the Clinton myth.

Notes Joshua Frank at CounterPunch:

As economist Robert Pollin of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst explains in Contours of Descent: US Economic Fractures and the Landscape of Global Austerity, Clintonomics was not all it was cracked up to be. 'The distribution of wealth in the US became more skewed than it had at any time in the previous forty years,' he argues. 'No question, an increasing number of US jobs began to be outsourced at an unprecedented rate as well.'

'Unlike Clinton, Bush is unabashed in his efforts to mobilize the power of government to serve the wealthy,' he continues. 'But we should be careful not to make too much of such differences in the public stances of these two figures, as against the outcomes that prevail during their terms of office … the ratio of wages for the average worker to the pay of the average CEO rising astronomically from 113-to-1 in 1991 under Bush-1 to 449-to-1 when Clinton left office in 2001.'

As for the future, consider Andrew Levine's analysis:

Why would [Hillary] think she needs Obama now?

The short answer is: the South Carolina primary. If the gods are merciful and Hillary gets schlonged there, her chances of winning the nomination will be toast, no matter how many 'super delegates' she currently has in her pocket.

The slightly longer answer is that the Clintons don’t want all their years of flattering and cajoling black politicians to be for naught. They think that African Americans owe them; and indeed many of their notables do. But when the people those notables purport to represent start removing the scales from their eyes and/or if they start thinking of Hillary as a loser, the jig will be up: it will be plain to all that it was all a waste of time and effort.

African Americans in South Carolina forsook the Clintons before, in 2008, but at least that was for one of their own – sort of. If they do it again, it will be for a septuagenarian Jewish man with a Brooklyn accent. This must get Bill and Hillary’s goat.

The Clintons understand identity politics; Hillary is playing that game now to win the votes of women of a certain age. But they have always treated adversaries to their left with contempt. Thanks to the Sanders campaign, Hillary has lately found it expedient to strike leftish poses. Under the skin, though, the old animosities remain.

She and Bill simply cannot abide the thought of being beaten by a 'democratic socialist,' someone who espouses an up-dated version of the old fashioned liberal political line that the Clintons have been working their entire lives to eradicate. They are therefore pulling out all the stops. If that requires strategic extrusions of shameless Obamaphilia on Hillary’s part, so be it.

It wasn’t supposed to come to this. Weeks, even days, ago, the Clintons could reasonably hold fast to the belief that, like the poor (and for much the same reason), African Americans would always be with them.

Now, though, they are starting to wonder if they can trust anybody — black, brown or white — under thirty. They have reason to be concerned: black youths in South Carolina are fast becoming as lucid about the Clintons and Clintonism (Democratic Party style neoliberalism and liberal imperialism) as their white counterparts in Iowa and New Hampshire.

In view of the Clintons’ role in encouraging the mass incarceration of African American men, and their assault on the already feeble welfare state institutions that used to keep oppressed and impoverished African American communities on life support — and in light of their role in forging trade and industrial policies that have decimated the entire American working class — this was bound to happen eventually. But Hillary was counting on it not happening soon. The question now is whether consciousness can dawn quickly enough to throw her off her track.

One would think that she and her handlers could think of a better way to stave the inevitable off than by lauding Obama and vowing to continue his good work.

Hillary Clinton just is not worth that.

Lose with Hillary Clinton

While Hillary Clinton spent the 1960s working to elect Republicans—Nixon (1960) Goldwater (1964) and Rockefeller (1968)—to the presidency, Bernie Sanders was a civil rights activists, a leader in Chicago of the Congress of Racial Equality working to desegregate housing, also attending the historic March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom.

Faced with these facts and Clinton's smearing of Sanders' civil rights record, the Chicago Tribune (Skiba) straightened out the record this weekend and released a photo from its archives of a young Sanders being arrested at a South Side civil rights protest occurring just weeks before the March on Washington.

No comment from the Clinton campaign who instead is smearing Sanders for proposing New Deal and Great Society initiatives that used to be the foundation of the Democratic Party's platform.

After spending the 1960s working for Republicans, Clinton worked briefly as counsel in 1974 for the House Committee on the Judiciary during the Watergate scandal. During her tenure on the Judiciary Committee, Clinton alienated several other young progressive attorneys with her "self-absorbed" manner as described by one counsel.

Clinton with her husband spent the 1970s and 1980s advocating a corporatist Democratic Party vis a vis a working families Democratic Party, an effort that grew to fruition during the Clinton adminstration.

Now Clinton is questioning Sanders' bone fides as a Democrat prior to mounting evidence Clinton would lose a general election.

Notes Aaron Camp at The Progressive Midwesterner:

Sara Goldrick-Rab, who is a education policy and sociology professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Goldrick-Rab is also a frequent user of Twitter, and she only needed one tweet to make a compelling case for how Bernie is a more electable presidential candidate than Hillary Clinton:

It's not personal Hillary, the American people just don't trust and like you, (Bloomberg Politics).