The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age

    NY: If She Can Make It There...

    By PeraclesPlease on Fri, 04/01/2016 - 6:27am |

    There's been some backseat driving and criticism and suggested panic for Hillary abandoning Wisconsin to campaign in New York. But seemingly lost in this analysis is the pretty obvious - the schedule:

                                 Dels Super Total

    Apr 5   Wisconsin        86  10  96     Open primary

    Apr 9   Wyoming         14    4   18    Closed caucus

    Apr 19  New York       247 44 291    Closed primary

    Apr 26  Connecticut    55  16   71    Closed primary

                Delaware         21  10   31    Closed primary

                Maryland         95   23  118    Closed primary

                Pennsylvania 189   21  210   Closed primary

                Rhode Island   24     9    33     Semi-closed primary

    It's not just about New York - it's about the eastern seaboard. 754 total delegates at stake there in the next 3 1/2 weeks. And advertising and media play has a better chance of seeping into other markets than anything in Wisconsin. Which seems to be confirmed by her schedule in New York, Pennsylvania, & DC.

    Of course she could work hard in Wisconsin for perhaps 5 more delegates - or focus on the motherlode. Nothing that happens in Wisconsin is likely to affect the east much. But what happens in New York will definitely have knock-on effects for the other states.

    Interestingly, there's a bit of activity in Florida and Chelsea's spending a lot of time in Oklahoma and Texas. My guess is this is indeed a pivot towards November, and while Florida's unsurprising, with Trump's weak showing in Texas, team Hillary hopes to put it in play for Democrats. Wait & see.

    Comments

    The Texas and Oklahoma swings are interesting?  Could Trump have alienated Hispanics enough to put Texas in play for the Dems?  


    by Bruce Levine on Fri, 04/01/2016 - 10:16am

    That's what I'm wondering. You start talking walls and people get bent out of shape....


    by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 04/01/2016 - 10:52am

    Nothing has happened of interest in Wisconsin since....

    We shall endure with or without Hillary.

    We shall not endure with a repub on the election in November.

    But...


    by Richard Day on Fri, 04/01/2016 - 10:10pm

    The math on why Bernie only gains a 5 delegate advantage In Wisconsin in the best case.

    http://m.jsonline.com/news/blogs/wisconsinvoter/374616281.htm


    by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 04/05/2016 - 3:09pm

    If everyone would read the NYDaily News interview with Bernie it might make them wonder if he has thought at all about how to implement his changes.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/transcript-bernie-sanders-meets-news-...

    an excerpt about how he plans to break up the big banks:

    Sanders: .....And I think that if somebody, like if Teddy Roosevelt were alive today, he would look at that. Forgetting even the risk element, the bailout element, and just look at the kind of financial power that these guys have, would say that is too much power.

    Daily News: Okay. Well, let's assume that you're correct on that point. How do you go about doing it?

    Sanders: How you go about doing it is having legislation passed, or giving the authority to the secretary of treasury to determine, under Dodd-Frank, that these banks are a danger to the economy over the problem of too-big-to-fail.

    Daily News: But do you think that the Fed, now, has that authority?

    Sanders: Well, I don't know if the Fed has it. But I think the administration can have it.

    Daily News: How? How does a President turn to JPMorgan Chase, or have the Treasury turn to any of those banks and say, "Now you must do X, Y and Z?"

    Sanders: Well, you do have authority under the Dodd-Frank legislation to do that, make that determination.

    Daily News: You do, just by Federal Reserve fiat, you do?

    Sanders: Yeah. Well, I believe you do.

    i don't get it.  It's the first time anyone went past "why?" And actually asked "how?"  And he was completely unprepared.d

    Edited to add another excerpt: (and again for speaking error)

    Daily News: Okay. You saw, I guess, what happened with Metropolitan Life. There was an attempt to bring them under the financial regulatory scheme, and the court said no. And what does that presage for your program?

    Sanders: It's something I have not studied, honestly, the legal implications of that.


    by CVille Dem on Tue, 04/05/2016 - 5:37pm

    It's interesting to note that AIG won its case against the government for bailing it out (ok, for the harsh terms, though the inquisitors offered them equity back if they assumed risk - no dice) but was awarded no damages because it would have had $0 left anyway.

    But trying to lord over a non-desperate bank can bite you in the ass - these are multibillion multinationals who understand the law and have good lawyers (David Boies?). One should, honestly, study the legal implications of that.


    by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 04/05/2016 - 4:02pm

    Thanks for posting this. It confirms what we suspected. Talk is cheap. Sanders could sit in Congress and be "pure" because his words were never going to be put to the test. He has no clue how to implement single-payer healthcare, free education, or control the banks. 

    I was hilarious when Trump said that he had not thought about abortion, because we knew that he wasn't a deep thinker.It is scary that Sanders has not thought deeply about the issues. I thought he knew that he couldn't get proposals passed. I never thought that he put no thought at all into his "revolution".


    by rmrd0000 on Tue, 04/05/2016 - 7:34pm

    I was surprised.   I thought he didn't have a GOOD plan for his programs; it never occurred to me that he had NO plan.


    by CVille Dem on Tue, 04/05/2016 - 7:56pm

    Ryan Grim at Huffpost counters that the Daily News botched it more than Bernie. woerth a read. Though he does offer an interest thought:

    (To be clear, I have my own view, that Sanders has shown himself to be a lousy manager of his staff on Capitol Hill over the years, which doesn’t bode well for a presidency, and has not shown much interest in organizing, or ability to organize coalitions within the House or the Senate to advance his agenda, outside of his audit-the-Fed legislation, and some improvements to Obamacare. That’s troubling, but it’s different than deciding he’s not serious and doesn’t know what he’s talking about.)


    by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 04/06/2016 - 3:02am

    In the Upshot in the New York Times, Peter Eavis notes  Yes, Bernie Sanders Knows Something About Breaking Up Banks.  In referring to Sanders' comments to the NY Daily News Editorial Board discussed in this blog, Eavis writes in part:

    Mr. Sanders is mostly cogent here. This is more or less how a breakup would work under his legislation. Doing what he outlines here would be far easier if Congress passed his breakup bill, or something like it. Mr. Sanders is on shaky ground if he thinks it would be easy to slash the size of the banks with Dodd-Frank alone. But, taking the interview as a whole, as well as his past positions, that does not appear to be the path he favors.

    Eavis is a long-time financial journalist who's worked at the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times.

    So we have a choice, we can vote for the candidate whom the big banks fund or the one who will do whatever he can to defang them.  I'm for defanging them.


    by HSG on Tue, 04/05/2016 - 8:22pm

    Nice try.  NOT!

     


    by CVille Dem on Tue, 04/05/2016 - 8:28pm