Ditto in CA. It really is outrageous how much control the ruling parties in state legislatures have over the drawing of district boundaries.

That isn't what I said.

I've stated that Americans are socialist-phobic and that Sanders would be crucified in a general election once he comes under attack. Zargof believes that Sanders can blunt those attacks, so he and I are in completely opposite camps.

Re: Clinton, I made two points:

1. She has been and will continue to be demonized by Republicans for being Hillary Clinton, not because of her positions. The hatred felt towards her is based upon her symbolic value as a target, not due to any particular position that she holds. She could move right, left, up, down or backward, and it would not change this one whit because contrary to what Amideislas believes, this is driven by cultural whims and not by policy.

2. Unlike Sanders, the GOP has already played their hand against Clinton, which makes her a safer candidate. Clinton has been in the public eye for 2+ decades, so there are relatively few fencesitters with her, while GOP efforts to invent a Democratic Watergate have failed miserably time and again. On the other hand, Sanders is relatively new to the national spotlight and there would be plenty of opportunities to turn him to shreds in a general election.

Zargof thinks that Sanders could withstand the attacks, the public favors his ideas and they'll come around to the socialism thing. I expect that he would go from hero to zero with non-progressives once they learn more about him (or at least the innuendo that would be created about him.)

This has been bugging me. Why did it seem so natural to support Obama in '08? As I've followed these little flare-ups (I despise Democrat on Democrat violence) I keep putting myself in my own shoes from 2008. Most of the arguments posed to Zargof, the "This is why Hillary will win" rationale, are very similar to those that were used on me in '08. Among white and Hispanic Democratic acquaintenances, I didn't know any who supported Obama early on. Some were quite annoyed with me but I'm sure they felt much better when I was proved correct.

Why do you care then

Erm, no

You don't line up for hours just to vote for a candidate you hope will make the party you don't like unelectable at the general. The uncomfortable truth for liberals is many blue collar Dems are voting for Trump in the hope he wins the presidency

As for Hilary's collapse in Michigan, the data suggests Sanders cut into Clinton's usual solid black vote, i.e. not enough African Americans voted for her

Because I live here.

She seems more adept at the political dance this time around.

That, and there isn't a viable alternative. She's not a great option, but she's the better of the two.

Anyone else watching the Dem debate on CNN?

So boring, every Dem debate has been the same. Clinton is too scared to demonize Sanders' supporters, who she hopes will vote for her at the general, to actually tear into him on policy and call them what they are, while Sanders is just a massive wet blanket on every issue going. A particular disappointment in these Dem debates has been the lack of foreign policy debate, neither of them have any plan on Syria and ISIS beyond what is happening already

I tried a couple of times, but every time Hillary was on and I wanted to vomit.

You watched it? You're a braver man than I Gunga Din.

It is good to see you seeing both sides of the coin as regards Clinton

Yep, he sure is taking some interesting positions! This one would be a vote getter for me.

A plus for me too. I doubt it will be for the electorate as a whole though. It's a brave politician that goes against being pro-Israel.

I'm watching the debate on tape delay. It's certainly refreshing to hear candidates talking about immigration in a calm, collected and constructive manner in comparison to the Republican debate.

Is that the best you can come up with?