Parsing the Election: Shining Objects, Lies and Misdemeanors

As this election campaign unfolds, it's very obvious that what passes for voting choice based on issues and policies is a thin layer of he-said she-said, shiny objects, and bullshit arguments. Then there is the very small group of low-information voters who will probably determine the winner. They waft from one candidate to another, as the polls indicate. Yeah, like a horse race at a carnival game whereas the horses advance by how much the "playing" public sprays water into a hole. 
 
Oh, what an entertainment it is to watch this race for the most powerful office on earth. We've seem to have lost the sense of scale, seriousness, comparables, and the sight of the big picture. 

Somebody has to call the truth. We are a nation of people who are ignorant how their government works, what policies work or not, and ignorant as to the fundamental differences among the candidates their parties and what they truly stand for. The media for the most part readily cater to this ignorant audience, further perpetuating the lowest common denominator. 

Some news media,like Fox News, openly say that their aim is to cater to their audience and peddle propaganda--and this is more honest as compared to the so-called mainstream media that want to self-identify as professional and truth-seeking. The truth is that when a lie is uttered by an official or a candidate, you call it a lie. If there's proof to the contrary, you don't accept a lie as one side of a story and give it equal value, be it that Obama was not born in the US or that the earth is flat.

Another sad but very real fact is that most people aren't truly rational or open to reason, especially in the heat of the game. You are a rabid fan cheering for your team and you only see your team being robed by the refs or the system, while you hate the illegitimate s.o.b.s of the opposing team. Then there's a small section in the stadium (half filled, because the rest of the population don't really care for this sport) that goes back and forth cheering for the team that does the latest trick or puts on the field the cutest cheerleaders.

Oh, the Humanity....

So, everybody is freaking out about the EpiPen these days because the company that makes it decided to up its price by hundreds of dollars. It's not the only time a drug company does such a thing if it has a monopoly and wants to maximize profit. Congress gets on the act of shedding crocodilean tears and holds public inquiries deriding big pharma execs for being ..inhumane. A chorus of other interested parties chimes in to say how they care about the public's health and the plight of the consumer. Oh, it's about people's health? Then it's Obamacare's fault! The right points out that it's the high deductibles people have to pay under the ACA (Obamacare) that have patients feel they're being gauged. Hahaha.

Let's cut through this bullshit. First, reporting the story--as done by most media--is a disservice to the public. It's another case of perpetuating a lie and not truly examining an important issue.  OK, let's start from the top. Why shouldn't a capitalist company try to maximize profit? Isn't this what the free-market conservatives advocate? Supply and demand is the ingenious mechanism that serves the consumer Adam Smith argued. The conservative goddess Ayn Rand was not in favor of a system of a social safety net because this is morally bad.

But, people may be hurt, suffer or die if they don't have access to certain drugs and health care? Oh, really? Is this a problem? Then what do we do about it besides feeling bad, curse at the drug companies, Obamacare and whomever else. Do we need to put in place a system to take care of those in dire need? Who should pay for it. Why are drug prices so high? 

The more you think about it, the more you realize that some regulation, oversight, and social safety net is necessary in some sectors of society! Oh, and why capitalism should work primarily in the direction of the big and powerful? 

Instead of Congress pretending to care about the ..poor patients, it should pass a law to allow Medicare and Medicaid to negotiate drug prices. Currently they're prohibited from doing what capitalism purports to want: competition!  Further, as Bernie Sanders points out, we can import food from all over the world but we cannot (illegal) to import even brand-name medicine/drugs from Canada at a fraction of what they cost in the US!  I happened to have witnessed scores of buses filled with senior citizens at the US-Canadian border around the beginning of the month. They're buying drugs they need but can't afford in the US! This is illegal, by the way, but the authorities probably think it's either bad publicity or unkind to arrest those senior citizens.

Steal Millions of Dollars with no Penalty (but don't get caught smoking weed)

Wells Fargo [see story here] abused its customers for 5 years, creating millions of accounts and charging fees without the knowledge or permission by the customers. This is not the only bank that has been abusing the consumers. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB*) fined WF $185 million for this. Is anyone going to jail? No! Get caught smoking weed in most of the US and you get a criminal record!

Republicans came out complaining why WF was allowed to do this.  Well, because the banks can and will if left unsupervised. Who knew, right? I mean take a look at Wall Street in the 2000s, or any other era. The GOP has systematically opposed anything that would interfere with the "free marketplace" including the CFPB. 

Now, why can't there be a class action suit against WF? Because the law allows the banks to stipulate in the contract when you open an account with them that you agree not to sue and not join others who may have similar grievances. You must go to arbitration, where a judge hired by the bank resolves the dispute. But if you have no other recourse, you accept the offer.  Similar case with employers, like Fox, where a sexual harassment case must be settled via arbitration.

Oh, and what happens to the big bosses that know of, or even encourage the abuses? Sometimes they lose their jobs, poor slabs. Ailes got a $40 million severance, and WF CEO gets $ 125 mil. package. That kind of money buys you lots of therapy I reckon. 
 

Now back to parsing this election......   


...

* This is what a modern state (country) should do, protect the consumer. Which political party do you think favors this? Beyond personalities, which party do you think would promote consumer protection? This election is about progress and what we want the government to do for us, right?....

   

I'm Rich, I'm Really, Really Very Rich. Believe me!

Dear Donald,

Show the world that you are not a loser. Release your tax returns and show them how fabulously wealthy you really are!

Finally, Many Voices, Including News Media, Are Now Indentifying Donald Trump as a Bullshit Artist. He Always Was, but Better Late than Never...

One year ago, I thought Ted Cruz would make a fine Republican presidential nominee, one who would be so conservative and repugnant that he would lose the general election. Then I noticed that Trump would be even worse and he became my favorite to deliver another defeat to the GOP. My only hesitation was that Cruz's loss would be owned by the Republican party whereas Trump's, perhaps, not so much. Already there are many Republican leaders and other notables who have declared they are not supporting their party's nominee. This has not happened to such scale in the last half a century that a major American party is so fractured. Of course, this spells defeat.

The only positive thing for the GOPers is that they can claim they were fooled by an outsider, not "a true conservative" who captured the party's flag. The general public may also buy this, as Trump has not been directly involved with a political party or has any experience with public office, or serving any interest other than his own. Today, we hear that the Republican National Committee may cut funding to its own nominee! [source: Politico ]  This may work for some Republicans seeking re-election this November and for the party in 2020.

The person who routinely makes ridiculous statements is a ridiculous person

And, then there's the man at the center of this circus, Donald Trump, whose bullshit now has hit the fan. The stench is permeating everywhere, but at least more and more people, including the news media, have begun to acknowledge this. Trump was always an asshole, who cared more about his ego, and has had a masturbatory relationship with publicity, any publicity--good or bad. It was obvious, the garishly decorated holdings, his name plastered anywhere and everywhere, his egomania, and his lack of intellect, all there. His only great skill was the shameless and relentless self-promotion. Yes, it's a craft to be a bullshit artist and Donald has it!


But, it reveals something about so many others who fell for this bullshit. So many investors, buyers, hopeful entrepreneurs, average people believed his b.s. A person who came from money and left a long trail of bankruptcies, defrauding of investors, and stupid investment choices, and who would have made more money, of what daddy had given him, had he invested in the market's index fund instead of going into business. Trump who was put on an allowance after his casinos and other holdings failed, and whose main income was his TV show and licensing of his brand, which, of course, was built on a b.s. This article in The New Yorker explains how the Trump image was built.

Trump's ghost writer, Tim Schwartz, of The Art of the Deal broke his confidentiality clause to reveal the background of how this best-seller came to be, especially Trump's character. Schwartz now says that he can't remain silent, because of the high stakes of this election. Schwartz spent 18 close months with Trump ahead of the book’s publication. He now claims he’s not the book’s co-writer, but a ghostwriter who penned “every word” ― with minimal input from Trump. Howard Kaminsky, the former head of Random House, which published the book, backed up Schwartz’s claim, the New Yorker reports. [source].  This ABC News Schwartz interview should be viewed as well.

On the numbers side, Clinton has about 90% chance of winning, 90 days before the election, which is a bit too early to say for certain what will happen in November, but if after Labor Day, the numbers stay as they are today, Clinton can win the election even if she lost Florida and Ohio! It's possible that she may greatly exceed Obama's Electoral College victory of 365 to 173. This is what a Clinton landslide would look like according to Fivethirtyeight. I don't know if Trump will lose this badly, but if the difference climbs to double digits, Congress can turn Democratic again. The question is whether Republicans will be energized to vote. On the Democrats side, there's lots more unity and excitement. In addition--and this is always crucial in elections--the Dems have a better ground organization and they'll win the voter turnout game.

Does the GOP Own Trumpism? It Helped Create it...

On occasion there may be a con artist, a demagogue, who captures a major political party and when the majority of the members oppose this person. This is not, and has not been the case with the Republicans. They created Trump, the tea parties, and now they own all of them. They own the rhetoric and the public policies they've been proposing. They allowed and often encouraged the infestation of the angry mobs, the racists, and the know-nothings. They reaped big political gains. Parties do better when they have excited people turning out to vote, and they do resort to negative attacks of their opponents, but there's a line that should not be crossed.

A country's political system rests on legitimacy and the institutions that makes it work. Since the 1990s, the Republicans--the official party and its leaders not just random conservatives--along with the Faux News machine, have been attacking the legitimacy of such institutions and the legitimacy of the Democratic presidential nominees. Both Hillary and Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama (you know, that Muslim Kenyan) have been attacked as not legitimate. This goes much deeper than political disagreements about ideas and policies; it erodes the institutions we supposedly so proud of. It's very irresponsible to undermine a system that you rely upon to get things done.

Leadership matters! People get clues from and get accustomed to a certain decorum, so clueless people are likely to copy and extrapolate the behavior of leaders. Inflammatory rhetoric has dire consequences. Juvenile behavior, inappropriate expressions, ad hominem attacks, bullying, racism, misogynistic behavior, and other crass behavior become appropriate in the eyes of said people. I hoped we're better than this. Someone like Trump should not be getting more support than a tiny fraction of the American society--the lunatic fringe.

But interestingly, though not surprising,  Republicans behave as they've been "trained" since Reagan and the emergence of Faux News. Over these years, Republicans have believed, in great numbers, crazy things that defy reality and logic. They've been trained to hate government, not to trust science (and the scientific method, which incidentally don't understand), to accept conspiracies, and anything else in between. A year ago, Trump was leading the "birther movement" and contrary to reality, I bet you many Republicans still believe Obama is a Muslim born overseas!

It's also interesting to see that this hard core of conservative Republicans is often not where the rest of the country is. Take for example: This group is less affected by the Khan controversy. Only 14 percent of that group reports being less likely to vote for Trump because of his criticism of the Khans. Forty-nine percent are unmoved by it, and 28 percent are actually more likely to vote for Trump now. Independents are split, with 31 percent who say they’re less likely to vote for Trump, and 45 percent who say it doesn’t affect their vote.  And, of course, there's Ben Carson who thinks the Khan's should apologize to Trump.

The above is not true, but it's fun to pay back in kind..

By the way, a 51 percent majority of registered voters agree with the Khans that Trump has “sacrificed nothing and no one” in defense of the U.S., including 30 percent of Republican voters and nearly half of independents. Trump himself exhibited his arrogance again by saying his sacrifices center on creating jobs and building things. Did he forget how he sacrificed by serving in the armed forces? (He didn't; he got 5 deferments during the Vietnam war). 

Did you seen Trump's economics team? It's a list of billionaires, one economist, and 40% of them are named "Steve."  Also, Michael Morell, who ran the CIA under both D & R administrations just announced he's supporting Hillary, while saying Trump is a threat to our national security. Increasingly, there's consensus in the foreign policy and national security world that Trump is unfit to be president of the US, and that Hillary is the one candidate to be trusted with such matters. After all, how can you trust a man with small hands and short sausage fingers?...

This Election is About Satan. Make Sure You Pick the Devil You know, the Devil Who's Going to Be FOR America not His Own Casino

The DNC show is over, and in my opinion it was by far more enjoyable to watch and probably more effective than the GOP's. Great speeches and some good memes, the ones that may appeal to those on the fence. Hard core Hillary haters won't change their minds. The purpose of the negative advertising will be to discredit Trump and discourage people for voting for him, and to motivate the hard-core Democratic base to come out and vote. Voter turnout on election day is absolutely the most important factor.

The polls that'll come out later this week should show a bump up for Clinton, otherwise it'll be bad. Polls right after the conventions don't mean much, but when we get to later August, around Labor Day, then polls begin to show trends and at that point it's very important to be leading.

The elephant in the room is the high unfavorable rates of the two candidates. Some voters will vote for the Green or Libertarian parties and thus register their strong disapproval of the candidates, parties, and the US political system. Of course, this is allowed--that's what democracy is about--but will soon be forgotten. Third-parties and their candidates rarely are a force in US politics, and usually it's the role of a spoiler.  I know people didn't like Al Gore and may even liked Ralph Nader, but the effect of that was the disastrous presidency of one of the worst presidents ever, G.W. Bush.

Bernie Sanders said this much in his speech, that this is the real world and if you think the most unqualified candidate of a major party should not get near the White House, then the choice is clear: Hillary Clinton. I very much agree with Sam Harris's take on this election:

These are some of the points and highlights of recent worth remembering:

• Trump has not sacrificed anything for this country, nor has he helped anyone outside his family and his own interest
• Trump has no clue of foreign relations and how the economy works
• He doesn't have the character, experience, temperament, responsibility, ability, or willingness to learn/study complicated matters
• Trump is anti-science (and therefore he's an anti-intellectual)
• He has not read the US constitution
• He keeps repeating the same lies, bullying and belittling his critics; he's juvenile
• He's a racist, bigot, and a fear monger
• FDR: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself"!!!
• Could you imagine the outrage of Fox News if Michelle Obama had plagiarized another first lady's speech, lied about her degrees, and then deleted her website with this information?...
• Bloomberg's takedown of the Donald: I'm from New York and I know a con when I see one! Plus, pointing out the trail of bankruptcies, defrauding of investors, students, and contractors by the man who wants to run the country as a casino or country club or a pyramid scheme. The same person who wants jobs in America but makes his products overseas...
• Stronger together. Yeah, I like this theme. Together also means a more equitable distribution of resources--wealth and power
• This election will determine the path of our country even after the next president leaves office, because of the Supreme Court. It's imperative that the high court become progressive. Many of the good things we appreciate today in our society have come via SCOTUS decisions.

Feelings Matter but Facts are Relevatnt Too. Which Side Will Prevail this Election Year?

So, yeah, feelings are very important and they trump reality. We have to acknowledge this. Most people are intuitive, emotional, and they pick a team or are brought up in a tribe that has their allegiance. Facts often don't change people's minds, especially during a heated argument or an strident political campaign.

(Link to video from the 2' mark)

That's why conservatives--who supposedly are big on "law and order"--keept pushing this narrative at their convention that we're about to die! Never mind that crime rates have gone down. Newt Gingrich when confronted with the facts he kept saying he was right because that's how he (and a lot others) feel. He may have found out that the crime rate on my block went up 100% last year, because someone stole a lawn mower!  You know what they say, a petty theft leads to the apocalypse. So, yeah, let us arm ourselves to the teeth to prepare for the inevitable. Whatever.

The point is that our democracy relies on the judgment of people, many of whom are very misinformed in a wilful ignorance way. I have friends and family who are all over the political spectrum. They rarely are interested in having a rational discussion about facts. I am not saying they have to agree with me--after all, values and priorities are individually based.

I teach political science and thinking about politics is a daily occupation for me. It's so rare, outside academia, to be asked, what do you think about this and how did you arrive at your conclusion.  If they're not sure where I stand on an issue, I may get the question, what do you think about it, though most often the reasoning, the path to the conclusion isn't needed. Why? Because it's confirmation bias at play.  They also hope for an answer that confirms their preconceived notion, otherwise the conversation on that topic ends there.

Republicans are better at pushing the emotional buttons. Simplistic but emotionally-laden remedies to complicated issues are preferred to details. Dems do that too, but they also tend to over-explain, and give complicated answers to hot issues. Trump does not deal in detail policies but in snake oil remedies that will fix things overnight, or at least the first thing in the morning of January 21st, 2017.

The bottom line is that if we had disagreements and true discussion based on reason and facts, there would be more common ground. But, people argue on emotions, and when perceptions of reality (who did what, when, and how) vary wildly and they are not interested in checking the facts. It's astounding to me that in the 21st century America (US) we are debating reality--debating not with facts but with feelings, like Trump, Gringrich and other cons bring to the table. Is the earth billions of a few thousand years old? Is science a guide to climate change? Vaccines? etc.

I can understand (not like it) if someone said he/she hates Mexicans, non-Xtians, whatever. But, the facts show these groups are not more violent or deal in drugs. Someone can say that homosexuality disgusts them, but they can't say that gay partners and parents are less loving or divorce more, or their children are less adjusted that heterosexuals' offspring.  Same with law and order. The conservatives should admit they want an authoritarian leader to keep them safe from imaginary crimes and real diverse society, but they can't argue that tougher punishment and incarceration reduces crime. Social programs, the safety net, and the well-being of the people makes a happier, less violent society!

More on the Dem convention in the next post..... I've watched the first night (Monday) of the convention and I was impressed by Michelle Obama, Bernie,  Warren, and Al Franken.

Historians on Donald Trump..

Can you maintain your objectivity when you see a train off its track about to crash and cause much harm? More and more voices, some from the conservative side, are talking publicly about the Trump candidacy for the highest office in the land as they can't sit silently on the sidelines and observe this train wreck.

Historians on Donald Trump is a Facebook page created by the famous Ken Burns. He has invited several noted historians and scholars of US politics to comment on Trump's politics. Take a look. [link] 

As David McCullough put it, Eisenhower said there were 4 qualifications for the office of the president, character, ability, responsibility, and experience. Donald Trump fails in all four.

In a related matter, the Republican party is putting together the planks for its platform--the official policy the party wants to implement if it could. As you'd expect, it's extremely conservative/regressive, but it reflects the Medieval nature of this party. The GOP and Trump's definition of greatness is the Dark Ages. Oh, the glory days of the strict father and subservient women, Biblical justice and intolerance of the pursuit of happiness--you know, the liberal principle that a person should be free to enjoy life on his/her own terms.

Abortion, birth control, women in battle, same-sex marriage, gun control, minority rights, separation church-state, equal pay, the environment ("coal is a clean" energy source), and of course anti-intellectualism and anti-science, are explained in the Republican policy platform...  As for the economic policies, yeah, those too are geared for the benefit of.... (you guess)
 

Is the US Condemned to High Levels of Violence? Meanwhile, another Mass Shooting in Dallas...

Mass shootings keep taking place, and gun violence is, sadly, part of everyday life here in the US. We are a violent country, but why? And, is it something we can change? Or, do we want to change that? After all, guns are connected to freedom! We need guns to fight the government, aliens, zombies, and whatever else Apocalypse may bring.

 After a deadly shooting, gun sales increase. The NRA is happy, and it has a hold on politicians. Do you know that Congress has  barred the Center for Decease Control (CDC) since 1996--when the NRA accused the CDC of being anti-gun--from doing research into gun violence, because, heck, it may lead to findings favoring gun control. Facts and science should inform public policy, right?... Since 2012, President Obama tried to reverse this, but...

The American Medical Association (AMA) has reversed its position though and now calls Congress to allow the CDC to do research into gun violence as a public health issue! 

Again, the lethal effect of powerful weapons and their availability is a big factor in US violence. I do not see why the "right" to own a gun should be above the right of others to have a ..healthier life!  We do have restrictions on all sorts of weapons not available to civilians. The right to live your life the way you want has to taken into account your actions as a direct impact on others. You can't do all sorts of things if your actions harm the community. You can't drive a car without a license, no insurance, and without emission controls. You can't cut down every tree or take every fish out of the sea. You shouldn't have certain weapons, certainly not open or conceal carry.

A Culture of Guns Feeds the Kind of Violence We Just Witnessed in Orlando. Which God Instructs His Children that Homosexuality is a Horrible Sin Worthy of Death?

If only there was another good person with a machine gun, or at least an assault automatic weapon to take down the Orlando shooter before he killed all those good people. Same, with all the other instances where unarmed civilians are gunned down by crazies all of our beloved country of ours. 

Now, I'll keep a moment of silence, after which I'll pronounce that my thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families. All of these acts, of course, will do nothing to help the past, present, and future victims of gun violence. 

The NRA is defending the interests of the gun sellers and manufacturers not the gun owners. It gets support from knuckleheads who believe that the more guns the more freedom people have. This is a libertarian paradise where the enemy is always the government, the communists and the non-xtians. Except we had this ...paradise in the early days of our republic--where Trump wants to take us back to--and it didn't work.

Yes, a gun in the hands of a good person may stop a bad person with a gun, but there are downsides as the proliferation of guns leads to more deaths. This is a fact. I include deaths from disputes with people having access to deadly weapons, suicides, children who shoot themselves or others, etc. There's no good reason, in my mind, why civilians should have access to assault rifles and high powered guns with big ammo clips. Such weapons must be banned. And, yes, it can be done in these United States if we wanted to. We have had a violent past (and present), a history of the vast frontier, wild men and untamed nature. But, so was Australia. They banned most weapons there and they have a huge reduction in crime involving firearms. 

Now, there's another sensitive issue in relation to the mass shooting in Orlando on Sunday. Many have said that the crazy gunman may had been offended by the gay culture but, guess what, his actions had nothing to do with religion!

Really?! All three Abrahamic religions--Judaism, Christianity, and Islam--teach that homosexuality is an abomination, a sin, worthy of the most severe punishment in human societies and in hell. The Abrahamic god is not tolerant, or loving, but angry, petulant, vindictive against the children of his creation, who are designed with imperfections and are worthy of condemnation and punishment of death for exercising their right to pursuit of happiness.

If you still choose to remain silent, sorry to say, you're part of the problem and for perpetuating violence and primitive superstitions. 

Update 6/14/16: This video by Samantha Bee just came out and it nails the points I'm making here.

The Democrats Make History But Most of the Work Begins Now Until the November Election. Oh, and Trump is a Man-child Loser.

Taking America back to greatness;
ah, the good 'ol times!

We're going to have a woman president for the first time in our nation's history, but this is not the most important reason to look forward to this election and beyond... It's the progressive direction--through executive action and per Supreme Court--that our country will take, and perhaps we may get a modern conservative party instead of this medieval GOP.

Young Trump at the Chipendale auditions.
He didn't make the cut,
because of his small hands.

Polls aren't accurate at this point, though based on several variables--like demographics, and economic indicators--Hillary Clinton should be able to comfortably win this election. I think Trump is not a uniter, and even though many Republicans will fall in line, there won't be a united effort. It looks like 1964 again. If I had to bet right now, I'd say we'll see a repeat of a Lyndon Johnson drubbing of Goldwater. 

One way to look it, though not necessarily a predictor, is whether Trump can do better than Romney 4 years ago. Yeah, you say, but there's no incumbent president and it's not the norm that the same party gets a third presidential term.  However, the economy is doing OK, low unemployment and no inflation, so Trump's argument (which is absolutely bullshit) he can make better deals won't look as credible alternative, especially when more Americans learn about the deals and the scams he's done building his empire.

So, Romney got 59% of the whites to 39% of Obama, and 27% of Latinos. I don't see Trump doing better with these numbers. Then how about the women who are the majority of the voters? In 2012, Obama won the women's vote by 12 points, whereas Romney won the men's vote by 8 points. It's expected that Hillary will get more that 12 points among women voters in 2016.

Images of the Great Leader everywhere in Trumpmurca,
by decree of the Dear Leader.

What's worse for Trump is that where he's very strong doesn't really help him--he may be getting 90% of the white voters in the South, but in many "blue" states he will lose the white vote. The Latino/Hispanic vote will most definitely not be as good as 27% for Trump as it was for Romney. In addition, millions of new Latinos are being registered to vote, and there's a real movement to vote against a bigot like Trump.

KAOS will be defeated

I watched both speeches last night as the two presumptive nominees spoke after their last round of victories. Hillary was amazingly good I thought. Unless you're totally blinded by bias, there's only one person qualified to be president. I'm not talking about policy or ideology; I'm talking about maturity, temperament, and skill.  I think this is the theme Hillary should pursue and not engage in mudslinging; let others attack Trump and get under his skin by talking his language. This doesn't mean that she can't be critical, but she should refrain from making statements like he needs a psychologist to figure out why Trump says whatever... 

Bernie ran a needed campaign but he may have gone a bit too far. Still, he can be a very important player in this election by marshaling his army into a "stop-Trump" movement. He has to tell his supporters that Trump is not an acceptable choice for president, and that the Dems need to take back control of the Senate so he, Sanders as a leader in the Senate, can push through more progressive legislation, and, oh, let's not forget the Supreme Court, where the Dems can confirm liberal judges to the high court. In the next 4 to 8 years, Hillary will nominate at least 2 new justices. The court can finally speed up the progressive direction of our country.