Where’s the A List?

The B List, the boys – Biden, Bernie, Buttigieg, Booker, Beto (and now Bullock) plus the other bros – is all we hear about from the media along with the constant coverage of the ever present Big Boob’s campaign.

What more do the ladies have to do to get some attention?

 

Share

38 thoughts on “Where’s the A List?”

  2. reposting X-R from last thread: “Various electronically accessible accounts of mine, bank, facebook, et cetera, have been under attack from central Europe. Pain in the ass. I s’pose it’s putin’s algorithms. They probably scan cyberspace looking for nasty remarks made about his celestial/bestial majesty.”

    xr, afraid you’re right about that.  many a time I’ve copied and tried to paste a Russia-elected-trump story (especially it seems if it refers to bannon or WikiLeaks or the oligarchs) to the trail my connection shuts down and I have to repeat the process from scratch at least once more to successfully post it on the trail.  

  3. sturge, perhaps they should try something like the movie Calendar Girls which according to wiki was “based on a true story of a group of middle-aged Yorkshire women who produced a nude calendar to raise money for Leukaemia Research under the auspices of the Women’s Institutes in April 1999…”

    the townhalls and debates would be a lot livelier if they did 

    or maybe do a Lysistrata thing and call for a sex strike nationwide until a woman candidate is nominated or at least covered on the news.

  4. Harris and Warren are still better than some those guys in the polls (for whatever that’s worth).

    Xrep…  no… I wasn’t watching baseball last night.  I was watching hockey.  The Boston Bruins now lead the Carolina Hurricanes 3-0.  One more win and I’ll be watching my team play in the Stanley Cup finals.  Go Bruins!

  5. I dunno – I’m seeing about as much Kamala and Elizabeth as I am anyone else.  I’ll tell ya who I’m not seeing from the top 5 – Bernie!.  and I thank my lucky stars. It’s early, as evidenced by the Emerson poll just released that puts Joe at +8 over Bernie! – the other polls in May have been +20 – +32 – average being +23.9.  But it’s early, and I believe Kamala and Elizabeth will be stars on the debate stage and see their exposure increase after the first one.

  6. Alabama Lawmakers Pass Strictest Anti-Abortion Bill in the Nation. Gov. Kay Ivey  (if you see her run screaming in the opposite direction) is expected to sign it.  But, hey, nothing like a little bullshit among friends, right?

    MONTGOMERY, Ala. — Alabama lawmakers voted Tuesday to ban virtually all abortions in the state — including for victims of rape and incest — sending the strictest law in the nation to the state’s Republican governor, who is expected to sign it.
     
    The measure permits abortion only when necessary to save a mother’s life, an unyielding standard that runs afoul of federal court rulings. Those who backed the new law said they don’t expect it to take effect, instead intending its passage to be part of a broader strategy by antiabortion activists to persuade the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, which legalized abortion nationwide.
     
    “This bill is about challenging Roe v. Wade and protecting the lives of the unborn because an unborn baby is a person who deserves love and protection,” Alabama state Rep. Terri Collins (R), the sponsor of the bill, said after the vote Tuesday night. “I have prayed my way through this bill. This is the way we get where we want to get eventually.”

    Mrs. P – a lifelong Catholic – was pissed when she heard this.  She said it is Alabama trying to impose religious choice on women.  Terri Collins’ comments might just provide some support for her pissed offness.  Me, I just think it’s an unconstitutional stupid waste of time.  The injunction will follow shortly.

  7. pogo, it would help if some big national corporations and sports teams boycott alabama the same as they did north Carolina for their crappy potty bill.  might change some opinions faster than going to court.

  8. re the new winds of war

    nytimes;

    WASHINGTON — As the Trump administration draws up war plans against Iran over what it says are threats to American troops and interests, a senior British military official told reporters at the Pentagon on Tuesday that he saw no increased risk from Iran or allied militias in Iraq or Syria.

    A few hours later, the United States Central Command issued an unusual rebuke: The remarks from the British official — Maj. Gen. Chris Ghika, who is also the deputy commander of the American-led coalition fighting the Islamic State — run “counter to the identified credible threats available to intelligence from U.S. and allies regarding Iranian-backed forces in the region.”

    The rare public dispute highlights a central problem for the Trump administration as it seeks to rally allies and global opinion against Iran. On Wednesday, the State Department ordered partial evacuations of the American embassy and a consulate in Iraq, despite skepticism from Iraqi officials over American intelligence showing a heightened risk.

    […]

    “We are aware of their presence clearly and we monitor them along with a whole range of others because of the environment we are in,” General Ghika said.

    But he said, “No, there has been no increased threat from Iranian-backed forces in Iraq or Syria.”

    Intelligence and military officials in Europe as well as in the United States said that over the past year, most aggressive moves have originated not in Tehran, but in Washington — where John R. Bolton, the national security adviser, has prodded President Trump into backing Iran into a corner.

    One American official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss confidential internal planning, said the new intelligence of an increased Iranian threat was “small stuff” and did not merit the military planning being driven by Mr. Bolton. The official also said the ultimate goal of the yearlong economic sanctions campaign by the Trump administration was to draw Iran into an armed conflict with the United States.

    [continues]

     

  9. wapo editorial board: We’re drifting toward war with Iran.

    […]

    As we pointed out previously, Mr. Trump is in danger of being cornered into choosing between a counterproductive use of force and allowing Iran to cross red lines. The way out is to return to diplomacy, in concert with European allies. The president should curb his hawkish aides and take that course before it is too late.

  10. big corps in alabama that could wield a big stick to get attention with a boycott:  Mercedes, honda, hyundai, (Alabama builds one-fourth of all passenger vehicles produced in the South according to newsmax) 
    3M, DuPont and a bunch of space and high tech cos.

  15. Sitting on porch while I still can, watching the critters. Beautiful Cardinal in the birdbath right now.

    Trying to formulate an opinion about these Democratic presidential candidates. Drawing a blank.

     

  16. wapo: No ‘do-over’ on Mueller probe, White House lawyer tells House panel, saying demands for records, staff testimony will be refused

    […]

    White House Counsel Pat Cipollone’s letter to committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) constitutes a sweeping rejection — not just of Nadler’s request for White House records, but of Congress’s standing to investigate Trump for possible obstruction of justice. In his letter, Cipollone repeated a claim the White House and Trump’s business have begun making: that Congress is not a law enforcement body and does not have a legitimate purpose to investigate the questions it is pursuing.

     

    But Cipollone stopped short of asserting executive privilege. Instead, he told Nadler he would consider a narrowed request if the chairman spells out the legislative purpose and legal support for the information he is seeking.

     

    “Congressional investigations are intended to obtain information to aid in evaluating potential legislation,…”  [continues]

     

    he told Nadler he would consider a narrowed request if the chairman spells out the legislative purpose and legal support for the information he is seeking ??? 

    is I-M-P-E-A-C-H-M-E-N-T narrow enough legislative purpose for you, cipollone?

  17. craig, you have 9 months to think about them before the first primaries begin.   plenty time to gestate anything – unless you’re an elephant which takes 22 months.

  18. Republicans hate women There has been an epidemic of goopers saying stupid things about the issue of choice. Someone needs to collect them and make an ad that will run endlessly until he 2020 election,

  19. consider the broad perspective – from sea to shining sea, Massachusetts & California, coast to coast

    Lizzie & Kamala

    2 tough ladies that could go toe to toe, mano a mano (or mano pequeña in twit’s case) taking him on  

  21. the hill: Poll: Biden leads Trump by double digits in Pennsylvania

    […]

    A state-level survey by Quinnipiac University finds Biden at 53 percent and Trump at 42 percent in a head-to-head match-up in Pennsylvania.

    Trump has a narrow 4 point advantage among male respondents, but Biden holds a 24 point lead among women — 60 percent to 36 percent. Among white voters, Biden leads 49 percent to 45 percent, but he leads among nonwhite voters by a whopping 70 percent to 27 percent.

    Trump and Biden pulled at least 90 percent support from within their own parties, while the former vice president held a 14 point advantage among independents, leading 51 percent to 37 percent.

    [continues]

  22. KGC

    Did you read the whole article and the segment on the Catholic priest?

     

  23. I did and the point was that  ignorant  people made stupid choices
     
    Hey Craig what happened to your love of Joe

  24. Alexandra petri:

    We are, apparently, in the stage of the campaign where the question becomes which candidate you would like to have a beer with. This has always struck me as an oddly specific litmus test, unrelated to fitness to govern; the answer often turns out to have no actual relationship to whether the candidate in question even consumes beer! Yet I do not mind asking it, as long as we also subject the candidates to the following equally specific litmus tests unrelated to their fitness to govern:

     

    • Which candidate would you like to send to the basement to see what is making the noise?

    [long list continues]

  26. I wouldn’t mind having a glass of wine with Kamala.  We could talk law and other shit.

  27. I’m trying to decide who would be fun to go kayaking with

    And I’ve been wracking my brain t find something that would be fun to do with Joe. He’s not the only one I feel that way about.

  28. So far all of the Democratic candidates are boring me and all are a huge improvement of the slimeball in the White House.  Hope the first debate at least heats things up a bit and the wannabee dictator doesn’t get us into a war before then.  

  29. could not agree more  any Democrat would be better than SFB

  30. The old 3M Legal Game with Amy,
    Beer with Butegieg, 
    Charades with Beto,
    Scrabble with Harris,
    Fly fishing with Biden,
    Twister with Gillibrand (snicker)
    Target shooting with Swalwell,
    Mumbledy Peg with Bernie
     
     
     

  32. I’ll vote for any of the Dems. I think Harris or Biden will win the nomination.
    If it’s Biden, then Klobuchar will be the pick for Veep. If it’s Harris, then I can’t imagine who would be Veep other than Biden . . . . 
    Weird.

Comments are closed.