2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumI will NEVER vote for Hillary Clinton
Earlier this month my brother posted something that sticks with me. Back in 1969 he was a 19 year old who had gone to college and when he clowned around they advised him to take a semester off and then re-apply. He did but was drafted instead and sent off to war. This is what he said 45 years later:
"45 years ago today a man came home from war. Just 20 months earlier a boy went off to fight. War teaches many things. The fragility of life, but at the same time, the cheapness of life. The most horrifying and yet the most gratifying moments. The bravest and the most cowardly times. The greatest friendships and the most extreme loss. Civilian life can never even come close. And to end it all on April fools day, says it all !!"
This guy is no pundit and most days it would take a lot to get more than a "Good morning" from him...
Today they announced we now have over 4000 troops back in Iraq. If we elect Bernie Sanders I believe we start to stop loving wars...
Chan790
(20,176 posts)Hillary is no Democrat as far as I am concerned.
athena
(4,187 posts)Not voting for the Democratic nominee is equivalent to voting for the Republican nominee.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Of course you will look to blame someone else, but it's you.
athena
(4,187 posts)the actions of those who refuse to vote for the Democratic nominee?
Your vote is yours and yours alone. If you choose to support the Republican nominee with it, you have no one but yourself to blame.
TDale313
(7,820 posts)Yeah. They're part of the problem
Arneoker
(375 posts)Got it.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)instead of the cult of personality.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)Chan790
(20,176 posts)Hillary is never responsible for the consequences of her actions either.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)She is not ever to blame for anything she has ever done, nor any mistakes she will make. Got it?
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)and because only women have sex for money!
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Nice interpretation of Democracy there, bud.
Jack Bone
(2,023 posts)Democracy caught the last train for the coast....
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)you are moving the goal post.
Are you stating that a minority of the voting population should be dictating another choice than that made by the majority of the voters?
Cal33
(7,018 posts)compared Sanders and Clinton to Republican presidential candidates, Sanders has been
besting the Republican by double digit numbers over Clinton -- every single time.
This shows what would happen in the General Election. The majority of the American
people by far would vote for Sanders over Clinton as president. There's the majority
for you.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)Because reasons?
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Demsrule86
(68,586 posts)Those of you who sit out, vote for Stein or vote for Trump with the idea that after he is really bad why then the revolution will continue are wrong...four justices plus the one being held hostage right now...the GOP having all three branches of government...many of us literally won't survive a Trump presidency ...and if we did justices serve for life...no revolution.
Arneoker
(375 posts)You might confuse some with that logic.
Arneoker
(375 posts)Bottom line, if you don't vote for the best viable choice in November then your passion and sincerity counts for squat, and you are objectively useless to any kind decent cause.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)my ballots always have several options
MattSh
(3,714 posts)it is not a vote for somebody else. Never has been; never will be.
Strange how many times that has to be said...
But as Stalin once not so graciously pointed out, and quite apropos in the USA in 2016, it's not the people who vote who decide elections.
athena
(4,187 posts)then you're effectively voting for Trump, even if you don't cast a ballot.
840high
(17,196 posts)KPN
(15,646 posts)If someone doesn't vote for Hillary, it's because she does not appeal to them or their interests. Has nothing to do with Trump.
Hillary will either get enough Bernie supporters to help her prevail, assuming she gets the nomination first, or she won't ... based on what she offers voters in exchange for their vote between the nomination and November 8th.
It';s up to Hillary.
Buddyblazon
(3,014 posts)If I vote for Hillary, I've voted for Hillary. If I don't vote I've voted for no one.
Don't spin it to suit your ego.
Silver_Witch
(1,820 posts)And I will vote for the one that represents me. Casting my vote is my vote and I get to pick who I cast it for. No matter how much you hate that.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Funny thing they never realize is you need more than just democrats to actually elect a president. The numbers just are not there as democrats only make up around 30% of the voters.
Silver_Witch
(1,820 posts)your post was the only nice one...much appreciated.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Might not always succeed, lol
Arneoker
(375 posts)Indulge yourself! That's what really matters, right?
Silver_Witch
(1,820 posts)I am older than dirt and don't need or want your judgement. Save it for the DNC.
WhiteTara
(29,718 posts)President Cruz. But do vote your "conscience". We saw how that worked out in 2000
Silver_Witch
(1,820 posts)...if Trump wins it is the DNC's fault not mine. The DNC picks the candidate not I.
My vote is MY vote and I shall cast it as I wish - your words are meaningless.
Thanks for sharing and have a very very nice day.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Does not count so my non-vote at the top will not matter. I will vote democratic down ballot though.
840high
(17,196 posts)Silver_Witch
(1,820 posts)The DNC and Hillary are not for you or me. They are only for the 1% and the powerful.
We all laugh when Republicans vote against their best interest and yet you promote the same.
TrueDemVA
(250 posts)I will not reward DINOs with my vote. That doesn't mean it is a vote for Trump. How stupid are these people to say this type of thing. Fear is not going to make me vote for her just b/c she claims to be a Dem. The Democratic Party is gone. Maybe it is time for a third party. A real party for the people.
I will write in Bernie's name if I have to, b/c he earned my vote.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)There are other candidates besides the two big parties. Camp Weathervane has been quite clear that Sanders Liberals aren't wanted. Other candidates will be grateful for our support. Good luck with your scorched earth campaign.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)voting for a Republican to be the Democratic nominee.
Flying Shoe
(23 posts)When this is how we approach elections, we end up settling for candidates that no longer represent what this party should be about. This is how the establishment gets its de-regulation, lack of campaign finance laws, and petty wars past the people who's interest these things directly conflict.
AgerolanAmerican
(1,000 posts)by traditional standards of what a Democrat is?
Trump complaining that people don't get to vote, Hillary supporters doing everything they can to justify people not being able to vote... the one that is actually supporting democracy - you know, as in "Democrat", that democracy - is clear cut.
The one that rigged the system to minimize the impact of voting is really not very democratic at all, one might even say anti-democratic.
msongs
(67,420 posts)EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)You have the big mouth. And F-35 programs prove little. Show me war votes.
still_one
(92,219 posts)puffy socks
(1,473 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Go ahead and poll that question--do it off DU. You'll find you're dead wrong by about 98%-2%.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Clinton is responsible for maybe a million dead Iraqi's. She hasnt even said she was sorry. Not empathy. She said she made a mistake.
MattSh
(3,714 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Either she's a slow learner, or well-paid to promote war. Neither case is presidential material.
Carolina
(6,960 posts)He was not for regime change in Honduras and Libya... You are confused and that's putting it euphemistically
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,640 posts)And Secretary Clinton likes wars.
*sigh*
DrDan
(20,411 posts)Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)frustrated_lefty
(2,774 posts)Let Rome burn.
Carolina
(6,960 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)catnhatnh
(8,976 posts)I ain't gonna study war no more-nor vote it
I would vote for a kumquat before Hillary. Maybe you don't get it. If I can vote against anything else I will never vote again for a warrior to young to even have ever voted.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)frustrated_lefty
(2,774 posts)center right judges to the Supreme Court. How is this a good thing?
Dem2
(8,168 posts)Nobody believes that.
SpareribSP
(325 posts)Not weighing in on Roe v. Wade and not thinking the Citizen's United ruling was a mistake hasn't exactly inspired a lot of confidence.
Dem2
(8,168 posts)You have to be extremely naive to not understand the politics behind this choice and why she is supporting Obama on it. I mean completely oblivious. You can't possibly think that this is indicative of what Hillary would choose.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)She's more liberal than Bill, and Bill appointed RBG.
frustrated_lefty
(2,774 posts)RBG is a gift from the heavens. I love having her as a Justice.
Hillary is not Bill. Hillary is indebted to the very same corporations that brought you Citizen's United. Why do you think she would push to overturn Citizens United?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)demosincebirth
(12,540 posts)frustrated_lefty
(2,774 posts)to who she's indebted?
demosincebirth
(12,540 posts)contributor or PAC, etc. Even Mr Sanders. That's politics. Sorry to bring you the sad news
frustrated_lefty
(2,774 posts)and some might be labeled corporate whores.
demosincebirth
(12,540 posts)you are "frustrated."
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Demsrule86
(68,586 posts)Bill Clinton gave us Ginsberg...you want to cut your nose of to spite your face...fine...but tell the truth...she is way better than Trump or Cruze. They would have all branches of government...hope you have as much money as Saradan if that comes to pass because you will need it to survive. Did the Dems win after Reagan? Was Bush survivable? Hardly.
Livluvgrow
(377 posts)Her fracking position is in line with saying it is cold by my hoiuse so globql warming cant be real. Let the states decide. Thats the solution to global warming frack her.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)Oh wait, she hasn't revolved to her original stance yet.
vintx
(1,748 posts)So typical.
Nothing beyond talking points. When you get down to policy they go silent.
TimeToEvolve
(303 posts)i expect hillary to fold like superman on laundry day. Her cronies who helped pay for her campaign will make sure that there is a goodie bag in there for them. all past and now future environmental laws passed by DINO's are rife with compromises that allows industry to continue to pollute and destroy. try waking up for once.
a good ol' centerist. the epitome of a turncoat dem. oh and rude and condescending too.
TimeToEvolve
(303 posts)I REFUSE TO SUPPORT A PLUTOCRAT!!
things still not clear enough?
I REFUSE TO SUPPORT A PLUTOCRAT!!
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)And we are already beyond the point of no return with global warming.
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)the stupid and failed drug war, who oppose money dominating politics, and who will rein in corporations?
Is she going to stop her global fracking initiative? Will she stand up stronger than Obama to the likes of BP? Will she be talking "all of the above" aka drill, baby, drill?
Why tout areas where there is little room to trust her like they are some walk off homerun?
When you say Supreme Court all you really mean is will uphold Roe and maybe some limitations on CU but I don't even buy that too deeply. I think her problem isn't the money but that she can't control all of it and maybe would like to review the opposition donor lists for something to hit them on. I don't recall her as much of a lion for campaign finance reform before CU.
When you say the environment, I have no idea what you are talking about.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)money and politics were not exactly strangers before Citizens United.
Voting rights and immigration are the bigger issues for the SCOTUS. I have full confidence she'd pick someone who is good on those issues.
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)leads on sentencing, upholds evidence rules, props up bad cops, reduces search standards.
I believe the courts weigh heavily on the scope and magnitude of damage caused by the drug war not dissimilar to the influence on immigration which is no less in the hands of the executive and legislative branches.
No question we already had a swamp to drain prior to CU, I have never for even a second contended differently and in fact it seems it is the Turd Way types who seem to always be implying this is where the real problems came into play.
I think the offer to me is vote for us so we can safe guard your ability to vote for us because we know you aren't going to vote for the TeaPubliKlans and please do it quietly and don't ask for anything else because we have corporate masters to obey and their agenda to forward.
farleftlib
(2,125 posts)Says it all.
athena
(4,187 posts)Because it's not like you'll have to live with the policies of President Trump for four or eight years.
frustrated_lefty
(2,774 posts)The assumption you make is that a President Trump would be more "evil" than a President Clinton. I'm saying that we're beyond the point of "more" or "less." A President Clinton would be a DIFFERENT kind of evil, but the degree of suckiness has passed beyond measuring in terms of "more" or "less." Hillary is still going to nominate right-wing judges for the Supreme Court. She'll get involved in as many, if not more, "military interventions." She'll compromise on abortion, she's already agreed to it. She'll compromise Social Security. She is NOT the lesser of two evils, she's a DIFFERENT kind of evil.
athena
(4,187 posts)Hillary is not the evil right-winger you seem to think she is. Please look into her record. Here is an excellent, unbiased article. (It was published in The Nation, which ended up endorsing Bernie).
http://www.thenation.com/article/can-hillary-clinton-win-over-the-left/
For the first half of her political life, Hillary Clinton was consistently painted as so far leftso feministthat it threatened her husbands political viability. Whenever that viability was in doubt, she would overcorrect, trying to convince a skeptical mainstream press that she wasnt nearly as liberal as she seemed. Eventually, the strategy of triangulationusing the left as a foil to prove her moderate bona fidesbecame nearly reflexive.
In recent years, however, Americas political context has been transformed. With the white South becoming solidly Republicansomething that happened during Bill Clintons administrationthe Democratic Party has become more reliant on the votes of women, people of color, and those who wear the liberal label proudly. This means that elections have become less about wooing swing voters than about turning out the base. Meanwhile, policies once supported by a smug centrist consensusfrom Wall Street deregulation to military adventurism in the Middle Easthave proved themselves failures, pushing the center of gravity in the Democratic Party to the left. Triangulation has become passé.
This means that, in a historical irony, Hillary Clinton now needs to convince progressives that she really is who she was once widely believed to be. She is running for president as a progressive feminist, something that would have been utterly quixotic when she entered public life.
The entire article is worth reading.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)The title says it all. She isn't left, she must win us over. Been saying it all along she isn't remotely close to liberal and she isn't remotely close to having earned my support.
athena
(4,187 posts)Don't make comments on an article you clearly haven't read. It looks bad.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)nor do I have to read about Hillary's record shit she's been running for president since 2007. I can tell left from right pretty easy.
athena
(4,187 posts)And reading it before commenting is about appearance, not substance?
If so, then up is down and black is white. And Bernie just won New York! And electing Trump president will be the best thing that ever happened to the U.S. and will greatly reduce the level of income inequality!
Enjoy your evening. Clearly, you already know everything there is to know. Who needs to read when you can just make stuff up?
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)to grasp the fact that the title asks can she win over the left. With that simple statement and me being a minute portion of the left I will answer for my portion. No, she can not win over this portion of the left. By the title also asking can she win over the left, it implies she is not of the left. Deal.
athena
(4,187 posts)There is actual content. Reading the title of an article is not the same as reading the entire article. Often, the title is not even picked by the person who wrote the article.
In this case, the content of the article is about Hillary's record, not about whether she can win over the left. But of course, you don't know that because you thought you knew enough about the article by just reading the title.
By the way, Hillary is not "the left". Neither is Bernie. The left is made up of voters. It is not a single person. And as a leftist, I do not feel that an angry person like Bernie who makes lots of promises but can't explain how he will keep them represents me or my concerns.
And you then suggest I'm not smart enough. I happen to have a Ph.D. in physics and find it very amusing when people on DU suggest I'm stupid. Anyway, it's always when they can't respond to the substance of an argument that Bernie supporters resort to name calling. In this case, it's not even a response to an argument we're talking about; it's the effort it takes to read an article.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)Can Hillary sway the left? No! Is Hillary part of the left? I am sure you are brilliant .
athena
(4,187 posts)That really limits the level of discussion one can have with someone.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)you are part of the problem. A vote for her is quite possibly a vote against every moral stance that can be taken.
athena
(4,187 posts)This is Democratic Underground, not Hillary Haters Underground.
I am still waiting for you to make a substantive comment that does not resort to personal attacks.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)She will serve her corporate masters well. Enjoy the oligarchy.
athena
(4,187 posts)But you couldn't be bothered to read it. You can't really debunk something you haven't actually read.
Do you think I am absolutely so forgetful that I forgot her past and her votes? You think I forgot how she has been wrong on every issue before she got it right? Are you calling me forgetful, stupid, uninformed? Which is it? All of them? I am quite well of her record, aaaaaaaaaaand am equally unimpressed. An article will not change that.
athena
(4,187 posts)Are you afraid of what it might contain?
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)I'll read it when I read her transcripts. That I do not know.
creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)Her votes that weren't liberal get singled out and repeated endlessly. But taken as a whole, she has a very liberal record. Her ADA scores were usually 95 out of 100.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)Game changing votes.
Demsrule86
(68,586 posts)So go home and pout and pray the rest of us bail your sorry self out because no matter what you think a GOP presidency is unthinkable. How long can you keep doing this...at some point you need to stop ragging on Hillary.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)John Breaux, Byron Dorgan.
frustrated_lefty
(2,774 posts)My apologies, but I don't think we can see eye-to-eye.
Despite "the first half of her political life," she was a Goldwater girl.
She still triangulates (but she doesn't pull it off with the same charm that Bill did). She qualifies every statement, predicates every assertion, and dances around ever taking a solid stance.
She's a hawk.
She defends the "super-predator" nonsense.
She supports fracking, despite scientist's conclusions about the damage it causes.
She demeaned the very women her husband was philandering with.
She, at a minimum, showed incredibly poor judgment with the home server.
She has lots of support from the fossil fuel industry.
She has lots of support from Big-Pharma.
She has massive support from Wall Street.
I cannot believe she has any reason for running for president than personal aggrandizement, and I think she's going to make horrible decisions.
Thank you again for the article and the polite response, but we disagree on this.
-fl
creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)where Hillary demeaned the women?
She was only a Goldwater girl when she was very young.
Bernie said he isn't going to get rid of fracking either, except in the long run. Hillary is for alternative energy too.
frustrated_lefty
(2,774 posts)http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=8204
You can question the source information, most assuredly. But, in searching the web, I haven't seen much disparity in the accounts.
As to, "She was only a Goldwater girl when she was very young," I agree. My reply was only in response to your statement of her very early commitment to liberal ideals.
Alternative energy: Hillary receives a lot of donations from the fossil fuel industry. Do you really trust her to regulate it?
creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)I don't see anything there specific that she did. I don't see any examples of her demeaning the women. Some of it sounds like plain paranoia, like cars slowing down in front of the house believed to be stalkers sent from the Clintons.
Yes, I do trust Hillary. Bernie is exceptional at raising funds in small donations for his admirable and generous base. However, nearly all other politicians are forced to raise donations from rich people. Yet, things get regulated.
k8conant
(3,030 posts)from last August.
Did you read the comments? How do you counter the September response?
athena
(4,187 posts)You show your bias in calling it that.
In response to that comment:
1. Serving on Walmart's board does not make her responsible for all of Walmart's actions. On the contrary, serving on a board means you can try to use the power you're given to change the system from the inside.
2. Hillary voted to give the president the authority to invade Iraq because at the time, most people thought W. wanted the authority for bargaining power. I, and others, were cynical and did not believe this, but many smart people did. If you did not live through that, it's easy to dismiss Hillary's Iraq vote as a bad decision that disqualifies her.
3. If Hillary were a pacifist, she would not be electable. As a pacifist, I accept that the U.S. is not going to elect a pacifist to the presidency in our lifetime. I'd much rather have Hillary as president than as a pacifist who has no political power.
k8conant
(3,030 posts)1. What change did Hillary effect at Wal-Mart?
2. Of course, I lived through the Bush baloney about Iraq and his rash decision to invade to get revenge for his Poppy.
So what is Hillary's excuse for not being properly cynical?
3. Why do you think only hawks are electable? You claim to be a pacifist yet you sell out in a heartbeat?
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Pro Fracking, and Pro Monsanto.
"The Nation" can publish whatever they want, and have a good go at sugar coating this vile human, but so what? Tell it to the families of the dead women martyrs of the Honduras.
catnhatnh
(8,976 posts)And I especially like the part where you claim he might be president for 8 years. How about this-people like you cause a president Donald Trump- and then you "assume" he would be re-elected??? I ain't trying to teach her-she is already ruined. War needs to be discredited.
athena
(4,187 posts)Do you remember how so many of us supported Nader, thinking that Gore was not liberal enough, and that in any case, four years of W. wouldn't be the end of the world?
No one on the left -- not a single person -- thought W. could be re-elected. No one thought 9/11 would happen. No one could imagine that W. would have 90+% approval ratings a year into his presidency.
What that election taught some of us is that we can't take anything for granted. You can't allow a right-wing nutcase to be elected President just to teach the Democratic party a lesson. That's not how things work. When W. was elected, the Democratic party did not move left; it moved right. If Trump is elected in November, the Democratic Party will once again move right, and all the hard work of moving it left over the past ten years will have been for naught.
creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)would be light years worse then Bush too, especially if its Ted Cruz.
athena
(4,187 posts)the W. years will seem in retrospect like a time of relative peace and prosperity.
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)The only actual moving left is leading from behind once forced by the courts or the states and that only if the donor class gives the A-OK.
demosincebirth
(12,540 posts)go home, now.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)GOP starts impeachment on day one to weaken her for 2020.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)On Tue Apr 19, 2016, 10:00 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
I will NEVER vote for Hillary Clinton
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511785945
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
The expectation of DUers is that they will support the Democratic party nominee for President.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Apr 19, 2016, 10:14 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Each person is entitled to vote as they see fit, you don't have to agree with it but it is their right. You can't force people to vote for the candidate of your choice. Also until the convention in July, there is no Democratic nominee.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: TOS Violation as far as I can see
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Skinner said primary season is still on. Stop alert stalking people who don't support your candidate.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)catnhatnh
(8,976 posts)I put this in GD-P just so people like you could argue or complain about me.Then we could argue on merits. To call an open forum Shitty is ridiculous. Make a point or go home.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)woolldog
(8,791 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)think
(11,641 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)YMMV
catnhatnh
(8,976 posts)Because you know who Kissinger endorses...
think
(11,641 posts)Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)You, who foisted upon us the most divisive candidate in memory. Ah well, Have fun in the general. Just think back on this moment on election night, when you're wondering what just happened.
still_one
(92,219 posts)book_worm
(15,951 posts)Most Democratic and Democratic leaning voters will vote for Clinton over Trump or Cruz. Go ahead and don't vote for her or vote Green. It doesn't matter to most people what you do.
catnhatnh
(8,976 posts)I'm so glad you endorse me!
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)Response to book_worm (Reply #43)
Corruption Inc This message was self-deleted by its author.
actslikeacarrot
(464 posts)...but I will draw the line at the inevitable "blood oath" that will soon be required to post here. I just don't get it, Clinton has NEVER met an "overseas adventure" she didn't like. I thought we were against that sort of thing.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
BreakfastClub
(765 posts)liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)no big deal if you don't vote for her?
catnhatnh
(8,976 posts)He was nothing special. Just one more Guy drafted in '69. Then later he shows up in a book about the siege at Firebase Ripcord. Just one more guy who had his squad overrun at an NDP and all his people appear on panel 11West.
kgnu_fan
(3,021 posts)LibDemAlways
(15,139 posts)hell bent on nominating a pro-war corporatist, then I need to rethink my party affiliation because today's Democratic Party certainly doesn't represent my values.
Esperanza
(13 posts)since I could vote - 44 years. I've worked in campaigns, donated money, been a delegate at my County convention. The first campaign I worked on was for a woman who was running for Governor in 1972. I am a woman and a feminist. I will never vote for Hillary. I made that decision long before Bernie ever entered the race. I will vote for some Democrats at the local and State level, but that's it. I would express myself more strongly, but would probably get kicked off this board.
vintx
(1,748 posts)ismnotwasm
(41,989 posts)nini
(16,672 posts)spend your time working at the local level and get the congress back in the D column. Anything short of that is simply tantrums because you didn't get your way.
BTW: my brother was in Vietnam too and saw all the same crap. He would NEVER sit back and not vote Dem and allow a repuke to be up even one vote because there's far too much at stake.
nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)For many people, the distinction between the Republicans and either of our Democratic candidates is a chasm we cannot afford to ignore.
Moreover, I simply do not understand why anyone thinks our vote is going to be changed because people threaten not to vote for our candidate.
Esperanza
(13 posts)I've been hearing that song for too long to be moved by it. I've witnessed a decades long, relentless retreat from democratic values and I'm fed up.
Believe me, I have no illusions about changing your vote. I do get to tell you what I think about it.
nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)I get it. I was a politics major in college and I've followed it all to some degree or another for years, and they always say, "this is the most important election of our lifetimes!" So yeah, it does sorta feel like we don't get to get the candidate we want. I wanted Hillary last time and got Obama, though I'm certainly proud of the job he's done. But the thing is, I think this time, this really is the most pivotal election of our lifetime. George W. Bush never said things as horrible as Trump is saying now. I think this man is truly dangerous, not just another four years to hold our breaths through. I mean truly dangerous. I could despise Hillary with the fires of a thousand suns, and I'd still vote for her over Trump. Heck, I don't think Bernie Sanders is right for this job at all, but I'll still vote for him over Trump.
I think this may actually be the most important election in our lifetime. What would I rather have? The first woman president or a truly unrepentant bigot whose personal style is so acerbic, he's liable to get us in the war to end all wars.
Esperanza
(13 posts)of my lifetime. If Hillary has won the nomination, then all is truly lost. The oligarchy has won. As a woman and a feminist who has campaigned for female candidates for 44 years, I have to say that her election - trickle down feminism at its worst - will not be a victory for women. Her economic policies are devastating for women. I supported Obama and was a delegate for him when he ran in 2008. He has been a horrible president.
I say that all is lost, but I hope the people who have been inspired by the Bernie Sanders campaign will continue to fight. They will probably have to do it outside the Democratic Party.
nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)Esperanza
(13 posts)the people she keeps around her. Neoliberal corporatists to the core.
Good luck with the optimism.
nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)Then there really isn't a point in continuing to go back and forth.
Esperanza
(13 posts)is no difference, but you're right. There is absolutely no point to this conversation.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)I respect that Hillary can find ways of relating to candidates on the other side of the aisle. I consider among my friends people of many political, racial, social, economic, and spiritual stripes. I do not believe it is prudent to isolate oneself into enclaves where only the echo of your own ideas can be heard. I am sure there are qualities to living in the White House that only those who have lived there can truly understand. I would rather Hillary be able to shake the hand of Mr. Bush than spit in his face since the latter cannot ever lead to effective compromise. It's one of the things I like most about her as a candidate. But, that camaraderie aside, are you really going to fault Hillary Clinton for being grateful to a president from the other party helping to get twenty-million dollars to help New York in the wake of 9/11? Is that really so terrible an issue to negotiate on?
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)in order to get that money.
Avalux
(35,015 posts)I care - that's why I'm not going to vote for ANYONE (Dem or GOP) who gets excited about invading and bombing other countries.
Done with it.
nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)This is a democratic site.
onecaliberal
(32,864 posts)Whose views are almost identical to republicans?
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)if you think that is the case. Hillary Clinton likes herself quite well. Republicans hate Hillary Clinton with the kind of hatred unseen in the USA except in the hatred of some Sanders supporters of Hillary Clinton. Have you asked yourself why it is going to be so wonderful to have Hillary Clinton as the next President of the United States? The answer is that it will piss off all the right people.
onecaliberal
(32,864 posts)Zilch to me.
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)supporter is a badge of honor to me. I am a Democrat. That means I go with the majority vote as a theory of governing. I'm not into imposing the will of an elite minority on the majority of voters. I get that you think that Sanders supporters are a lot smarter than everyone else. It's an opinion you are entitled to, but one that I do not share even slightly.
I won't miss the "Bernie math" where a statistic of losing not so badly, or even winning small numbers of voters for a stretch, is deemed the undisputed will of the majority. It isn't. It's desperate garbage from people unhinged from the reality that more votes is what wins.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)In Congress. If you lump her in with people like Cruz you are showing your ignorance.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)But the libels about Hillary Clinton should cease. They will not benefit Sen. Sanders any longer.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)and so are others. It isn't an opinion that I can respect.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Frankly- I don't care if you respect my opinion or not.
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)Best wishes in your endeavors.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)Kittycat
(10,493 posts)Last I looked, she hasn't crossed the Pledged Delegate line. And until she does, you will just need to deal with it.
Pastiche423
(15,406 posts)I do not vote for corporatist, warmongers, liars or cheaters.
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)That is a corporatist. More Americans die every year from guns in this country than the last 40 in wars. And we fight a lot of wars. And when the Bernster says he is a Democrat? That's a lie. When his campaign hacked the DNC computer, he is a cheater too.
Do it looks like you do support a corporatist, warmonger, liar and cheater. You are just very selective about what facts constitute reality and how to interpret them.
TM99
(8,352 posts)So sad really that y'all debase yourselves so with lies, innuendo, smears, and rat-fuckery.
Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)demosincebirth
(12,540 posts)Skid Rogue
(711 posts)Vote for whomever you want to vote for. Don't stress out about it.
What's that green person's name... Jill something?
BainsBane
(53,035 posts)The choice now is between Clinton and the GOP. If you aren't going to support Democrats, you don't belong here.
By all means, ,vote for Trump. Vote to make the military really "Yuge," better than ever.
People have rejected the campaign of bumper sticker slogans, of a candidate who proved himself unable to even articulate how he would implement the core ideas he had been campaigning on for months.
We now have a Democratic nominee. You can choose to support the Democrat or enable Trump to come to office and make good on his promise to build the military even bigger than it is now. We are now at the point where refusing to vote for Clinton promotes the GOP, which promotes more military spending and more military interventions abroad.
Bernie lost. He would have to get 71 percent of the remaining delegates to win. He hasn't even been able to reach 50. He's finished. No amount of delusion or fantasy justifies ongoing attacks against Democrats. The women who support the Democratic party are not "whores." The "Southerners" and "confederates" who are the single most loyal demographic supporting the Dem Party in all 50 states are not worth less than rural whites or self-entitled "progressives" who supported Sanders. The primary has been decided. Bernie has gone home. Enough with the bullshit. Other people besides yourselves get to vote, and they rejected Bernie, despite his outspending Clinton 2: 1 in NY and every other state he lost. You don't have to like it, but it is reality. Either you support Clinton or the GOP. You will decide in accordance with your own values: If what you seek is to punish the majority by stripping away their civil rights, then you will refuse to support the nominee. But don't for a second thing we buy these claims about caring about war when refusing to vote for Clinton promotes a candidate that promises even greater military expansion.
dinkytron
(568 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)Demsrule86
(68,586 posts)You could have it your way...but with Trump....well all I can say is many would die...war monger. He would destabilize the world...not just the middle east like Bush. I am a Democrat had Hillary lost, I would have voted for Bernie and worked my ass of to get him elected.
farleftlib
(2,125 posts)probably more. He's not as much as an interventionist as she is. Either one and there
will be a massive loss of life as well as a poor quality of life for those who survive.
Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)Why would I vote to cut my own throat? I'll never vote for a Thirdway dem again.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)BeyondGeography
(39,374 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)And no one loves war. That's an idiotic thing to say on a Democratic forum.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]
pampango
(24,692 posts)If my life consisted of perfect choices the GE would be Sanders against Cruz. Unfortunately my life is about imperfect choices.
smiley
(1,432 posts)I can't support corruption.
Arneoker
(375 posts)smiley
(1,432 posts)kgnu_fan
(3,021 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)Seems like a poor hook on which to hang your hat.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Not DU's finest moment, I'll have to say.
Anaxamander
(570 posts)...it's going to be a hard decision for me.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)I hope you'll allow yourself a loophole for voting against the Republican nominee--but your vote's your own.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)She and her supporters have made that crystal clear. So rest easy - if she loses in the general, it is 100% on HER and HER SUPPORTERS - NOT on you.
Cheers.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)You obviously haven't been following the race
Squinch
(50,955 posts)do just fine without you.
It just isn't that big of a deal.