Will voters be turned off if the race is between Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton?

[kentuck]

Under the surface, it seems to me that people are tired of the Bushes and the Clintons. They don't like the idea of passing the presidency down from family to family, in my opinion.

[djean111]

1. Yup. Especially young voters. n/t

[JoePhilly]

4. You mean the ones who tend not to vote?

[Scootaloo]

8. "We don't need them anyway!"

Great strategy from the Hillary camp.

[artislife]

21. +1 nt

[JoePhilly]

38. Why would you put quotes around something I did not say?

Or is that a tactic Bernie's supporters have had to turn to?

It's not very Bernie-like.

[stevenleser]

148. Highlighting their own strawman, I guess? nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

153. LOL ...

Why would you put quotes around something I did not say? Or is that a tactic Bernie's supporters have had to turn to?

You mean like this:

PoC: "Economic Primary is less important an issue to me than Social parity!"

Bernie Supporter: "Why do you keep saying that 'Bernie doesn't care about PoC' (or, worse, 'Bernie is a racist') ... he marched with Martin, fer Christsake!"

PoC: "I didn't"

Rinse and repeat.

[MineralMan]

70. Funny...I didn't see that in the post

you're replying to. Odd, huh. Why the quotes?

[wendylaroux]

101. no

the ones who do.

[840high]

109. The ones like my

grandson who likes to vote. If it's those 2 choices, he will stay home.

[JoePhilly]

116. Then you should talk to him.

Because staying home is a dumb idea regardless.

But hey, that's kids I guess, right?

[JaneyVee]

2. Not according to the polls.

Just the historic nature of electing our first woman president would GOTV. And the fact that all Bush's should never be allowed to be in office again.

[murielm99]

49. But we still can't neglect GOTV.

That is one of my biggest activities during primaries and generals.

GOTV is important for the down ticket races, too.

[PADemD]

95. GOTV was one of my priorities in 2007-2008.

I phone banked 2 hours per week for the Obama Campaign for over a year. I'm glad Hillary has so many volunteers because I will not be doing the same for her campaign.

[PADemD]

94. Only if the first woman were Elizabeth Warren.

Not Hillary.

[MADem]

3. People love a horserace as much as they hate change.

I think that matchup will suit most people just fine.

[passiveporcupine]

73. While you may be correct on this

it doesn't say much for the American people.

[MADem]

103. I think it says they like a vibrant competition, but they're somewhat risk-averse.

These are not "bad" traits.

They just are what they are.

I don't think buying a pig in a poke is a trait that makes one stand out positively, in and of itself.

Sometimes, taking a chance pays off, other times, it can end in disaster.

We prefer to remember the times when great risk meant great reward.

When the opposite result happens, we use the terms "foolhardy" and even "bone-headed."


Overall, I like the American people. I think most of them are well-meaning.

[Cosmocat]

120. BINGO

I remember in my younger years, being around some young ladies who used to bemoan how much they hated jerkoffs and just wanted to meet a good guy, who invariably would hook up with the biggest possible POS guy in the bar by the end of the night.

We are like that in politics.

Everything we SAY we hate about pols, we vote for them almost every time ...

[Live and Learn]

5. I would be. nt

[Scuba]

6. This one sure would be.

[raindaddy]

61. Can you imagine sitting through a Clinton/Bush debate?

[Demeter]

63. Not while breathing

[artislife]

67. +1000

I am supposed to be doing my online course but it's posts like this that keep me coming back to this site...!

[Enthusiast]

69. Me too. It's a good one.

[Demeter]

78. Thank you, I'm here all week! Try the veal!

Don't ever hand Demeter a straight line....unless you want a smart riposte!

[raindaddy]

97. Don't mind being your straight man Demeter...

It was for a great cause!

[L0oniX]

71. That would be so bad that even these guys wouldn't watch it....

[wendylaroux]

102. it woud take forever,

both of them trying to remember what they can't say,or what their opinion was last time.
and the saying something that sounds so deep,but not saying anything at all.

[restorefreedom]

7. i know i will

knowing that in 2015 on the heels of having the first pres. of color, that our choices are between two elitist and antiquated family dynasties?

why bother is my view

[Sheepshank]

9. I don't see Hillary fatigue as much as Bush fatigue

In addition the republican fatigue, Bush is representing a very liberal view of immigration. There will be many disenchanted Republicans. They won't vote Dem, but they won't vote Bush. Unless of course they put everything aside to put any Rep in th whitehouse. They do have a Borg mentality after all.

[okasha]

24. I see sheer terror

at the thought of Jeb's likely SCOTUS nominations, especially among women, the prospect of privatizing Social Security and Medicare, endless war in Western Asia.

[Sheepshank]

89. Agreed

[LongTomH]

150. If it comes to this, the only thing that can save us, is sheer terror at the thought of.............

.......another Bush in the White House!!!!!

[passiveporcupine]

76. "They do have a Borg mentality after all."

So, those of us who will vote for Hillary if she wins the primary have a "Borg mentality"? Because we don't want another republican in the white house any more than they want a democrat.

[Sheepshank]

88. Re-read

Reps as a huge voting body may likely vote for any Rep nominee ....they are a Borg...all fall in line to try and keep a Dem out of the Whitehouse. They may ultimately care very little for any platform, they just don't want a Dem as POTUS.

[passiveporcupine]

91. And you know this because?

Many dems, myself included, will always vote dem, because we know what it means to put a republican in the white house. It means crawling backwards again, instead of crawling forwards.

And I would imagine that that is why republicans vote for republicans. I think they may not understand what is in their best interest, but they think they are voting for their best interest, just like dems do.

[Sheepshank]

113. Postulation and opinions only....no need to get defensive nt

[passiveporcupine]

115. There was no defensiveness in my reply

I was hoping that you would see that your broad brush labeling was not really fair, because it can apply to both parties, equally.

[Sheepshank]

124. yes, I know it cuts both ways.

A prime example: A Bernie Supporter called all Hillary supporers Zimmermans.

But back to my original post and the Republican borg mentality. I will not forget the loyalty oath all the Rep Senators signed onto and lead by Norquist. I will never forget their huge voting block to try and grind this nations recovery to a screeching halt. They voted as a block regardless of the viability of any bill. Their unified goal was to stop Obama.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/loyalty-oath/
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/the-gops-affinity-loyalty-oaths


We all do it to some degree and generally it's because there are plenty (more than ten, less than 1,000,000) of examples. I and pretty much realize the entire universe will acknowledge that a broad brush description almost never includes 100% of a class.

[passiveporcupine]

144. I agree with you regarding republican politicians

Most of them do seem to have a Borg mentality. But you were talking about voters, so I was responding on the actions of the constituency, not so much the politicians.

And yes, we all should acknowledge that broad brushing is used a lot (even by me, when I'm not careful) and should not include 100% of a class...but for some reason it's not perceived that way in a debate...especially a contentious or heated debate. Not saying that this is a heated debate. I'm just getting really worn down by the fighting and nasties here (again, not saying this applies to you or this thread)...I've recently and suddenly lost someone very dear to me and it just seems like people should try to be nicer to each other. I hope you understand where I'm coming from.

[Cosmocat]

121. The borg mentality will trump all else

sorry for the pun ...

WHOEVER it is, they will look back on 8 years of having to deal with what in their mind was not a legit president in BHO, and look forward to 8 years of the anti-christ (hill or the socialist) and will show up in droves.

[hrmjustin]

10. Seems to me she does well in head to head polling against him. You may be tired

of Hillary but that does not mean the rest of us are thank you.

[kentuck]

26. Just for the record...

I will vote for Hillary if she is the nominee.

However, my point was that a lot of people do not like the idea of "dynasties" running the White House. Just my opinion.

[MJkcj]

46. thank you

[blm]

11. The upside is that voters will truly be facing Clinton or Bush decision WITH benefit

of hindsight.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

141. And as much as I can't stand the Clintons, I will take delight if another Clinton

beats yet another Bush...AGAIN!!!

[blm]

142. That is EXACTLY my point. It forces voters to declare for progress or regression.

Casual presidential year voters don't see the decisions the exact same way that engaged policy wonks view issues and candidacies. They only view Clinton as Democrat and Bush as Republican, period - no nuance for them.

I think if it is Bush-Clinton we'll see another 2008 year, except for the heavily gerrymandered districts.

I'm with whoever is nominated, 100%, because I do GOTV in a purple state. Like you I have major issues with Clintons, but, do see this silver-lining in the two names being before the American people as their CHOICE.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

145. The irony, of course, is that it appears that Bill and George W have grown

very close.

Over the years, Pappy and Barbara Bush have referred to Bill Clinton as an "adopted son".

It makes me want to throw up, but if that's what we're striving for in this country, then so be it.

People just need to remember that the next time they want to demonize President Obama for being a so-called "pro-corporatist".

[blm]

146. WE know all that - casual prez year voters do not.

That is the reality that those of us who are consistently engaged are stuck with, unfortunately. My pragmatic nature has to kick into overdrive at these times. ; )

Till then, though……..I'm apulling left.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

147. Yeah, I agree with that. I live in MD and take for granted that I can

think/act more sympathetic rather than strategic, since this is slightly a more liberal state.

However, after the Midterms, I take nothing for granted, and I certainly don't assume that the average American is a rational actor who makes decisions in a thoughtful manner after conducting a thorough investigation of policies.

Therefore, it'll be up to you and me and all those like us to persuade young folk and everyone else in between who are likely to vote Democratic to do so, even if they aren't that fond of the nominee, who I think will be Hillary Clinton unfortunately.

[Sherman A1]

12. I will most certainly

I will vote for the eventual Democratic Nominee whoever that eventual happens to be, but should it be a Bush v Clinton Campaign I will simply tune it out completely and concentrate on other things.

[peacebird]

13. Yes

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

14. I don't like presidential dynasties either, but

although Hillary is not my first choice I would move heaven and earth to keep Jeb! from becoming president. Although he's been said to be the "smart" brother, it now appears that he's at least as dumb as W, and possibly more corrupt. So, if Hillary is the nominee I will try not to be turned off by her dynasty in order to prevent his from continuing.

[TwilightGardener]

15. Well, this voter is.

I intend for neither family to ever move back into the WH again.

[Metric System]

16. We've had two Bush Presidents, only one Clinton. We're owed a Clinton.

[kentuck]

28. Good response!

[MJkcj]

44. love this

[restorefreedom]

79. i'm for bernie

but that was a good line

[99th_Monkey]

17. Q: What's not to like about a Bush/Clinton Dynasty?

A: After all, it's brought us so many memorable disasters, like ME wars,
a crashed economy, NAFTA, War on Drugs, fat & happy MIC, record income
disparity, you name it.

[jaysunb]

18. I hear that a lot.

And, I am in that crowd.

[ybbor]

19. If that is the case, this progressive dem will vote third party

You can't find nose plugs big enough for me to vote for either of those two.

[MJkcj]

45. And then we can thank you when we get another conservative on SCOTUS

progressives who like to cut off your nose to spite your face and just as stupid as the lower middle class who vote against their own self interest and vote GOP.
grow up and support the nominee who will continue the good work that Obama has worked so hard to establish and don't give the country back to another bush to destroy

[ybbor]

48. The way I see it either way the country is fucked

And apparently Hillary doesn't need my support because EVERYONE loves her. Well not this guy. She does not represent my values and she is just barely better then whoever the Repubs put up. She is a corporatist who is more concerned with her banksters friends and the oligarchs whom she represents.

I want real change. What Obama claimed to offer but didn't provide. My life will be no better if either of them win, and I don't see it getting worse if the repub wins, which I don't see happening with or without my vote.

As far as the SCOTUS is concerned, she will just appoint another pro business justice, who could give a shit about the likes of me. They may seem less conservative than a GOP nominee, but they are essentially the same.

She's pro TPP, but won't say so. Pro-business, pro-bank.

I am all in for Bernie and unless someone can convince me otherwise, it's all or nothing.

Besides the SCOTUS nominations, what's in it for the little guy like me?

[Enthusiast]

72. +1

[DebbieCDC]

86. +1

[HooptieWagon]

98. +1

[yourout]

152. +1.....sadly things are going to have to get alot worse before....

the sheeple wake up.

[oasis]

75. "SCOTUS"will be the battle cry for both parties. (eom)

[840high]

110. You'll have to thank me, too. I am

not voting for those 2.

[Chan790]

119. If Hillary was really concerned about that...

she'd pull up the tent-poles on her campaign and retire to her mansion paid for with money paid to the Clinton Global Initiative and speaking fees for both her and Bill from people that want something from her.

[Robbins]

20. Yep

I am staying home if bernie sanders isn't nominee.

screw the corporate Dino's.no difference between them and GOP.

[MJkcj]

40. Then you will be voting for more Scalias and Thomas' on the supreme court

I am voting Hillary in the primary but in the general i will vote for the blue candidate whether it is Bernie, Hillary or O'Mailley.

[boston bean]

22. They'll totally be turned on by a Sander/Trump race....

LOL

[artislife]

55. Actually, I think the public would...nt

[glinda]

23. Well considering that America is hooked on

game shows and reality shows, sadly no. For those who don't see things this way i suspect they will find it difficult (emotionally) to go to the poles.

[PoliticAverse]

25. Nah, it'll be like the Cowboys and the Steelers in the Superbowl again. n/t

[Puglover]

27. Yes. nt

[cherokeeprogressive]

29. I'm in the position of not HAVING to vote for President. I live in CA.

Can't see how the Democratic nominee loses.

I sure as hell am voting against Hillary Clinton in the primary though.

[LuvNewcastle]

133. I feel ya.

I don't see Mississippi going blue, either, so I could sit out the general and it wouldn't make any difference. I'll be voting for Bernie in the primaries as well. The primaries are the only part where my decision actually matters. I've never voted for the winning Presidential candidate in my state.

[99Forever]

30. Turned off is being generous.

More like this:

[Enthusiast]

74. Me too.

[artislife]

31. For those in both parties who support different candidates--yes nt

[WorseBeforeBetter]

32. YES. (n/t)

[Binkie The Clown]

33. Why Don't Democrats Vote? I'll Tell You Why.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-alan-grayson/why-dont-democrats-vote-i_b_7757850.html

As you may have heard, Democratic turnout dropped off a cliff again last year, just like it did in 2010. I was wondering why, so I asked. I polled Florida non-voters. I found that the main reason why they didn't vote last year was simple: They couldn't see any difference between the candidates. When there is no difference between the candidates, Democrats don't vote, and Democrats lose.

--SNIP--

As Gov. Howard Dean has said, if you offer people a choice between a real Republican and a fake Republican, they will choose the real Republican every time. And they did.

--SNIP--

So, let's be honest. When we put up a pseudo-Democrat or a neo-Democrat or a quasi-Democrat or a semi-Democrat for Team Blue, our voters are not amused. They are not fooled. And we only hurt ourselves.

[JoePhilly]

41. Or, we lose off year elections because they are not national.

The GOP wins empty districts, and just enough red states in the senate.

[tularetom]

80. No, we lose those off year elections because our candidates don't have the guts to be Democrats

The Democrats keep nominating shitty republican-lite candidates like the one who ran in KY last year. You remember, the lady who wouldn't say she agreed with anything Obama had ever done. There are a lot of other examples, but the message is the same.

Nominate Democratic candidates (for president, senator, congress) that actually act like Democrats and you have a chance. Keep nominating Clinton-style DINO's and you will lose.

[sunnystarr]

42. 2010 wasn't a Presidential election year.

Dems historically stay home in mid term elections. The electorate has no clue what is meant by neo, quasi, semi Democrat.

[jeff47]

64. He was talking about 2014, and comparing it to 2010.

Also, you don't have to apply some sort of official label to come to the same conclusion.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

136. Anybody believing that there is "no difference(s)" between Republicans and Democrats

isn't paying attention. Anyway, in the end, it's all about numbers and who gets to set the agenda. If you want a Democratic agenda, you work to elect as many Democrats as possible so that Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid sets the agenda. You may have to hold your nose and vote for a Blue Dog Democrat- whom may not be a reliable vote 100% of the time- simply for the numbers, but they generally won't be the ones in the leadership determining what bills are brought up.

[Binkie The Clown]

157. Exactly. But "Isn't paying attention" describes at least 60% of voters. n/t

[Proud Liberal Dem]

158. Anybody that disconnected

Is probably not even bothering to vote- if they are registered.

[Binkie The Clown]

159. A lady I know...

is 93, and is a Republican because she thought Eisenhower was wonderful, and has been paying so little attention she thinks today's Republican party is the same as Eisenhower's Republican party, and she votes in every election, simply by looking for the (R) next to each candidate's name. (I actually heard her say a few months ago that the South always votes solidly Democratic. That's how behind the times she is.)

She tells the story (over and over at every opportunity) of how a union rep was rude to her in 1945, and she has hated unions every since, for no other reason than that.

She is uninformed, misinformed, completely out of touch, and votes in every election. And I have a hunch she's not the only person who reflexively votes by party line, according to habits formed and ossified 50 or 75 years ago. And that applies to both major parties.

The older generations turn out in droves every election because they were raised to believe it was their civic duty. The younger generations who are out of touch just don't care one way or the other and don't bother to vote, unless some hot button issue grabs their attention momentarily for one specific election. (Yes, I know, I'm a cranky 70-year-old man complaining about the younger generation. What a cliche I've become!)

[HooptieWagon]

34. Hard to vote while vomiting.

Turnout will be low.

[Lisa D]

35. No. n/t

[sadoldgirl]

36. Absolutely, imo

However, I don't think it will be Bush.
My bet is that they will nominate Walker,
who is far more devious.

[MJkcj]

37. Many people care deeply about the supreme court, the economy and women's rights issues

I know I will be voting for the blue in the general. No matter whether its Bernie or Hillary or O'Malley.

[NorthCarolina]

39. That's the race Wall Street wants.

I am hoping the people resoundingly reject status quo.

[MJkcj]

43. I don't care what race the wall street wants.

I'm voting blue in the general and Hillary in the primaries

I wont "stay home" if my candidate isn't the nominee like a spoiled baby because I am adult enough to recognize what is at stake if the GOP wins the white house back.

And I have my reasons for backing Hillary. While I can respect people for backing Bernie I really resent any implication that I my choice is in any way influenced by wall street.

[NorthCarolina]

50. You can protest all you want,

but there is no denying that Clinton/Bush IS the race Wall Street wants; your personal reasons for supporting Hillary notwithstanding.

[artislife]

58. Also, I really believe you "know" it will be H in the general

and you really don't have to do a gut check if you would really vote for another candidate. One thing Bernie, O'Malley and everyone else has to do is really see if their plan A doesn't make it and what they would do.

I don't think there are many H supporters who believe she will lose the primary.


My goal is to have you all disappointed again after the primary. But such is the nature of the preseason.

[Baitball Blogger]

47. Hillary would win that race, hands down.

[SheilaT]

51. If they are the candidates,

I think voter turnout will be at record lows.

We don't need dynasties. We need candidates who actually stand for something.

I'm hoping I get to vote for Bernie.

[rock]

52. "They don't like the idea of passing the presidency down from family to family"

That is a common assertion, but I see no evidence of it. Why exactly did you form that opinion? Also please note that in the case of the Clintons, there is no blood kin.

[murielm99]

56. Examine the Bush family history.

They are the wealthy dynasty. Look at all the political positions they have held.

Bill Clinton came up from nothing. He earned every office and every honor. Hillary had a more financially comfortable family, but they were hardly a dynasty, political or otherwise.

This is a meme.

And all these people here who are saying they won't vote? They don't belong on a Democratic website. I will be glad when they are gone.

[ybbor]

85. I want real Democrats

Not centrists who are using the Democratic label.

Hillary is further to the right than the GOP used to be.

I want DEMOCRATS, not placard-wearing politicians who don't represent what true progressives are so desperately wanting. Hillary is the quintessential DINO. And with that shit for brains running the DNC from Florida, that's what we have been getting.

I represent what the Democratic Party used to stand for, and I hope will again. So get used to me and others like me on DU, cause we're taking our party back. One person at a time.

[murielm99]

100. Hillary is a read Democrat.

This is a big party. You have not looked at her record if you say that.

[ybbor]

107. I was gonna reply...

She's a read, pronounced red, democrat. As in really a republican. Look at her logo, red arrow pointing right.

I like your take though.

[840high]

111. ...^ that

[tularetom]

82. No blood kin? Are you suggesting that that somehow makes a difference?

Then perhaps she could run as Hillary Rodham in order to emphasize her independence from the Clinton name.

[DamnYankeeInHouston]

53. And then it will be Hillary's daughter against Jeb's son. Make it stop!

[Buns_of_Fire]

62. Nope. It's gonna be Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush...

for the rest of your life and beyond. And when they run out of humans, it'll be Socks, Millie, Millie II, Socks III, Socks VII, Millie XI... Until the sun finally puts an end to all this foolishness and consumes the earth and everything on it.

Except for RoboClinton v3 #577389 and RoboBush v2 #857730, who, having escaped earth's destruction, will continue the cycle on Betelgeuse 4, where DU v39 will still be having the same arguments.

Some things are meant to be eternal, it seems.

[jeff47]

54. Democrats will. Republicans will be thrilled to vote against Clinton. (nt)

[ybbor]

87. Exactly

They will come out of the woodwork to vote against her.

She is extremely polarizing, and I am worried about her chances in the general. I am personally not a fan, and can't see myself pulling the lever for her.

All in for Bernie! He is on my side!

[Cosmocat]

122. They will be thrilled to vote against the "socialist" too

It is not an exclusive thing, being the most reviled person in the country to these idiots.

BHO is a perfectly likeable and reasonable, even charming person, but he has held the mantle since he was the presumptive candidate.

Don't think for a second if he becomes the presumptive candidate Bernie will be immune to it.

[jeff47]

123. To them, all Democrats are socialists.

The Republicans have spent 30 years turning the Clintons into Satan incarnate. Their hatred for the Clintons is far greater than their hatred for Democrats in general.

As a result, far more Republicans will be excited to vote against Clinton than excited to vote against any other Democratic nominee.

That in no way says another candidate is immune. It says the problem will be much worse for Clinton, thanks to 30 years of groundwork.

[Cosmocat]

125. That ignores the last 7 years

I supported BHO in part out of this line of thinking, I thought it might be a little better with him because he didn't have that history and he is such a calm and charming person.

They have been even worse with him than they were with Bill, and equal to what they would have been with Hill.

Does not matter who it is, they will whip themselves into an absolute frenzy of hatred toward him or her.

[jeff47]

127. No, it doesn't.

I thought it might be a little better with him because he didn't have that history and he is such a calm and charming person.

I don't think it would be better with someone other than Clinton. I think it would be worse with Clinton.

Just like I never believed Republicans would work with Obama, and also believed they would still be worse towards Clinton.

Does not matter who it is, they will whip themselves into an absolute frenzy of hatred toward him or her.

There are stronger and weaker frenzies.

[Cosmocat]

138. Yeah it does

You either haven't been awake for the last 7 years or you want to believe what you want to believe.

Short of a coup, it could not have possibly been worse.

[jeff47]

139. Yes, it really could have been worse. How many times has Obama been impeached? (nt)

[Cosmocat]

143. No, it would not and could not have been worse

They didn't bring BHO up on charges of impeachment for the same reason they would not have brought Hill up for impeachment, because they did it to Bill and paid for it, and knew they would have paid for it worse this time.

Were they as absolutely united in voting against Bill like they have been for BHO - the worst congress we have seen in our lives in being absolutely 100 percent united in opposition, to the point where they went beyond the Hastert Rule?

Did they shout YOU LIE at Bill in the SOTU address?

Did the assholes in the 90s write a letter to a country Bill was negotiating a deal with telling them not to sign it?

Did the invite dickhead Bibi to speak in congress as an FU to Bill during this negotiation?

Did some cut rate, half wit governor yell and point Bill on a tarmac?

Continue to believe what you want to believe ...

Ain't NO democrat, Bernie or otherwise, who will be immune from every last bit of to the soul hatred if they get elected.

[udbcrzy2]

57. Who's turn is next?

Who's turn will be next? Clinton, then Bush and then Clinton again?

I would like to see a President who stands up for the working class and not the billionaire class really.

[SoapBox]

59. I absolutely believe that there is Bush burnout

AND Clinton burnout.

I think the Clinton burnout, especially when it now comes to HRC, is totally underestimated.

[William769]

60. Maybe they like the idea of passing it to the best qualified.

Just saying.

[MisterP]

65. it'd be delirious promises from Clinton, the people kissing one whip or the other,

and endless dissection of haircuts and pantsuits

[DemocratSinceBirth]

66. As long as more of them than more of us don't vote I could give a rat's ass ./nt

[L0oniX]

68. I predict the lowest % voter turnout in the history of the USA.

[Buns_of_Fire]

83. If the final matchup is Clinton II v. Bush III, I think you're probably correct.

And that would be a shame. But it's hard to get the electorate enthused about it, when there's nothing to be enthused about.

[tularetom]

77. I won't vote against any Demcratic candidate

You may draw your own inferences from that statement.

[still_one]

81. If that is how the results of the primary end up, the only thing I can say is if they have loved the

Supreme Court up to now, they are going to fall head of heals if the republican wins

[DCBob]

90. Initially perhaps but it will gain traction eventually.

The contrast in the effects of who wins will be stark. Few will remain on the sidelines.

[mother earth]

92. But...but...they are inevitable...only the best for the l%, to answer your question, why bother

having an election?

[BKH70041]

93. I admire Sanders supporters against Hillary in the GE.

I sincerely admire Sanders supporters who say that if Hillary wins the primary and is the nominee that they won't vote for her. You view her as a corporate shill and are unwilling to vote for a corporate shill. You refuse to fall for the talking points about the USSC, the "lesser of two evils" stance, and the false argument that a vote not for a certain candidate is automatically a vote for someone else (A non-vote is just that; a non- vote. Don't ever let someone try and tell you differently.). You know what you believe and are unwilling to settle for less. While I disagree with you about Sanders, at least you aren't two-faced in your support.

The one's here who are saying "Clinton = Wall Street" and talk about how much they hate the Wall Street influences, but then turn and say they'll vote for the very type of candidate they cry against now if she is the nominee, are automatically telling me they have no backbone. What they're screaming out loud is that when times get hard, they'll sell out.

[morningfog]

96. YES. That is the worst possible set up.

It turns my stomach to think of it.

[truebrit71]

99. Yes. In fact I think that would inspire a third-party candidate.

Nothing less inspiring than retreads from the 90's...

[JustAnotherGen]

131. I hope it's on the right

Someone like Ted Cruz to split the Conservatives in this country would be great!

[underthematrix]

104. LOL!! If the race is between a Bush and a Clinton

I vote for the Clinton. I voted for PBO twice because his policies were consistent with my values and I also admire and love him very much. In this match-up, I vote for HRC because her policies are consistent with my values.

[Lil Missy]

105. Not by the majorities that selected them as nominees, no.

[840high]

108. Yes. I think a lot

of them will stay home.

[mmonk]

112. Sure but there would still be an election and millions will vote.

[sabrina 1]

114. Yes!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

117. Many Dens will stay at home

[Chan790]

118. Yes.

I get that a lot of Hillary supporters don't get this...but youth voter motivation basically drops to nil if that's the race and I don't believe we can win without Gen-Y/Millenials coming out in droves.

Most of my friends/lovers/peers/coworkers are 17-25...and well...they hate Hillary. Loathe her. Ironically, it's because of her service as SoS that kept her viable with most Democrats...they see a hawkish, fiscally-moderate Democrat who doesn't care about them or their issues and had to be dragged out of being a homophobe and a drug-warrior. (Whether that's an accurate perception is less important than the reality that is the perception.) If you're old enough to remember 1968...remember how you felt about LBJ? About Bobby Kennedy? Well...Hillary is their LBJ...a decrepit old-guard Democrat war-monger who represents everything they perceive as wrong about the Democratic party and doesn't understand them because if she understood them...she'd understand that the only thing she can ever to do to appeal to them is accept that she's endemic of the problem and needs to make herself no-longer-relevant.

It'll be worse for us if the GOP nominee is someone perceived by youth as more libertarian than conservative. An anti-war, pro-drug-legalization GOP nominee could actually cause us to split the youth vote.

[HERVEPA]

126. Silly

Who cares who is related to whom? It's the policies. And if it's Hillary, I'll be less than thrilled, but certainly understand the huge difference between her and any of the Rethugs.

[daleanime]

128. Well, yeah. If that comes to pass....

I think you would see a fairly low turn out for a presidential election. Which is about the only way Bu$h could win.

[BainsBane]

129. Polling shows Clinton's favorables are highest among the Democrats

and her unfavorables are lower than Sanders. She polls best against every Republican, beating them all. No other Democrat polls so well. Jeb is unlikely to be the nominee. The GOP base doesn't like him. Walker is a likely possibility. He is also very well liked by the GOP donor banks and the financial sector.

The problem is that you all assume everyone is just like you, thinks just like you. You can't imagine that any life, any other experiences, or any other way of thinking could possibly be valid, if it even exits. That is a major mistake. What makes you think you have some sort of lock on the national consciousness? This site is older, whiter, and more affluent than the nation--by a sizable margin. It's demographic is nothing like the nation as a whole. Why would you assume everyone else thinks like you all do? The advantage (probably the only one) of growing up poor in America is that I KNOW I am not like the rest of America, that this country wasn't built for people like me. I suppose a drawback of being born into the middle and upper-middle class is that people tend to believe everything centers around themselves.

[calimary]

149. You bring up another good point - another valuable distinction between the two, to keep in mind.

bush ANYTHING was born to wealth, privilege, and comfort. Has jebbie ever really "worked" a day in his life? Has he ever been ANYTHING but a trust-fund baby? Has he EVER been anything other than born-on-third-base-and-thinks-he-hit-a-triple?

Say what you will about Hillary, go ahead and hate what you will about Hillary. But neither she NOR Bill were born with silver spoons in their mouths. Their parents weren't well-placed, well-heeled, OR well-connected. Hell, Bill Clinton didn't even have a father! They BOTH worked their way up and achieved despite humble beginnings, with their brains, their energy, their self-confidence, their creativity, and their courage. They're wealthy now. FINE! And they've done some rather wonderful things with their wealth and their access to further wealth. And I appreciate that about BOTH of them.

[JustAnotherGen]

130. No - I won't

I would rather eat broken glass then spend even one more minute with a Bush in the White House.

If it is those two - I'm taking as many people to the polls who hate the Bush family as I can.

[NaturalHigh]

132. Speaking only for myself, I've already made up my mind to vote for Clinton.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

134. Excited for Jeb, no. Excited for Hillary, yes

With some voters being somewhat superficial about their voting habits, I think that the opportunity to elect a woman President will be hard not to excite voters, particularly younger ones IMHO. Most younger voters weren't around (or were kids) during the Bill Clinton years, so they haven't really had time to "get tired" of the Clintons. Many of them grew up under the eight years of George W. Bush and are at least somewhat aware of the mess he made, so I doubt that they would want to elect another one.

[Doctor_J]

135. This one will be

They are both wall street water carriers who want to do away with public schools. The only people who will benefit from having either of them in the white house are the hyper rich.

[KamaAina]

137. Yes. And low turnout favors Jeb!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

140. I think our side will lose. I think more people dislike HRC than Jeb Bush.

Too many Democrats are duped by Jeb Bush and think he's different than his dumb ass, evil brother. They both are evil. Jeb Bush is far dangerous because he has people thinking he's not.

[yourout]

151. It certainly will me.....yuck.

Reminds me of the Simpsons episode where the aliens Kodos and Kang replaced Clinton and Dole.

[vadermike]

154. Maybe

It's already happening and is a little alarming. I know this older gentlemen I used to work with. He didn't care for Pres O but wAnted Hillary and Bill back in the WH and was gung Ho for Hillary until The donald came out and us now all gung ho for the donald cause he "speaks the truth" and he doesn't like all of these illegals coming in. His words... I don't know what to think but we can't underestimate any if these crazy GOPers and I know we laugh at donald Trump etc but he could be poaching soft hillary supportes likey friend .. 2016 is going to be tough it seems, I hope I'm wrong!!

[dem in texas]

155. Go vote for the Democrat

It is all about the Supremes. We have to elect a Democratic President or we will end up with one or two more Scalias.

[Reter]

156. Does Ross Perot have a son or younger brother?

Why not make it totally 1992 while we're at it?