Clinton supporters don't understand

[Prism]

I'm a pretty firmly Democratic voter. I'll vote for whoever, just don't make me vote for the Republican. I'm a gay man. You need not tell me about the Supreme Court or a hundred other things.

But in this election . . . .

Seriously? Clinton? You need me to go for her?

Don't make me do this. Don't ask this of me. Don't put me in this position. Seriously. Her. This is our choice. The Establishment is serving her up to us peons, and we're expected to obey (don't even argue this - the DNC non-debate schedule makes this clear).

Seriously? Her? You expect me to put up with this and endorse this? And you think we'll all go along and pretend to be enthusiastic?

God almighty. She will be our nominee. You'll win that. And then she will lose. So fiercely obviously.

Why are you asking this of the rest of us? It's just not friggin fair. The malaise towards her is palpable. The popular culture is mocking of it. And yet, we're still expected to magically fall in line in force. The professional class - who is always as wrong as wrong can be - thinks we'll materialize.

It's like a car crash you see from quarter of a mile away, but some people won't perceive until it's brake-hitting time. And then it will be everyone else's fault. This is coming, and it's stupidly avoidable, but we're all sort of married to it now, aren't we?

Agh. Helpless. That's what I feel. Helpless. I am preparing for a Republican president.

[Cali_Democrat]

1. In the primaries, vote for the candidate you think will make the best president.

If Hillary is the nominee, it will be because Democratic primary voters picked her.

I can understand that you don't like Hillary, but sometimes the person you want to win doesn't win because the voters picked a different candidate.

It happens all the time

[Live and Learn]

8. All we are asking is to give the people (instead of the money) a chance to select the nominee.

Is that seriously too much to ask?

[Cali_Democrat]

41. The selection process begins February 2016.

The people will select the nominee.

[One of the 99]

57. Well said

[hootinholler]

56. So what's all that about having superdelegates locked up?

It is possible that she could be selected against the will of the primary voters. IIRC Hillary supporters love to point that out.

Personally I think that is unlikely, but I have to admit it's a possibility. I also think that if it happens it will get ugly.

[Eko]

2. To be fair

Clinton is open to more debates, and as far as the malaise most of that seems to come from the incessant republican attacks on her. None of those at least to me seem to be valid arguments against her. Dont get me wrong, there are plenty of valid arguments against her, its just those aren't.

[DianeK]

3. Clinton has the luxury of 'appearing' to

be open to more debates because Debbie Wasserman Schultz is clearly working just as hard as she can to garner the nomination for her...that just can't be denied...it is painfully clear

[Eko]

4. Well I am certainly glad

that you can tell the difference between willing and appearing without actually knowing and to let us chads know what the "real truth" is without any evidence whatsoever. I feel so much better now that you have cleared that up with your inside and superior knowledge.
Thanks.

[Fumesucker]

5. If all the candidates want more debates

Then why are there not more debates being scheduled?

[Eko]

7. That could possibly be

up to not the candidates and someone else like possibly the DNC?. Or are you saying it is up to Sanders or Clinton? Do you have any evidence for this? or are you saying something different with no evidence to back it up?

[Fumesucker]

9. Are you saying the DNC thinks all the candidates are wrong in wanting more debates?

[Eko]

150. I would not presume

to say what anyone thinks without some evidence.

[GoneFishin]

25. Just stop. If HRC wanted more debates she could just pick up the phone. Everyone knows it.

[GoneFishin]

61. Nonsense. I don't accept that as approval of a wyle debate schedule for nights when few will

watch such as Saturday nights, or religious holidays, or when it is too late to affect voters' choices because of registration deadlines etc..

The weasel factor is woven all through the schedule.

[beam me up scottie]

108. "Magic Clenis"? Why are you posting sexist right wing talking points here?

[beam me up scottie]

113. Colbert is a liberal comedian who mocks right wingers, you're repeating rw talking points on DU.

[mcar]

115. You are posting sexist RW talking points

on a Democratic board. Let's not do the Republican's job for them, ok?

[Aerows]

126. Do you know how many different websites I had to go to

to find out what a Magic Clenis is? Many of them weren't pretty.

I finally found it on Urban Dictionary.

You aren't doing anybody on DU a favor by using such a disparaging term.

[Aerows]

128. And that's even more

unsavory than the source I found.



Don't bring this kind of crap to DU. Please. I could have totally gone my entire life without knowing all of this. I mean, seriously?

[LiberalElite]

130. I never heard of the expression but it turns out it

isn't new on DU - I found this which is from 2008: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5726932&mesg_id=5727132

---snip---
Yes! Yes! Yes! Poor Obama is at the mercy of the omnipotent Clintons! Skip Intro Apr-28-08 10:07 PM #12
- The magic Clenis strikes again. Yossariant Apr-28-08 10:12 PM #16
---snip---

[Eko]

151. See reply 149.

Thanks.

[Armstead]

74. Sirry to disagree but Clinton could come out FOR more debates

And, it could cause the DNC to buckle if all the candidates were pushing or it. And even if it doesn't, it'd sure press the momentum in that direction, and show their obvious error in limiting public exposure to he democratic candidates in the primary.

[Eko]

152. She has said she is open for more debates.

Not quite the same thing as pushing for it I agree, but certainly not against it at all.
"I am open to whatever the DNC decides to set up. That's their decision," she said during a stop in New Hampshire. "I debated a lot in 2008 and I would certainly be there with lots of enthusiasm and energy if they decide to add more debates, and I think that's the message that a lot of people are sending their way."
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/252845-clinton-open-to-more-debates

[Eko]

149. The DNC sets the debates

not the candidates. There is also the rule of "Any candidate or debate sponsor wishing to participate in DNC debates, must agree to participate exclusively in the DNC-sanctioned process. Any violation would result in forfeiture of the ability to participate in the remainder of the debate process.". If Clinton were to affect that in any way, as in ask for more, then she would be using her influence to change the debates and there already are a bunch of people accusing her of being totalitarian about the debates when she has done nothing to affect them. Imagine what an outcry would be if she did affect them.

[RBInMaine]

6. Conspiracy theory radical nonsense. Please, take a med.

[Enthusiast]

14. It's not a radical theory at all.

My candidate of choice needs more exposure to the electorate, particularly in New York State where the deadline to register is after the first debate scheduled. That is a conspiracy theory? On what planet? This is an anchor around the neck of the strongest alternative candidate to HRC.

There is no reason to stick to such a narrow schedule of debates. The debate schedule can be changed right now. And they had better get to it or risk alienating a large part of the Democratic electorate.

[peacebird]

52. Bingo!

[stillwaiting]

23. The radicals are the Establishment Wall Street Democrats that have heavily taken over the Party.

These interests and these politicians spit in the face of the people they are supposed to serve.

They serve Wall Street's interests HEAVILY over Main Street's interests, and THEY are the radicals.

It's not radical to expect for friggin' Democrats to serve the interests of the People. But, now somehow it is to some people.

Democrats were MUCH better at doing the People's business several decades ago before they started calling themselves "New Democrats".

And you are as condescending and obnoxious as ever and just might benefit from your own advice.

[elehhhhna]

28. I didn't leave the party. The party left me.

[sibelian]

34. Don't insult people by telling them to "take meds"

and don't dismiss their views as conspiracy theories.

If you feel that your opponent's position is unrealistic I am sure you are easily intelligent enough to explain why in reasonable language.

Here, how about this:

"The connection between Wasserman and Clinton is simply assumed, how do you know this? How are you distinguishing between Wasserman as a biased debate reduction advocate and Wasserman as an unbiased debate reduction advocate? How does Clinton benefit unduly from fewer debates, more debate provides her with more air-time along with everyone else!!! Of course you don't have to take what Clinton says at face value, but that's YOU making the interpretation..."

Garbage, all of it, but at least you'll piss fewer people off. That's what you want, isn't it?

[NorthCarolina]

58. Another aspect of the debate format that is troubling to me is that

attendance to the debate is by invitation only by the DNC Chair I assume. Is the audience going to be 100% Hillary supporters who will sit on their hands and/or boo every time Bernie speaks? I believe it was Hillary supporters that Booed Bernie at some state fair a month or so ago. Is that part of the plans for the debate? Who knows.

[GoneFishin]

62. Exactly. It's transparent weaselry and classic right wing manipulation.

[Eko]

156. Thanks for your opinion.

[daleanime]

18. So all the candidates, the public and a large chunk of the DNC want more debates....

but Debbie stands defiantly by herself against all.








No. I'm not buying it.




And I don't think too many others will either.






Sorry about that.

[DianeK]

20. She is the chairman..

it is entirely her decision..if she wanted more debates, there would be more debates..she does not..she made that very clear at the democratic state party convention in nh last month..you know the one where she was shouted down about having more debates?

[daleanime]

21. Thanks for the laugh...

[elehhhhna]

29. It's only a coincidence that when Hil talks her number drops.

[peacebird]

54. ^^^this^^^

The more the public sees/hears from her, the less they like her

[sibelian]

36. I think you guys need to drop this kind of thing now.

Hillary, whether anybody actually wants her or not, will remain part of the Democratic party in some form or another after the primaries are over. I don't think "thanks for the laugh" and the rest of the dumb crud coming out of her camp is going to help anything.

You're more than welcome to actually oppose other people's ideas. Sticking your fingers in your ears and saying you're "not buying it" isn't a criticism.

[daleanime]

87. I'm the one 'sticking my fingers in my ears'?

I thought you wanted me to stop laughing.


I'm always willing to have an honest dialog, but what can anyone do when faced with the preposterous? Sorry about that, have a great day!

[sibelian]

89. "but what can anyone do when faced with the preposterous?"

You can say WHY you think it's preposterous.

[beam me up scottie]

90. psssssssst!

daleanime is a proud Bernista!

[sibelian]

94. WHUH????

OK, weird brain melt. I have to read it all again!

[beam me up scottie]

99. I think they took issue with this comment:

To be fair Clinton is open to more debates

And it got confusing from there.

[sibelian]

96. ...... ????

I am VERY confused.

[Eko]

153. Being open to more debates

is not the same thing as wanting more debates.

[Prism]

136. She's not open to anything

This is a silly argument. If she wanted more debates, DWS would bend over backwards to make it happen. As it is, the DNC is bending over backwards to ensure the debates happen at times when literally no one is watching.

A saturday night? Really? You think that's family time around the TV? Because the networks don't. That's why they exile their shitty programming to that time slot.

[Eko]

154. See reply 152.

[jfern]

145. No, she's not,. it's just a good cop bad cop routine

[Eko]

155. Possibly

But that would be your opinion, as in not based on facts.

[jfern]

157. I think every other candidate said they'd be willing to go to any debate Hillary is at

It's really on Hillary to add debates. Hillary said she would only do DNC debates. But if there was another non DNC debate and everyone showed up, the DNC would have to disregard their exclusion rule. Hillary is not serious about wanting more debates.

[Eko]

158. By the same token

everyone except Clinton can go to different debates and force the DNC to change its rules. Are they not serious about wanting more debates?

[jfern]

159. Not many will watch a debate without Clinton, and she doesn't actually want any more

[Eko]

160. So they are serious about

having more debates but they need to be with Clinton. Doesn't sound too serious.

[jfern]

161. Whatever, it's obvious that Hillary doesn't want more than 6 debates

[Eko]

162. Yes,

because if she did want them she would break the rules, the same rules that you are not pushing for anyone else to break. Obvious.

[jfern]

163. She could actually ask the DNC for more debates like every other campaign did

So no need to break the rules. Or if everyone broke the rules, they'd get rid of the rules. Drop the act.

[Eko]

164. So now she has to ask

earlier you said "It's really on Hillary to add debates." So does she have to ask or can she just add them?

[jfern]

165. Well, she can either ask the DNC like every other campaign did

Or just organize with the other campaigns to have another debate, who all want one. But she has done neither, so it's clear she doesn't want any more debates.

[Eko]

166. Why dont the other

Candidates organize a debate and ask her? See, the thing is you are expecting her to break the rules first, and since she hasn't she isn't serious or does not want more debates while not expecting the same thing from the other candidates. What if she does ask the DNC and they add more but the other candidates complain about timing, or setting or anything. All of a sudden she can be accused of actually harming the other canidates by asking. I'm sure people here wont accuse her of it, they already accuse her of collusion as it is. What if she decides to organize another debate and no one else shows up, now she cant join the DNC debates.

[jfern]

167. Come, these excuses are pathetic

And people have been complaining about the timing of exist debates. Saturday December 19th? For real?

I bet you had no problem when after 18 debates in 2008, Hillary asked for and got another 8 debates.

[Eko]

168. If you say so.

Nope, no problem. I also have no problem with anyone else asking for more, I have no problem with there being more. I think there should be. I just find it funny when people think Clinton should stick her neck out and others should not and then accuse her of something that there just isn't any evidence for. Why don't you do an op saying one of the others should just attend a different debate to force the DNC's hand instead of accusing her for something there is no evidence for other than your opinion?

[jfern]

169. She hasn't done with every other campaign did

Ask the DNC for more debates. It's not hard.

[Eko]

170. Wow.

She hasn't asked equals she is against more even when she said she was open to more. That is your argument.

[jfern]

171. Come on, this isn't fooling anyone

[Eko]

172. So you are saying

that is a correct evaluation of your argument?
Here is a quick example of your argument.
As little kids.
Big Brother: Want to go see a movie?
Me: Im open to that.
Big Brother: Ask mom to take us.
Me: Im not asking mom.
Big Brother: You are against going to see a movie.
or
Big Brother: Fine, lets take the bus.
Me: She will ground us.
Big Brother: You are against going to a movie.

[jfern]

173. Come on, it's clear Hillary doesn't want more than 6 debates

This spinning isn't helping.

[Eko]

174. I will assume

that sums up your argument since you didn't take exception to it.

[Eko]

175. Your argument reminds me of when people say

" I saw a UFO, it must be aliens". It couldn't be anything else, it must be what your bias tells you it is.

[jfern]

176. Come on, we weren't born yesterday

[Eko]

177. Yes, we werent born yesterday.

I feel confident stating that, if we were and could type today then that would be something. If you are alluding to something else feel free to just say it instead of making vague statements.

[jfern]

178. It's clear that as the frontrunner, Hillary is playing it safe and doesn't want more than

6 debates. Of course she is too much of a coward to admit it, and people like you like to claim she would actually like more debates.

[Eko]

179. Can you please show me

where I claim she would like more debates? And this time answer this one with more than a "wink wink" post, actually show me. Otherwise retract what you have said please.

[jfern]

181. You said she is open to more debates

It's a classic good cop bad cop routine that assumes we were born yesterday

[Eko]

182. I'm sorry.

If you cant understand the difference in "open to more debates" and "like more debates" I can supply you with a dictionary. The word "open" and "like" do not mean the same thing. Once again I believe you should retract your statement.

[jfern]

183. Well, triangulators like you seem to love Hillary

But the rest of us really don't trust her because of stuff like this.

[Eko]

184. Never once in this discussion

or anywhere on Du have I expressed love for Clinton. I respect her and all she has done. I have actually voiced my choice for someone else repeatedly here on DU but never-mind that. If I question your use, or rather non use of logic on a argument of course you have to fall back on personally attacking me, what else do you have? You cant say you were wrong even when you attribute a position I have never taken to me and I ask that you show where I did so. Its flat out dishonest and disgusting. I dont support Clinton for president over Sanders, but I also don't support false logic and ad hominem attacks. You chose to think since I question your ad hominem and false logic against her to mean I support her. You were wrong on my reasoning just like you could be wrong on hers. Your opinion on why I questioned your logic is just as valid as your opinion on why she has not asked for more debates, in other words not based on any facts at all. I may support Sanders, but even more I support valid arguments and you have not lived up to that expectation at all.

[Eko]

185. edit

not all that she has done, but a majority of it. There are plenty of things she has done wrong but quite a bit that she has done right also.

[Eko]

186. I see you are still up posting comments

but wont bother to reply to mine. No problem, I understand, its hard to admit when you are wrong. I understand.

[edgineered]

10. Bravo!

In language that even a child could understand. Sadly some children know nothing of driving and accidents; they wonder why someone would want the cars to crash. Its hopeless for those who refuse to see.

[DFW]

11. Well, there is some good news

Unless the Republicans come up with SOMEONE to be taken seriously, and that had better be someone new, the next President will be the nominee of the Democratic Party.

As in 2008, the battle for the 2016 Democratic nomination is far more intense than the battle for the Republican nomination for the simple reason that, as things look now (and we all know that could change), the battle for the Democratic nomination is a battle for the presidency.

The current anti-Hillary rhetoric seems to be stitched together from years-old Republican hit pieces on her plus the standard stock phrases of today ("corporate," "oligarch," "establishment," blah, blah, blah). I tune it out just as I tune out the "socialist!" cries of the far right against Bernie Sanders. I NEVER deliberately look at posts from the Hillary group or the Bernie group here. Instead, I listen to things said by Hillary and Bernie, and in context. They give a far better indication of what I'm looking for to make my decision.

[reformist2]

13. How can you not see Hillary is the candidate of Wall Street just as much as any Republican?

She received millions of dollars from the big banks.

She was a senator from New York, home of Wall Street, and was proud to do their bidding.

Elizabeth Warren has told many a story regarding the corruption of Hillary Clinton, pointing to examples where Hillary has changed her position on bankruptcy legislation, banking reform, etc.

[DFW]

15. Senator from New York? Seriously?

I guess I shouldn't listen to Stephen Colbert, because he is from South Carolina. I shouldn't even listen to myself. I'm from Texas, just like Cecile Richards.

This is like saying I should dismiss Bernie for defending gun owners.

Again, I'm interested in what will come and what the individual candidates say/will say, and what I think their presidency would be like, not hit propaganda on any of them. I don't get my favorite, anyway (Howard Dean), and I still agree with him that any incoming president shouldn't be much older than 50 (which Howard now is). So I have to settle for a second choice no matter who I end up voting for in the primary. I have plenty of time to wait for the Texas primary, and I refuse to be swayed by stock phrases and hit pieces on the internet.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

27. Here's the money shot from your comment.

Again, I'm interested in what will come and what the individual candidates say/will say, and what I think their presidency would be like

And that's where Hillary fails for me. and it's not because of 'decades old Republican' whatever. It's because of decades of seeing Hillary. We KNOW what we'll get from her. War-hawking when the country can not afford to throw more money away on foreign adventures that bleed us dry and kill and maim our younger generations. A willingness to turn a blind eye towards civil rights issues if she feels they will inconvenience her or upset the fundies on the right. Lecturing minorities on how to behave. A begrudging willingness to 'evolve' AFTER the country has.

In short, NOT a leader, but a follower of trends, and one who sometimes only follows because she feels she has to to remain politically viable.

[sibelian]

38. "NOT a leader, but a follower of trends" - THIS. RIGHT HERE.

She started up on gun control. She's more sassy-er. It's good...! But she's left it so late that it's impossible to avoid the conclusion that she's now figerured she can triangulate herself over he "stand up for it" crowd.

It's certainly nice to be triangulated TOWARDS instead of AWAY from... but triangulation is triangulation. The wind changes very quickly these days. Political communication channels are vastly more volatile than they once were.

We can't afford someone who's happy to be knocked off as many pedestals as they like because they can always buy their way back onto another one.

[leftofcool]

12. No one is forcing you to vote.

[Enthusiast]

16. You have such a refreshing attitude.

[stonecutter357]

26. You have such a refreshing attitude.

[haikugal]

110. Such immature stinky bait...

Don't you have anything better to do than try to make other democrats angry? Try adding something to the discussion.

Unless that's all you're here to do?

[stonecutter357]

124. i copy and pasted it from Enthusiast.

So Mind Your Own Business.

[haikugal]

125. I know what you did...I've seen this game played by grade school children.

So that's your contribution...nada

[Fumesucker]

17. Some people have a sense of duty, others not so much

[JoePhilly]

60. Our duty is to keep the GOP out of the White House, and as many other elected offices as possible.

[GoneFishin]

64. Our duty is to keep GOP policies out of the White House. 'D' is a letter, not a policy guarantee.

[JoePhilly]

69. Yes, yes ... Hilary is a Republican ... blah blah blah.

So is Obama.

Yawn.

[daleanime]

19. True....

voter surpression is new again.


Isn't?

[sibelian]

22. That's not the point.

[stillwaiting]

24. I see so many posts from you telling people that aren't ecstatic about voting for Hillary

to not do so.

It's the strangest thing really. Not saying anything at all would be so much better if you really want Hillary to win the GE. Or, actually providing a few good reasons for why someone should vote for Hillary over a Republican (and there are definitely a few good ones). That is, if you really want to see Hillary be elected President. There are so many occasions where you're telling people Hillary doesn't need them, don't vote for Hillary, etc. It's all rather interesting isn't it....

You're NOT helping Hillary when you do this. Emotions are running high this primary for very good reasons, and we don't need your antagonistic taunting adding fuel to the fire. It REALLY doesn't help around here. It just sows resentment, division, and bitterness.

[elehhhhna]

30. Reminds me of OBAMA CANT WIN!-1!!!

Where did I hear that? Oh. Yeah.

[brush]

31. You say, "The malaise towards her is palpable" yet she still has healthy leads in most polls

Is that "malaise" you speak of just wishful thinking?

And I will probably vote for Sanders in the primary but we need to be clear headed and firmly situated in reality for the general election as we need to vote for the Dem nominee so that we don't get two or three more Scalias on the Supreme Court, Planned Parenthood funding cuts, voting rights further eroded, no action on immigration, and more and more and more wars and all the other disastrous things that come with repugs winning the presidency.

[Prism]

143. Look at any late night programming

They blatantly mock her for being foisted on an unwilling populace. It's her main theme for comedians.

[brush]

147. Yet she still leads in most of the polls

[BlueWaveDem]

32. What a bizarre bizarre op.

Hillary is a global citizen who is supremely qualified to be President and has spent her whole life fighting for liberal causes.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. Precisely

What a bizarre bizarre op.

Precisely

In order to win she simply has to capture 37% of the white vote, ninety percent of the African American vote, and anywhere over 53% of the Latino vote. That is well within her capabilities.

[sibelian]

40. "That is well within her capabilities" - but that's not how it works, is it?

It's not her capabilities that are the significant issue, it's what people actually want.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. She is hitting those numbers in all the polls.

That is well within her capabilities" - but that's not how it works, is it?


It's not her capabilities that are the significant issue, it's what people actually want.

Yes it is.



She is hitting those numbers. And considering in the last SEVEN presidential elections Democratic presidential nominees have hit that number (37% of the white vote) it's a rather low bar.


If this was a boxing match, MY GAL, Hillary Clinton, would be the boxer in the white trunks:

and her helpless opponents would be the boxer in the red trunks.


Hillary is a fighter. DemocratSinceBirth is proud to support her.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

50. I thought this thread was about her electoral prospects

"You seem a little /too/ obsessed about the polls How about we discuss issues. I'll even let you go first''
-Left Ear

I thought this thread was about her electoral prospects, ergo:

"Clinton supporters don't understand

I'm a pretty firmly Democratic voter. I'll vote for whoever, just don't make me vote for the Republican. I'm a gay man. You need not tell me about the Supreme Court or a hundred other things.

...

God almighty. She will be our nominee. You'll win that. And then she will lose. So fiercely obviously.

...


Agh. Helpless. That's what I feel. Helpless. I am preparing for a Republican president. "

I was merely disabusing the seminal poster of that notion.

Oh, and more importantly, out of respect for my fellow denizens of this board I refrain from hijacking this or other threads. This thread was about Madame Secretary's electoral prospects which I addressed.

[sibelian]

92. It's very easy to make either claim.

The GE is some time away and polls can change very radically over the time-scale predicted. We've already seen this story played out.

I'm not convinced either way with any of the candidates.

[sibelian]

84. So what?

What's the point of cheering on someone who looks like they're going to win if the victory doesn't mean anything?

It's not supposed to be about her, it's supposed to be about the people she serves.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

100. What's the point of cheering on someone who looks like they're going to win if the victory doesn't m

"What's the point of cheering on someone who looks like they're going to win if the victory doesn't mean anything?

Again, out of respect to Prism I addressed the points he made. It would have been disrespectful to hijack his thread, ergo:

I'm a pretty firmly Democratic voter. I'll vote for whoever, just don't make me vote for the Republican. I'm a gay man. You need not tell me about the Supreme Court or a hundred other things.

...



God almighty. She will be our nominee. You'll win that. And then she will lose. So fiercely obviously.

...


Why are you asking this of the rest of us? It's just not friggin fair. The malaise towards her is palpable. The popular culture is mocking of it. And yet, we're still expected to magically fall in line in force. The professional class - who is always as wrong as wrong can be - thinks we'll materialize. "
...


Agh. Helpless. That's what I feel. Helpless. I am preparing for a Republican president.

-Prism

If one of the denizens of this board wants to discuss the pluses and minuses of a second Clinton administration they should start a thread and then I will decide whether or not to participate. I rarely hijack the thread of others.

[sibelian]

103. "I rarely hijack the thread of others."

Well.

I suppose that depends on what you consider to be "hijacking".

I think it's probably a fairly simple matter to decide that the threshhold beyond which a contribution to a thread can be considered hijacking would be wherever one needs it to be to make a rebuttal to one's posts seem irrelevant or impertinent.

But there you go, I'm rather cynical about these things.

There are threads all over GD-P that elaborate on the minutiae of Sanders and Clinton's relative positions (or lack thereof), so I don't see any point in a giant superthread on a second Clinton administration.

It's well known to everyone here now that the primary division is along the lines of Sanders adherence to principle and Clinton's flexibility. So, my point was winning's no use if what you've won is something you can't really rely on.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

105. Well

"..So, my point was winning's no use if what you've won is something you can't really rely on."

The most salient point of the original poster's argument is that Hillary Clinton is a certain loser next November. Lose isn't in her or my vocabulary.

[sibelian]

118. That's certainly a confident metaphor/crowd-pleasing sort of thing to say.

But you don't win things by telling yourself "I'm going to win". That's how you avoid tricking yourself into losing, which isn't really the same thing. I get it, sure, don't think I don't. Of course you need fire in your belly. But there are far more posting here than those of us who are content with pithy aphorisms. Some people need fuel for the fire.

Anyway, I guess you think you don't need the rest of the left.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

121. I hope everybody votes for the eventual nominee , whomever she or he is.

Life is always about choices.

[sibelian]

122. I'm sure they will.

I don't think the smattering of disaffected people posting here saying they won't vote for Clinton is particularly reflective of the left at large.

But given the currently ludicrous state of the Republican party, it seems to me that this is NOT the time for caution.

[beam me up scottie]

43. Liberal causes? Like fighting against marriage equality?

[DianeK]

44. well..

not her whole life...remember she started off as a republican

[BlueWaveDem]

47. As a teenager? Liz Warren was a Republican until she was 47 years old.

[Thinkingabout]

79. She was never registered as a republican and did not vote for the republican candidate in 1968.

she has always been for Democratic ideas and has not only been for those ideas but has advocated for those ideas.

[mcar]

104. This again?

HRC has been a registered Democrat her entire adult life. Period. End of story.

Can we just stop with this "Hillary was a republican" nonsense? Please.

[Ino]

46. Global citizen?

As in (D-Punjab)?

[darkangel218]

131. Thats a hilarious post!

Hillary is a global citizen who is supremely qualified to be President and has spent her whole life fighting for liberal causes.

LMAOROFL!!

[Prism]

135. I'm not voting for mayor of world popularity

I'm voting for the President of the United States.

I also don't get my news for E!, so maybe that helps.

[riversedge]

35. Buck up.

[sibelian]

39. No, don't do that.

Give REASONS.

You are talking to adults.

[LuvLoogie]

72. Isn't Senator Sanders going to absolutely destroy Hillary in the debates?

Last edited Sat Oct 3, 2015, 11:55 AM - Edit history (1)

I mean after the first debate, isn't she going to be just a quivering heap on the floor?

She won't be able to withstand all the glorious truth and authenticity before a national audience. Rejoice! For, by the third debate, the corporatist hoard will have been demoralized and flown to the Caimans! Hillary will have acquiesced (I mean, what would be the point in carrying on, really?) and endorsed Bernie.

So, vote Americans! Vote!

or not...

[sibelian]

82. I don't know.

It depends on what she actually says, doesn't it?

[sibelian]

101. Put it this way, if she somehow manages to convince me that she means a word she says...

... she will have done well.

[still_one]

37. First of all you don't know who will be the nominee. That is what primaries are for. You single

Clinton supporters, but I would argue that some other Democratic candidate's supporters go out of their way to say they will not support the Democratic nominee if it isn't to their liking. It is unsolicited, and you imply that Clinton supporters push to make it mandatory to support her, or as you phrase it, "Don't make me do this" You do realize that no one can make you vote for someone you don't wish to vote for, or even vote for that matter, so your argument is not very sound, but then again, I don't think it is an argument, but rather a rant

[99Forever]

45. I disagree Prism.

No one automatically gets my vote, REGARDLESS of their brand, and they shouldn't get yours either.

If you have to hold your nose to vote for someone, anyone, DON'T.

[randome]

55. Hold out for perfect, then? No thanks.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[Bluenorthwest]

76. Once when snowed in, I had very few food choices. One was a food I dislike intensely, the other

contained an ingredient known to cause me to break out in a painful rash. I could go hungry, I could eat that which makes me break out or I could just eat that food I really don't care for which will not cause me to break out. This is to say I decided to select 'not breaking out' and ate what remains among my very least favorite foods.

A general election has two choices. If I can't vote for either, I vote against the allergen. And I always vote.

[Metric System]

49. That's your opinion.

[Catherina]

51. I rec'd but my vote will not be rubberstamping her coronation n/t

[peacebird]

53. Vote for Bernie! Eff the DNClinton and their 'it's her turn' coronation

[DCBob]

65. You should be alot more worried if Bernie is the nominee.

Clinton is our best shot to keep the RW from taking over this country. Bernie is a huge risk.

[GoneFishin]

68. Nonsense. Hillary has been a favorite target of Republicans for decades. I can say without

hesitation that (regardless of the reason) I have never met a Republican in real life whose knee jerk reaction was not immediately critical of Hillary whenever her name popped up in any conversation.

The right wing has been stockpiling ammunition against her for a very long time.

Bernie is the candidate they fear, and for good reason. He tells the truth, and he can't be bought. He is a lying Republican's nightmare.

[DCBob]

71. Nonsense on your nonsense. That is precisely the reason I am not worried.

They have thrown everything at her including the kitchen sink.. and yet she is still afloat.

Bernie hasn't been touched by GOP attacks.. yet. If he somehow miraculously does become the Dem front runner then the barrage will begin and his numbers will plummet... guaranteed.

[davidpdx]

73. Funny

People said the same thing about Barack Obama in 2008. Those people should be eating their shoes.

[DCBob]

75. How many times do you people need to be told this is not 2008??

Good grief.

[davidpdx]

77. How many times do you need to be told stupid prognostications can be wrong?

Fucking shit!

[DCBob]

80. Back at you...

with emphasis.

[davidpdx]

86. Don't mind the woman behind the curtain pulling the strings

with the money attached to them.

[DCBob]

88. It takes money and strings to win.

[davidpdx]

95. Says the person defending the candidate who claims she'll overturn Citizen's United

Riddle me this.........

If she loves her strings and money that much, what makes you think she won't start fundraising the day after she is elected, if she won, for her reelection?

Then while you are at it, tell me how a candidate that has three times more donors than Barack Obama did in 2008 can't raise the money for the GE (since you seem to be of that opinion) when Hillary donors are maxing out at $2,700 a plate at one dinner.

I changed my mind, you are right. It isn't 2008.

[DCBob]

112. Hillary is probably more aware of the responsibilities of the Office of President..

than any other person on earth other than someone who has actually been President.

Bernie clearly is not ready. He has no idea what he is going to have to deal with and will likely make huge blunders.. he is a risk to this nation's future... if he somehow miraculously wins.

[davidpdx]

148. That didn't answer my question

It was an artful dodge though.

[Prism]

137. I'm tired of being afraid

And watching Clinton throw LGBT families under the bus because of what Fox might think, ugh, no thank you.

[NonMetro]

66. I'm Not Happy About This, Either, But..

In the meanwhile, I'll vote for Bernie, but once HRC gets the nomination, I'll vote for her next November, too. There's nothing we can do about it, period. The die was cast long ago. It's machine politics or a different sort, and it's better to have a New Democrat in office than no Democrat. And the choice was never really ours to make, anyway.

[GoneFishin]

70. If you are satisfied with the wratcheting of the Democratic party toward right wing corporatism

then you are correct.

[NonMetro]

107. I didn't say I was satisfied with it

I said there was nothing we could do about it. Also, who can win without Wall Street? People say that like it's a bad thing. I mean, it is, but people shouldn't say it like it is. You know....

[ismnotwasm]

67. Interesting

That's exactly how I feel about Sanders running and if he should win the nomination. Funny how no matter what their opinions, people share the same emotions. Positive and negative

[sibelian]

98. ...... okay.

Is it JUST thwacking the Republicans? Is that what you want?

Is that ALL you want?

I realise this is a tangent, but I want to know.

[ColesCountyDem]

83. Are you comparing people who don't want HRC to be our nominee to Teabaggers?

Seriously?

[ColesCountyDem]

93. That didn't answer the question I asked.

Questions are answered with declarative statements, not other questions. Do you need me to ask the question again?

[ColesCountyDem]

114. Thanks for clearing that up.

Way to win friends and influence enemies! I'm sure that sort of attitude will prove extremely helpful in winning over the people who currently can't see themselves supporting Secretary Clinton.

[GoneOffShore]

123. If Hilary is the nominee then I'll have to stick myself in the head with a fork as I vote for her.

[Faux pas]

81. Kicketty Kickin'

[cantbeserious]

85. Republican Lite - Avowed Republican - Not Much Difference To This Voter

eom

[HassleCat]

102. If you can't fight them, join them

Or at least imitate them. That has been the Democratic strategy since 1980, and it has cost us dearly. "We can move far enough to the right to steal their votes, then do genuine Democratic things once we take office." That would be OK, but it's not working.

[Zorra]

106. There is a reason that OWS uses this mantra:

"The Only Solution Is World Revolution".

Voting for Bernie is engaging in sorely needed political, social, and economic democratic revolution. If Bernie is not nominated, either because we can't muster enough votes to nominate him, or because the oligarchy will simply not permit it, it will be time for mass consideration of alternative peaceful methods of instituting some semblance of democracy.

The segment of the American populace that won't be voting for Bernie is generally poorly informed, easily deceived, and easily manipulated by MIC propaganda into apathy or voting against their own interests. It is very difficult to compete with MSM brainwashing. Landslide numbers of people voting to nominate Bernie may be necessary to override any chance of further electoral foul play by the DNC.

If Clinton is nominated, one thing is certain for the 99%...

The beatings will continue until morale improves.

[Juicy_Bellows]

134. Beautifully stated.

"If Bernie is not nominated, either because we can't muster enough votes to nominate him, or because the oligarchy will simply not permit it, it will be time for mass consideration of alternative peaceful methods of instituting some semblance of democracy. "

Yep - I will not relent.

Cheers!

[sabrina 1]

109. She will not be the nominee if everyone who feels as you do votes for

the candidate who best represents them. Just saw some polls from several states showing Bernie leading the polls now and only 10 points behind Hillary nationally. That's quite an achievement for someone who no one heard of four months ago and half the country still hasn't heard of, but they will.

So do not despair, we do have a choice.

[hrmjustin]

119. With due respect get a grip!

No one is forcing you to vote for anyone.

[NaturalHigh]

132. Someone doesn't get to alert for 24 hours.

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Pretty rude to order another DUer to "get a grip".


You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Oct 3, 2015, 12:47 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: HRMJustin, they'll get you eventually.

To the alerter: I'm not even on his side, he called me a PUMA in a thread not that long ago. But come on. This is just trying to silence someone. Rude does not mean an attack.

This is why the jury system is complete and utter crap. Yuck. I only hide bigotry.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Oh get over your old self. Biggest waste of an alert I have seen lately.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: What? Why would anyone alert on this?
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: WHY was this alerted? Come on now.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Telling someone to get a grip doesn't seem hide-worthy to me.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is GDP, get a grip.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If we hid every rude post, the jury system would crash and burn.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[hrmjustin]

133. Thank you and thank you jury. Looks like they want to silence me for another 2 months.

[Prism]

141. Is that your best answer?

Just don't vote for her? I do understand, as another gay man, you've put in the effort to support her despite the fact she'd bend us over in a heartbeat to get ahead. So your love of her is very special in that weird way.

But your advice to me is not bother?

Seriously, I can do. If that's what you're recommending.

[hrmjustin]

142. Where in my response did I say to you just don'tvote for her, brother?

[one_voice]

138. Vote your heart/conscience in the primaries...

and hope you get the outcome you want.

I like O'Malley. I'm hoping the debates will get more people familiar with him.

[m-lekktor]

139. I am also a gay man and I think she is the absolute worst.

I believe she barely tolerates LGBTers! good post, btw! thumbs down to Hillary Kissinger CLinton

[hifiguy]

140. Lest we forget

HRH with her BFF, War Criminal Henry Kissinger.

How can anyone defend this shit?

[Prism]

144. The social justice brigade is in a pickle

More and more, we're learning just how reluctant a champion Clinton can be, and the people screaming at everyone else about social justice are suddenly dead quiet.

Because it's their candidate.

LGBTers are, as always, fairly expendable in this way. Again.

[Warren Stupidity]

146. One of their more prominent members here

recently declared us, right here, to be fakers, not real Democrats. They are real bitter that DU is not Hillary Underground, and probably were hoping that there would have been some sort of purge of all of us by now.

I still think Clinton will eventually prevail. I accept that. To me it is all worth it to have a serious campaign on the left, to bring an alternative message to the same old corporate shit to the people, to remind us of an alternative history and the possibility of a very different and much better America.

They will be insufferable, but we will just have to suffer through it.

[akbacchus_BC]

180. I can understand where you are coming from, however, vote for the person whom you think

you feel you can trust. Politics is not that clear to us, I was told that politicians lie and I should suck it up. No, am not doing that, I am voting for the party that will progress Canada and so you should being a citizen of the US!