2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumI'm rescinding my pledge to vote for whom ever the Democratic nominee for POTUS is.
When making that pledge I didn't realize I was giving license for my vote to be taken for granted.
I think one of our candidates is doing just that. So I now declare I support Bernie Sander for POTUS.
And will as long as he remains a candidate. If that changes, only then will I consider other options.
SamKnause
(13,110 posts)You are going to like it here.
You will be welcomed with open arms.
senz
(11,945 posts)SamKnause
(13,110 posts)Sorry.
I don't know how that happened.
senz
(11,945 posts)Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)Sometimes I have five or six DU tabs going because I will be following some treads, not commenting but to read new posts anyway sometime I accidentally comment on the wrong thread.
SCantiGOP
(13,874 posts)Welcome (effectively) to the Republican Party! I am sure you will enjoy Sec of Defense Cruz and Supreme Court Justice Santorum.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)At some point the whole we're better than the Republicans won't work anymore.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)out and say I find your initial statement not entirely credible. Your posts in this and the Bernie forum make it clear you have, at very least, leaned Bernie's way for a long time.
That's fine, of course, but I'd respect your "declaration of final decision" more if you didn't use it as an excuse to sling a vague and gratuitous insult at Hillary. Grabbing every chance to insult your candidate's opponent is a defining characteristic of the group you've now officially joined, so it does seem that you have come home.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)so dramatic, so vast, so incredibly HUGE that if the GOP manages to take the WH, we may well never be the same again, none of us.
It is remarkable to see people act this way.
p.s.
If you are a
woman
gay
minority of any kind
not a Christian
You not only better as hell show up and vote for whomever the Democratic candidate is, but you also better bring at least one other voter with you.
If you dont fit into any of these categories and wish to pretend it doesnt matter either way....oh well
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)And that is what makes the issue unacceptable. This constant voting for the lesser of two evils has had dramatic consequences in my lifetime. Sadly, the DNC will NEVER change until it faces a mass exodus.
This whole thing reminds me of conversations I had decades ago about the Catholic Church and people who kept going, despite disagreeing with the core teachings. They were going to "incrementally" change the Church from the inside. Never happened, instead the Church continued its slide back to the 19th Century.
erlewyne
(1,115 posts)Hillary is my #2, but this in-fighting (We are Democrats) was wearing
me down. Thanks, I will vote for one or the other (ugh).
We need a mass exodus, and yes, I was one of the above.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)of the differences, or an intentional lack.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)Full-throated support for the three strikes, more cops, harsher sentences, more war, taking advice from war criminals and praising them, is NOT moving the country left. HRC has also PROUDLY proclaimed herself a centrist, which in today's reality means to the right.
Intent exists, on the part of HRC to move right.
merrily
(45,251 posts)If you volunteered the pledge, you did not need to.
Anyone who wants my pledge can go scratch.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)left to the republicans so we must vote for her (if she wins), because the alternative would be a NIGHTMARE!
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)and yes, even Reagan are now far to the left of today's GOP. Try to remember that under Nixon, we got the EPA, OSHA, and good relations with China. Reagan raised taxes and cut budget deal with Tip O'Neil.
If it is so important that she win, perhaps she will consider altering her stances on the major issues alienating about 14% of the voters in the Democratic base to a point that they say they won't vote for her.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)Thank you for pointing that out.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)Those that think otherwise are either delusional, or paid RW trolls
cui bono
(19,926 posts)are either delusional, or paid RW trolls.
.
Change has come
(2,372 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)Agree on 90+ percent of items
cui bono
(19,926 posts)they sure as hell don't. And that ideology informs and influences a lot of the other positions they take and votes they make.
Ask Obama, he told us he's a moderate Republican. Hillary is much closer to Obama than Sanders and in fact, I think most think Obama is just to the left of Hillary. But they are both center. Bernie is left. GOP is now extreme right with only a few left who are simply right.
Bernie is in the left area in the graphic below, the area that needs more people back in it. If the Dem Party won't shift back now then they are going to lose at least half their membership to a new party who will fill that void. Probably the Green Party.
.
saturnsring
(1,832 posts)PADemD
(4,482 posts)Will Hillary pledge to stop using Henry Kissinger as an advisor?
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)Still has absolutely nothing to do with the huuuuuuuuuuuuuuge difference between the two parties.
Surely you can see that?
PADemD
(4,482 posts)Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)She is more liberal than Obama. Those are just BSS talking points
Autumn Colors
(2,379 posts)world wide wally
(21,757 posts)He is much more "American"
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Authentic, not like Hillary.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)because the alternative is idiotic.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)the alternative would be a NIGHTMARE. Then vote a straight Democratic ticket!
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)Either one is perfectly willing to vote to slaughter you in droves if they think it will score them political points.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)way I am a woman and a Buddhist and have a bisexual atheist daughter who has said after her vote for Bernie she is done with the Democratic party.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)If you are a woman, gay, minority of any kind, not a Christian, both Hillary and Obama are good candidates to vote for.
But, if your biggest concern is economic issues, if you want a candidate you can trust on the environment, on Social Security, on expanding Obamacare to cover everyone and be Medicare for all or single payer insurance, if you want more and stronger regulation of Wall Street and other crucial businesses, if you want a tax system that is fairer to the middle class, if you want free tuition at state colleges and schools, if you want the things Bernie is willing to work for, then voting for Hillary is a waste. If you want what Bernie wants plus you are a woman, gay, minority of any kind, not a Christian, then your best bet is to vote for Bernie.
Even a man who is not gay, white and a Christian is better off voting for Bernie.
Rationally, Bernie is the best choice.
In fact, for me, Bernie is the only choice.
ybbor
(1,555 posts)As a straight, agnostic, white man I 100% agree with you.
Bernie is the only choice, period!
HRC is just GOP lite, or as said above, about the same grade as Reagan. And I believe that Reagan's presidency was the beginning of the downfall of our nation.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)and economic reform.
And there is a bonus with Bernie. He grew up poor and is by nature frugal and careful with money. Knowing how that works on the psyche based on my own childhood and adult experience, I would bet you that he is an excellent money manager and will prove to be good at managing the federal budget. He will probably find lots of ways to save money.
Most of the Republican leadership grew up with money to throw around. They talk about small government and saving money, but they have no clue as to how to save money or tighten the belt of government.
I think Bernie has a really, really good chance of being our next president. In fact, I predict that he will be elected. But, he will govern very differently than people think. I say that because he is just not the big spender that Republicans will try to say he is. He will spend on the things we need, but a lot of things we now spend money on will not receive the funding. I predict he will be an extremely wise and good president.
True Blue American
(17,994 posts)I will vote for either one, but am so fed up with the constant name calling of Hillary I honestly think my party has degenerated into Republicans.
I am ready to say a pox on both parties. And Have to say DU has turned into Breitbart light with all the headings.
I will not be back here if it is not cleaned up and made more fair.
Bohunk68
(1,364 posts)As a gay man I am getting goddamn tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. I have done more than my time in the frying pan for GLBT issues since the early 60's and do not need you to tell me what I should do in the voting booth. If I choose not to vote for evil, I still have the options of further down the ticket.
Purrfessor
(1,188 posts)particularly in the case of all the hostility that has invaded DU over the primaries. And that is, "You get what you get when you don't bother to vote."
My views are this:
Anyone who sits out the election because the nominee is not the one of their choosing needs to refrain from complaining on DU about how bad Trump, or Cruz, or whichever Republican is elected president is, if that turns out to be the case. And anyone who thinks the Democratic nominee (whomever that may be) is worse than the Republican nominee probably shouldn't even be a participant on this board.
For those who say they won't vote in the general election for the Democratic nominee they dislike because they live in a red state, well, if your preferred nominee wins the primary I see no need for you to vote for that person either, since you are convinced that the Democratic nominee has zero chance of winning in a red state. So if you are one of these Democratic voters living in a red state stay true to your beliefs and don't vote at all for the presidential ticket.
Everyone should ask themselves this question: who does more to damage the Democratic Party, those who vote for the Democratic nominee regardless of whomever that persons is, or those who sit out the election (red state or otherwise) because their preferred candidate is not the nominee? I know my answer.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)True Blue American
(17,994 posts)As a former poll worker who knows rhe dirty tricks of some voters I would never not vote.unless I were dead,but I might come back then just to annoy Republicans,who are always fipuming about dead people voting.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)we must vote for the Democratic winner no matter who wins. This is so important.
True Blue American
(17,994 posts)Not voting. What I said Is I am sick and tired of Democrats ranting about one candidate because they want the other.
Madeline Albright does not speak for me, but neither do the name caller rangers of the Democratic Party. You sound just like Republicans when you constantly call the other candidate names.
I really thought my party was better, but looks as if I were wrong.
Purrfessor
(1,188 posts)Just those who say they will sit out the general election if their preferred candidate is not the nominee. With Scalia gone this election becomes even more important now.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)Generations of people will pay the price. I WILL VOTE FOR WHOMEVER WINS AS THE DEM! Then, I will vote a straight Democratic ticket!
NoMoreRepugs
(9,481 posts)I'd suggest you should get under the covers for what's to come
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Volaris
(10,275 posts)I won't have any problem voting for Clinton if she's the nominee...because I know what I'm buying..4-8 years of status quo.
Nothing radical, nothing useful, probably not much getting done, and when it does, it will be sensible-woodchuck type stuff that the GOP will still scream their infant heads off about.
More votes for stripping the ACA.
more weapons in the middle east; bigger banks.
More surveillance because reasons.
Etc.
4 more years of Obama, minus the oratory.
Status quo (that's better in a lot of ways then when Jr left).
It's not my preference, but it will work in a pinch.
Meanwhile the REAL politicking of Berning Revolution can continue amongst ourselves, independent of what Washington and Wall Street think is best for us.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)I couldn't agree more!
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)Bernie even said it, that we (Dem's) have to come together at the end of this process.
When Obama was running against Clinton, I was for Clinton originally, then when Obama won, I wholeheartedly supported Obama.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Bernie says we should. This Revolution is bigger than Bernie. I'm obviously not going to say who I will or won't vote for in the GE because I don't plan on getting kicked off this site, but I will say this. I will not just come back together. I may very well vote for more Democrats in the future, but I am no longer a Democrat. I owe no loyalty to this party.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)taking a step.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I'm rescinding my pledge to vote for whom ever the Democratic nominee for POTUS is.
When making that pledge I didn't realize I was giving license for my vote to be taken for granted.
I think one of our candidates is doing just that. So I now declare I support Hillary Clinton for POTUS.
And will as long as she remains a candidate. If that changes, only then will I consider other options.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)consider other options.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)regardless of the outcome.
HubertHeaver
(2,522 posts)In the primaries one backs one's candidate until that candidate drops out. At that point, one considers one's options.
cynzke
(1,254 posts)Otherwise you might as well vote GOP. How do you (collectively) think the clowns we have in Congress got there in the first place? This is not just a Presidential election to consider. There should be NO CONFUSION as to what happens if you don't vote Democratic or don't vote! We are where we are because the GOP, the Tea Party, the religious fanatics, the Koch brothers and super pacs know how to whip up fear in the weak minded voters that drive them to the polls. They will succeed if we break down into political squabbles. I pledge I WILL VOTE AND NOT HELP THE GOP WIN ANY MORE SEATS AND POTUS.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)Well said and supported!
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)As much as I don't want Hillary, I won't let the GOP win. If she were to be impeached and O'Malley were her VP, we still win.
brush
(53,924 posts)Last edited Fri Feb 12, 2016, 03:18 PM - Edit history (1)
They all equal the same thing giving more chance for a repug winning.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)A Utah Dem writing in Bernie, if it comes to that, will not affect the electoral vote. Nor will a Minnesota Dem doing likewise.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)It didn't have to be this way.
True Blue American
(17,994 posts)I find repulsive in my Democratic Party. Sounds just like a Republican.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)The ignore button's right over there. Doesn't seem like we're destined to be friends, so you might as well put it to good use.
True Blue American
(17,994 posts)Far members of my party will go.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)stay nice.
cali
(114,904 posts)m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)Folks: it's nobody's damn business how you intend to vote. If you answer incorrectly, you can be banned from this site. This seems to go double if you are a Bernie supporter.
So be careful.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)Duval
(4,280 posts)catnhatnh
(8,976 posts)I've never committed to vote for Clinton.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)If that changes, only then will I consider other options.
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)HubertHeaver
(2,522 posts)KentuckyWoman
(6,697 posts)nose juice all over the damn place.
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)I can see if you're not part of a minority group, it doesn't really matter, but frankly with many Republicans still promising to rescind gay marriage, as well as to outlaw abortion, deny voting rights to minorities, throw out the immigrant parents of US citizens, etc., I think there is no choice in this matter. I am old enough to remember how the Republicans sat by during the AIDS crisis of the 1980s and allowed tens of thousands of Americans to die, so I know Republicans are capable of murder, and I know whatever one thinks of Hillary she's not a murderer. Hope Bernie is the nominee, but if he's not Hillary will not only get my vote, she will get my enthusiastic vote.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)SCOTUS is too damn important to fool with to me. Reproductive freedom, health care and marriage equality will be serious jeopardy in the hands of the GOP.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Anyone who wants to take their ball and go home if they can't feel like a winner can go *#%@& themselves.
They are part of the problem if they pack it up now and do not continue on and to try and flip congress.
Flipping congress is a revolutionary act, staying home is bullshit.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Excellent.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)but to disparage "establishment" people as if they are always more symbols of corruption is crap.
to not educate people about plans or process- also crap.
True Blue American
(17,994 posts)Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)It is just too important!
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)candidates that support LGBTQ rights. Now she tells me because of the dirty tricks the party has pulled she will cast her vote for Bernie and will then be done with the Democratic party.
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)If you agree, perhaps have her read this. In the 1980s, the Republicans were just horrible beyond belief. While families were sitting with their dying children without recourse to treatment or meds, the religious right and Reagan did nothing. If it was not for the French and WHO, who really tackled the crisis aggressively, even more Americans would have died. It was a terrible time, and I think it's one of the big reasons that so many older gays will never ever back a Republican for president. The Republican Party hasn't changed. If anything, it's gotten worse, and wants to bring back the 1980s.
http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/Reagan-s-AIDS-Legacy-Silence-equals-death-2751030.php
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)AIDS crisis in the 80's? That is no excuse for what the Democratic Party is doing today. My daughter is really pissed that the party has decided for her that Hillary should be the nominee. The party should not dictate who the nominee is. That is what voting is for. That is what democracy is.
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)Both sides are playing politics. Bernie is a terrific insurgent within the Democratic Party. If he wins, he will form his own establishment, a better one than currently exists. I agree the way the party is trying to give Hillary the nomination is terrible, but the reality is that is exactly why she is in so much trouble, so it's worked to our favor. To quote Bernie's hero, Winston Churchill, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except all others that have been tried."
That said, I have no idea how old your daughter is, so have no idea if she knows what it was like to live through an era when friends were dying right and left and the government was just standing by. If she knows about it and doesn't care or thinks it won't happen again, that's her right. But, I think Bernie would agree that history has a tendency to repeat itself.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)doesn't work for her. Like most Millennials when she sees an injustice she rails against it. She fights vigorously for her and others social rights. But she also fights for other rights as well.
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)I mean that. (Though it would be nice to have both!)
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)I am sorry.
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)Amazingly, my closest friend at the time contracted HIV in 1983, but is still alive. The sad thing is he spent 15 years giving up, expecting (like 3 of his lovers) to die. It was a terribly sad time.
BobTheSubgenius
(11,572 posts)Churchill's closest analog in this cycle is probably Jeb; neither as far right as George Wallace, and miles away from Eugene Debs, say. My ad hoc assessment is mainly due to his quite pragmatic approach to government. Within himself, he was quite socially conservative, definitely an imperialist and more than a tad racist.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)provided the states have outlined their rules in their state constitution.
A political party is not a state and has no Constitutional right to run an election.
Sam
Postscript: The United States Supreme Court is not a state either....
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)I can see why many of them are flipping back and forth to Trump- they want it to be all about them.
Screw women and POC if they don't follow along.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)You really must be delusional to think that.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)The R hate for HRC is second only to the R hate for Obama.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Court confirmations. I know the future of the court is more important to me than many Sanders supporters, but if this is supposed to be encouraging, I don't see it.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)I have to wonder why anyone thinks that is a good sign. Especially when it comes to USSC confirmations.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Because many are disenfranchised, Ike Republicans are still around but they have had no voice in a very long time.
Do you trust Hillary with USSC confirmations with her Monsanto, Wall Street, Big Bank and military ties? I don't.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)White male privilege affords one the opportunity to stand their ground and sit out or vote 3rd party if their candidate isn't nominated.
I will not squander that, it's too important for our future.
JudyM
(29,294 posts)Orrex
(63,233 posts)Repeated ad nauseum with little support, but I guess we're just supposed to agree without really thinking about it.
What bold initiatives has Sanders "gotten done" that were contrary to the wishes of the Congress as a whole?
JudyM
(29,294 posts)to get enough rethugs to sign on to it in a way that wouldn't put the spotlight on them.
Here's an article that lays out more info on the question:
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-gets-it-done-sanders-record-pushing-through-major-reforms-will-surprise-you
(Snip)
When the Affordable Care Act was in danger of not having the votes to pass, Sanders used his leverage to win enough funding for free health treatment for 10 million Americans through Community Health Centers. This gutsy moveholding out until the funds were put into the billhas even Republican members of Congress requesting the funds, which have helped millions of Americans who otherwise would not have access.
Another moment came when Sanders, who was then chair of the Veterans committee, worked with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), to overhaul the Veterans Administration. McCain praised Sanders' work on the bill in an interview with National Journal. Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) even went so far as to say the bill would never have passed without Sanders' ability to bring the parties to a deal.
Orrex
(63,233 posts)Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)Orrex
(63,233 posts)So they can answer first.
Sanders' supporters want to have it both ways: they claim that Clinton is a de facto Republican while simultaneously insisting that Republicans will block everything she tries to do. You can't have it both ways.
And if Clinton won't be able to get anything done with a Republican Congress, despite being so far-right that some of Sanders' supporters can't even "hold their nose" and vote for her, then how will Sanders do it?
Sadly, I expect that you thought you were being clever by reversing the question, but in fact you're simply using a child's playground trick. You should learn from your candidate: he would certainly reject such simplistically petulant tactics.
and your reply is just as childish.
you first. you first.
please.
talk about petulant.
oh well. have it your way.
Orrex
(63,233 posts)As is common for that crew, you like to demand answers while refusing to give any.
Oh, well. Still plenty of room on my Ignore list. No great loss.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)through the Senate, Hiraeth? By her strong, well established record, and moderate liberal coattails, which will help carry OTHER Democrats into office, including getting a majority in the Senate and lessening our minority in the House.
Bernie has no coattails. To the contrary, like Trump on the other side, a candidate who appears too extreme for centrist voters could cause the Democratic party to lose everything. An entire nation of Democratic candidates is waiting anxiously for Hillary to win the nomination because their own election could well hang on who wins.
There are as many reasons why Bernie's colleagues do not endorse him, but this is a huge one for many.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)forthright comment. Thank you, Hortensis.
zalinda
(5,621 posts)Take a look at what happened in Iowa and New Hampshire, Bernie when he entered the race was considered just some pesky gnat to be brushed aside. Hillary was up by 50-60 points in Iowa, and how did the caucus go? She is now rapidly losing ground in South Carolina. Bernie has become a huge competitor in less than a year. People have known Hillary for 25 years, they don't trust her, but they trust Bernie, as the polls have shown.
This is not a centrist country, not any more, that time has passed. Bernie will have HUGE coattails if the DNC lets more liberal candidates run. And, this is why Bernie's colleagues are not endorsing him, they fear they will have a more liberal candidate running against them. Also, you must know about the Clinton's enemies list. I never realized how ingrained they were in the political establishment, until I saw the pic of the young Clintons attending the barbecue with Bush Sr and George Wallace.
As for SCOTUS nominees, Bernie has many friends in DC that he has worked with over the years. He is well liked and respected even by Republicans, that cannot be said of Hillary.
Z
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Hekate
(90,865 posts)Yes, honestly.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)He certainly wouldn't have been able to do it in say, 2015.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)If she's the nominee, my vote does nothing. All our electors will be going to the Republican. Even if he promises to execute everyone who votes for him. They hate Clinton that much here. And that hatred is specifically for Clinton.
And the vast majority of us are in states in a similar situation - they will either always go to the Republican, or always go to the Democrat.
As a result, almost everyone on DU is not presented with the choice you are describing. For the vast majority, the result is predetermined and individual votes only make someone feel better or worse.
Contrary1
(12,629 posts)And the only positive talk I'm hearing, other than for Trump, is about Sanders.
Hillary will bring out the voters alright, but not for the result she is hoping for.
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)When people talk of secession and the like, I always say, well look at even a state like Oklahoma. Obama got 33% of the votes against Romney. We need to never forget that even in the reddest of red states, there are a lot of good people. In that way, your vote does matter.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)And the politicians from OK definitely don't act concerned about the 1/3 of their constituents who like Obama.
senz
(11,945 posts)However, Hillary's foreign policy, as revealed through her short stint as a Senator and her single term as SOS, has been extremely destructive to innocent human life -- so please don't harbor illusions about Hillary's reverence for life.
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)He led an investigation to out gays in the 1920s, he turned back boats of Jews fleeing Europe, he bided his time entering WWII even after it was known how many innocent people were being killed. it was the Russians, more than the Americans, who won WWII. Sure, he was outstanding on social policy for his time, but clearly if foreign policy is your measure, he failed for far too long to keep the world safe, and that failure led to the deaths of 100 million people. Hillary looks pretty good in comparison.
senz
(11,945 posts)If we continue to follow the Clintonian/Republican "Third Way" corporate path, this country will crumble from within.
Clinton has a dominator approach toward other countries and no compunction whatsoever for those she helped to kill.
She may need your vote now, but she is no friend of LGBTs.
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)What happened when Bill was president is he overreached in terms of gay rights and conservative Democrats (and Republicans) fought back, and he was forced to settle for Don't Ask/Don't Tell in the military or gays would have been fully discriminated against. I have no doubt that the Clintons and Obama were never particularly against gay marriage, they were just dealing with more conservative constituencies. Bernie, who I support, had it easy. He chose to serve a largely politically and racially homogeneous state. The only area where he had to take a stand controversial to liberals was gun control, and he did what Hillary did, compromised with his constituents. (I don't blame him for that.)
druidity33
(6,449 posts)Iraqis, Syrians, and Libyans are so much safer now than they were before, right?
Really, throwing FDR under the bus? REALLY?
Wow.....
Orrex
(63,233 posts)I've concluded after much discussion and review that anyone who opts not to vote for the Democrat on the ballot in Nov 2016 is a shortsighted and stubbornly self-important fool.
My ideal candidate hasn't been on the ballot during my voting lifetime, but like a grownup I recognize that it's not all about me, and I vote in whatever way will help to keep the most Republicans out of office.
"I refuse to vote for the lesser evil," claim the righteous moralists.
Well, I've got some news for you: politics is always about the lesser evil. It has been for millennia, and will continue to be so for much more than the foreseeable future.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)I've seen it as well....what you have said is 100% true.
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)Anyone and everyone can pledge on an anonymous
blog to vote for someone. It does not matter, because
we still can fill out our ballots privately.
What does matter though is the state of the voting
machines and the scanners. That worries me a
lot more than anything else.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)I was #2
On Fri Feb 12, 2016, 10:30 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
I'm rescinding my pledge to vote for whom ever the Democratic nominee for POTUS is.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511213220
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Clear violation of TOS. This poster is saying he won't vote for the democratic nominee if Sanders is not the nominee. This should be hidden. Also, should be sent upstairs to admins.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Feb 12, 2016, 10:35 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: These kinds of posts are common during the primaries. Meh, the poster will come around after we get our nom. Just relax and try not to be so sensitive.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Alerter reading comprehension fail. "consider other options is not stating specifically.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nope. Poster is saying they're vote is theirs and they will reassess their vote IF Bernie isn't the nominee.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: "If that changes, only then will I consider other options." That's the key. He didn't say he would not vote for a Democrat.
Leave. Bluejazz
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)SHRED
(28,136 posts)...Bernie if he is the one or if not I vote Green Party.
I live in Blue California so I have that option.
farmboy
(252 posts)but I will absolutely vote for him over any Republican or Independent candidate if he is the Democratic nominee in the general election. To even have to make the case that Bernie/Hillary supporters should support the other if that person is the Democratic nominee due to so much being at stake (Supreme Court alone) is the perfect example of the narrow tunnel vision for Bernie Sanders by so many of his vocal supporters. For any Hillary supporters that won't support Bernie, it is the same, though I see an overwhelming number of the former and few of the later. Coming out of the tunnel that is the primary nomination process, that unexpected or unprepared for first curve can send you right over the mountain , smashed to bits at the bottom of the ravene. Wide-view, people. The election of either of our two candidates does not end the fight for our priorities, values, and visions. Both of these two will be more receptive than anyone else running.
zalinda
(5,621 posts)The simple truth is that many, many first time voters will not stay around and vote for Hillary, they see her as the problem and not the solution. Many, many indies will not support Hillary either, because they see her as the problem. More than anything, it's probably the establishment that is 'on trial', which is why for some people it's either Bernie or Trump. With Hillary's people taking Rovian shots at Bernie, she is not endearing herself to Bernie supporters, they know who is calling the shots.
People are hurting and to tell them to vote for the lesser of two evils, is not going to work this time. If their work and vote for Bernie doesn't work out, expect them to stay home because they will figure the system is rigged, so why vote.
Z
NNadir
(33,574 posts)...run by petulant children will eventually fail.
In 1980, this was a prosperous country with a healthy and strong middle class. What now?
I'm not optimistic about the chances of the future generation in this country, but if they stay home rattling their rattles and crying for milk or to have their diapers changed, rather than bite the bullet and vote for the "lesser of two evils" if that's how they see it, then they will live with the consequences of the "worst of two evils" and moreover they will have been involved in exacerbating evil and will thus, have no right to say a damned thing about the consequences of evil.
I really don't understand why reality is so difficult, but apparently it is, notably among Sanders supporters.
Have a nice day.
zalinda
(5,621 posts)It has always been the lesser of two evils. It hasn't worked out for us. People aren't stupid, but they do know that to do the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, is crazy.
How often do you keep patching a bridge, hoping it doesn't fall down. That's what the dem party seems to be doing. Some Bernie supporters are thinking maybe it's time to let the bridge fall, so we can start over again and build a better, stronger bridge.
Z
NNadir
(33,574 posts)If this concept escapes you, I can't help you.
The year 2000 is particularly galling on this score. How many people died in Iraq; how much suffering is going on, because there were enough "purity seekers" in Florida to throw the election.
This conversation is concluded. You're making me sick and depressed.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)I'm not sure I will need to reconsider anything.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)The way of high integrity. Always rare.
firebrand80
(2,760 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)firebrand80
(2,760 posts)At lot of attention seeking, but nothing actually affecting the outcome of the election.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)this will eventually have an effect on elections.
kjones
(1,053 posts)It's not about loyalty, it's about common sense.
Though I agree, a lot of my cohort lack it.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)not voting Democratic if Bernie is not the nominee.
kjones
(1,053 posts)I'm sure by graduation they'll be eagerly appropriating Madam President's
progressive accomplishments as if they were their own hard fought
victories.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)Cross bridges when I come to them. K&R
handmade34
(22,758 posts)the need to come together in a few months... there is too much at stake to pout
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)Actually, I haven't read one yet. In 2008 you had people on both sides (thought mostly HRC's) vowing not to vote for each other. It says something that despite all the nasty stuff being said about Bernie, no one is vowing not to vote for him.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)not a comment on your specific choice.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Sanders supporters have to not be very authoritarian. Because there's a giant mountain of authorities (endorsements, superdelegates, media, etc) telling us we should support Clinton.
The thing you call "weird" is a natural result of that. More Clinton supporters will "fall in line" behind Sanders, because that's "what you are supposed to do".
Sanders supporters are already not doing "what you are supposed to do" by backing Sanders.
seaglass
(8,173 posts)think their principles are more important that other people's lives.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)One side trying to explain their position, while the other hurls insults.
seaglass
(8,173 posts)I don't care if it is a Clinton supporter refusing to support Sanders or a Sanders supporter refusing to support Clinton, my opinion stands.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Almost like I wasn't actually calling them sheep or otherwise blind followers. Just more receptive to "this is what you are supposed to do".
Guess I'll keep hitting search. Surely "sheep" will come up one of these times.
seaglass
(8,173 posts)"falling in line" and doing ""what they are supposed to do." In any case I'm SURE that you did not mean that as an insult.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Thank you!
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Do you feel better now?
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)plus5mace
(140 posts)If the results of the primaries are overturned through undemocratic means, I will not support her nor any future Democratic Party candidates for any position.
scottie55
(1,400 posts)Over crazy town.
Both or our candidates are light years ahead of the Neanderthals on the other side.
HubertHeaver
(2,522 posts)scottie55
(1,400 posts)There is no creatures to compare Republicans to without insulting them.
I mean insulting the creatures of course....
True Blue American
(17,994 posts)Claiming you will not vote for the other because your guy or gal did not win is called,"Cutting off your nose to spite your face!"
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)HubertHeaver
(2,522 posts)Kasik (phonetic spelling, pronounced with a long "a" does worry me though.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)MisterP
(23,730 posts)Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
uhnope
(6,419 posts)the whole purpose of DU is to elect Dems. If you're agitating against that, you are undermining the whole cause.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)And the lesser of two evils is not going to earn mine. Definitely not as long as there is still a good offer on the table.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)the fact that Bernie is talking the long game here. A commitment of many years is required.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)good for Democracy when our candidates do.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Not going to win the long game using RW framing against Dems. And the long game is what it will take.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)I cannot vote for that woman.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)hamsterjill
(15,224 posts)Just wondering. Thank you.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)hamsterjill
(15,224 posts)So my assumption would be that you didn't vote.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)hamsterjill
(15,224 posts)Have yourself a great weekend!
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Bohunk68
(1,364 posts)How someone voted is no one else's business. Not mine, not yours. You were being snarky.
hamsterjill
(15,224 posts)I asked if the poster was willing to say, he/she refused. So without fact, there is only assumption.
Bohunk68
(1,364 posts)hamsterjill
(15,224 posts)As to the very obvious point I was making. Do you? Totally over the head....
beaglelover
(3,496 posts)basselope
(2,565 posts)Luckily, I live in Cali, so it doesn't really matter what I do.
Horus T Light
(12 posts)Some have the speed and the right combinations, but if you can't take the punches it don't mean a thing! She has been battle tested and is ready to Rock!
I am with her and looking forward to the day you are to.
[link:http://www.politicususa.com/2016/02/08/fighter-hillary-clinton-blasts-every-republican-candidate-for-being-anti-woman.html
stopbush
(24,397 posts)Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)kjones
(1,053 posts)brooklynite
(94,792 posts)...and I could care less about the chest-thumping by the "my candidate or bust" contingent.
steve2470
(37,457 posts)True Blue American
(17,994 posts)I will vote for the Democratic candidate. Period!
EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)jillan
(39,451 posts)tularetom
(23,664 posts)#2 If you want to make or break such a pledge you should never announce that you did so.
#3 It's nobodys fucking business who you vote for (except yours of course)
#4 Don't ask, don't tell.
liberal N proud
(60,347 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)When everybody understands what chance we have with the current choices, they'll say the same thing.
Response to Snotcicles (Original post)
Post removed
Response to Post removed (Reply #156)
Snotcicles This message was self-deleted by its author.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)kjones
(1,053 posts)demwing
(16,916 posts)right now we have a mountain that must be climbed
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Hekate
(90,865 posts)fun n serious
(4,451 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)We are not conservatives who love war for profits & globalization (let the poor people in other countries have the jobs so the wealthy can make higher profits) & lowering our goals so far in every area that we are indistinguishable from republicans.
But our party leaders are. They've also been quite unDemocratic as they try to force a conservative, purchased, phony establishment candidate on us.
That's what's shocking.
fun n serious
(4,451 posts)I pledge to vote blue no matter who! I would do ANYTHING to prevent a Republican win. The Bush years were horrific.
Bad Dog
(2,025 posts)Most of the show was taken up discussing the NHS and Jeremy Hunt, but a substantial part was devoted to the American primaries and Donald Trump. They all agreed that when the last series ended Donald Trump was seen as a joke and now he's the front runner. As Osman has studied US politics he was asked to go through it. He rubbished all the other Republican candidates one by one which is why they were out in front.
Osman said Trump would definitely win the Republican nomination because of this. He then said if Clinton wins the Democratic nomination she'll beat Trump, but if Sanders wins, (and he had to explain who Sanders was,) then Bloomburg would also stand thus splitting the left of centre vote.
It's just his opinion, and he hasn't got a dog in this fight, but that's how it was explained to a British, fairly left wing audience.
This is from when Johnny Vegas was on last season.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)I mean he could try.
But I personally wouldn't switch my support.
Bad Dog
(2,025 posts)He said he would split the vote and let Trump get in. That's just his view, but he's a smart guy.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Who is switching to Bloomberg? Bernie supporters or Hillary's?
The blue collar worker in GA who doesn't like either?
Bad Dog
(2,025 posts)But the feeling was that Republicans would vote for Trump regardless. He said that if Sanders won the nomination Bloomburg would stand and split the vote, so the inference is that some Clinton and independents would vote for Bloomburg rather than Sanders.
That's how it was explained to a British audience.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Its just odd to me.
Bad Dog
(2,025 posts)The main worry is Trump, and as far as we're concerned the only recognisable people in the race are him and Clinton. He had to explain who everyone else was. I don't think, (political junkies like myself aside,) anyone will be taking that much notice until the nominations are secure.
On a personal level I'm not that bothered as long as the Republican doesn't get in, and Bloomburg should have run for the Democratic nomination not muddy the waters for the progressive vote by standing as an independent.
Loki
(3,825 posts)RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)NNadir
(33,574 posts)I kid my son about it: He's a pretty strong Sanders supporter. I tell him - and this really gets his goat - that I might vote for Bloomberg, since traditionally America has always been run by billionaires or their equivalent.
The fact is however, that even if that tiresome fool Sanders is the nominee, I can't see that I will have any choice but to hold my nose and vote for him.
I'm not some egotistical self absorbed twelve year old crybaby. I've grown to be an old man; I saw Reagan and two Bushes, the last one being definitely among the worst American Presidents ever observed.
I've learned that one seldom has any choice in this country other than "the lesser of two evils."
Historical "lesser of two evils" have sometimes nonetheless surprised their voters and being better than expected. Abraham Lincoln, generally rated as our greatest President, was such a person. In 1860 a large share of his voters, even as they saw him as an uneducated country bumpkin, voted for him anyway. The rest is, as they say, history.
I will be very depressed if Bernie Sanders, a tiresome baby boomer who never grew up, is elected President. Being a baby boomer myself, a member of a generation that will leave an awful mess behind, I know the type very well. But, channeling Mario Cuomo, even though I hold a low opinion of Sanders, and, increasingly the insipid rhetoric of his supporters here, if he is elected President, I hope he will succeed. I hope that anyone elected President, so long as his goals are to make the country secure and prosperous and sustainable, as opposed to a President whose sole purpose is to gratify his own ego, will succeed.
Only a complete asshole, frankly, would decline to vote for Ms. Clinton, should she be nominated, if the Republican nominee is a man like Trump, Cruz or that ilk.
A remark to the contrary is very childish in my view, to the point of stupidity, and reflects the fact that at least one candidate in this election is supported by childish thinkers, and, if my impression is correct, may reflect some childishness on the part of the candidate himself.
Have a nice weekend.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Try again..
Herman4747
(1,825 posts)...think of the tremendous damage a Republican presidency could inflict!!
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)For now, Bernie is my candidate. God forbid, if I need to look at that again later I'll do so when necessary, and not before.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)of how a captive of the Taliban must feel when asked to recite the Koran.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)This proves once again why I do not trust the "Bernie revolution." Bernie is promising a lot of things that I really would like to see. I also know that to achieve even a fraction of those things, we'll need to do sustained and years-long work from the grassroots up. Bernie has not been doing that for years, since he is not a team player and has indeed chosen not to throw his energy into building up the Democratic Party (which, within the American system, is the only plausible vehicle for getting progressive things done). He has NOT been building up progressive candidates for years - i.e., he has NOT been building up a "revolution." And at his age, he won't have the time to do so in the future. A revolution of the kind he has in mind requires years and years of work and dedication, and followers who will actually follow through. What I see instead is an old man, too old to put the 20 or more years of work into building a movement (this is not ageism, it's just reality), and who has not done so in the past. And I see enthusiastic followers who will turn on him the moment reality sets in. Because pledges mean nothing to them.
Thespian2
(2,741 posts)ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)We've been trying so hard to have our voices heard ABOVE the rumble of NEGATIVITY and SLANDER coming from almost everyone of our Congress Critters!
What are they so afraid of?? Hmmmm, maybe it's We The People who might now be ready to show THEM that THEY work for us!!!
Have we had enough NOW?? I know I have!
Huge test coming in the next few weeks, I can't tell you how much respect I have for this ONE man who has stood so tall and has withstood the trash they've thrown at him from every direction. A lesser man would have crumbled. I don't know how he does it, but even if the GROUPS OF MACHINES do take him down, not only has he lost... WE HAVE LOST!
He needs us more than ever! Does the donation quarter end in March? I've given monthly and added some along the way, but so many of us don't have huge bank accounts. I want to give what I can, but will have to wait till March.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)if the D nominee isn't their first choice---then I gotta ask, did you do the same thing in the midterms?
Just want to know who to thank for the pack of evil clownbaggers in Congress.
We'll thank you for you purity as we watch the GOP consequences. So will your grandchildren.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)and that is that.
JeaneRaye
(402 posts)If everyone felt this way, we would be handing the Presidency and the Supreme Court over to the Republicans. I understand how you feel but no matter who wins the candidacy, we have to come together and support the nominee. We cannot allow the Republicans to get back into the White House.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)A candidate who is uncertain of the outcome is more likely to improve.
Response to Snotcicles (Original post)
Post removed
mvd
(65,180 posts)It's not just a scare tactic. There could be 2-3 more wing nuts on the Supreme Court if a Repuke gets elected. Bush was bad enough, and some of these Repuke candidates are even worse - President Obama fixed some of the main stuff, but it may not be as doable next time. Country might be lost for generations. That said, my enthusiasm about Hillary is not high. Especially after the way she has campaigned against Sanders instead of trying to bring his supporters into the fold. Not surprising but still disappointing.
Response to Snotcicles (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Chichiri
(4,667 posts)...is your pledge still rescinded?
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Corey_Baker08
(2,157 posts)Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)ecstatic
(32,748 posts)gatekeepers? Openly threatening to vote GOP even while there's a vacancy on the Supreme Court? GMAFB. You're not fooling anyone.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Corey_Baker08
(2,157 posts)Let me start off by saying, Snotcicles, I joined DU as a young 14 year old Liberal Democrat while our party, The Democratic Party, was also embroiled in another heated Fight for the Nomination of the 2004 Democratic Nominee for President of the United States.
Snotcicles, I remember your posts, & as a young and impressionable young man I always liked your posts & respected you, hell I'll go as far to say I kinda looked up to you...
But to say that you will not support the Democratic Candidate unless it's the person you like is selfish on your behalf. It's people like you who pledge Bullshit like that, that will be the reason The Democratic Candidate For President has a greater chance of losing this November.
Elections have Consequences. With the Death of Justice Scalia, It is quite probable that indeed the 45th President of the United States may very well be the individual who does indeed make that Appointment...Not to mention the fact that whomever the next President is He or She will without a doubt have the obligation to appoint 3 or more vacancies on The Supreme Court of the United States.
So keeping those facts in mind are you really saying that if Bernie Sanders is not the Nominee of the Democratic Party YOU are willing to risk a Republican Taking The Oath of Office on January 20, 2017 & Allowing Him to Change The Make-up of the United States Supreme Court For Generations?
Remember Al Gore Lost By 537 Votes, I Ask You, I Beg of You To Listen To The Voice Of Reason This Election Is The Implications Of This Election Are Soo Much Bigger Than Making A Point To The Democratic Party That The Liberals Are Alive & Well & Want Their Voice Heard
I ask of you with all due Dilligence & Respect To Reconsider Your Decision in light of recent events because any Democratic Candidate Would Be A Hell of Alot better than any Republican especially knowing with almost certainty that the SCOTUS Hangs in the balance...
ecstatic
(32,748 posts)I have neither the time nor patience to beg grown adults to vote democratic.
Corey_Baker08
(2,157 posts)Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)but I will vote for Hillary if she wins because the alternative would be a NIGHTMARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)If ever.
Vote for your favorite Dem, or against a Republican, but vote!
And in the meantime, lobby and campaign like a motherfucker.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)earthside
(6,960 posts)That has always been the last plaintive plea of the establishment Democratic Party: You have to vote for us because of the Supreme Court.
First of all, as important as Supreme Court vacancies and nominations are, this time my economic well-being comes first. I'm not going to vote for a neoliberal candidate for president. That puts all the Repuglicans and Hillary Clinton in one group and Bernie Sanders as the only major figure in the other group.
I am tired of being manipulated by Democrats who are beholden to economic elitists and those who always figure out a way to support 'free trade' that sends the livelihood of average folks overseas. (No -- I absolutely do not believe Hillary Clinton when she says she is against TPP or Keystone.)
It's a new day I hope in America: if a presidential candidate is not on my side, then I'm not voting to help them out just on one emotional issue.
themaguffin
(3,828 posts)Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)We don't get to vote for court appointments. Anyway. GOT IT!
zappaman
(20,606 posts)basselope
(2,565 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)convention, the race will get a lot scarier.
I'm doing what Bernie recommends.
Response to Snotcicles (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)banned from here, even though I have invested lots of time and emotion in this endeavor. Better people than me have been run out of here. Joining that alumni might have it's own rewards.
olddots
(10,237 posts)I have no idea what the hell that means .