Seriously, What The Hell Does Hillary Clinton Stand For?

[GoLeft TV]

Hillary Clinton supporters should be asking themselves some very important questions before they decide to vote for her in the primaries. What does she stand for? What does she believe in? Who has she ever fought? Who has she stood up to? Ring of Fire’s Farron Cousins discusses this.

[upaloopa]

1. Bernie supporters should stop telling us what we should be doing.

We are winning and our candidate will be the nominee. Bernie, not so much. But thanks for your sincere caring.

[Cobalt Violet]

3. You can't answer the question.

[upaloopa]

9. We don't need play Bernie supporter games. They is no reason to accomodate you

[Cobalt Violet]

12. you will in November if she is the nominee.

I'll have the last laugh then because you don't really make much of case for me to vote for her.

[upaloopa]

14. That stuff doesn't phase me. You do what you want

[Baobab]

36. Hillary stands for Disinvestment

look at the video i just posted- To Study or to Not be Able to Study

thats what she stands for - Globally. privatization -

Which in india they call by a better name "Disinvestment"

[lewebley3]

39. Hillary will fight for all Americans: she will always stand with the people

[Baobab]

41. Juridicial people, i.e. corporations

Corporations are not people.


>Hillary will fight for all Americans: she will always stand with the people.

No she won't, her track record shows her quietly behaving quite differently.

For example, in 1994 when she claims to be working for affordable health care, she was doing that to divert the country's attention from a secret trade deal that was actually making affordable public health care impossible forever. that is definitely its intent.


And you should know, when she talks about ending discrimination she means ending discrimination against foreign corporations. And their low paid workers. Which has been in the pipeline for 20 years- being negotiated and when it kicks in in earnest, it likely will undercut US wages substantially.

I am not kidding.

[lewebley3]

42. Hillary track record is fighting for the people: Not coporations

[Baobab]

48. I thought that too for a long time - Not any more.

You can learn a lot about this global agenda by Googling the last half of this phrase

'a service supplied in the exercise of governmental authority' means any service which is supplied neither on a commercial basis, nor in competition with one or more service suppliers."

here is another example.. the US fought to keep minimum wages in Haiti dirt cheap..

WikiLeaks Haiti: Let Them Live on $3 a Day | The Nation

http://www.thenation.com/article/wikileaks-haiti-let-them-live-3-day/


http://www.businessinsider.com/wikileaks-haiti-minimum-wage-the-nation-2011-6

http://www.haiti-liberte.com/archives/volume4-47/Des%20c%C3%A2bles%20r%C3%A9cemment%20divulgu%C3%A9s.asp

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/06/10/137064161/would-a-5-a-day-minimum-wage-make-life-better-in-haiti

http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/a_pulled_scoop_shows_us_booste.php

[lewebley3]

87. Hillary has been fighing for the American people: I know I have watch her myself

on the national stage: we a lucky she wants to continue
helping Americans personally by running for office.

[Baobab]

88. She's been involved with the WTO who have a huge guest worker program in the pipeline

that could be disastrous for the country if the WTO rules on a case now pending the way I think they may.

They have been working on tweaks for this thing for at least 20 years. Every time that fast Frack is approved they work on it and then when it ends they have stopped. To me that means its main target is the US.

Its described in here: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTRANETTRADE/Resources/C13.pdf Its under GATS Mode Four

An updated, newer version is part of the Trade in Services Agreement which is on WikiLeaks- under TiSA, movement of natural persons.

Other parts of the same WTO deal are the real reasons US health care is so screwed up.

She is very dishonest. Its time for this all to stop, we need an honest President.

[lewebley3]

89. Hillary has not been involved with WTO the United States has:

Hillary has not been President yet: We have one President
and congress at time.

[Baobab]

90. Bill Clinton is the single human being most associated with the WTO

nt

[lewebley3]

92. He is not the single human ass with WTO: You post is political because of the Clinton

Bill Clinton is the single most person associated with
Dem success.

[ThePhilosopher04]

79. What track record? Just because she says it doesn't make it so. She talks a good game ...

that's about it.

[lewebley3]

85. Her record is a fact: Hillary has not been closed to coporations: She votes

for what is best for all

[Baobab]

91. "She votes...for what is best for all...corporations"

Even corporations from Third World countries get treated better by Hillary than natural persons in the US.

[lewebley3]

93. Wrong; Hillary in her votes has always sided with people against the Corp

[bjobotts]

61. She hasn't yet.Bernie wants what the people want.Hillary wants to be president

She's been running for president for 25yrs. She gets in front of the parade and then turns down the alley. She will not reign in WS or regulate the Banks or increase SS benefits. We will see and increase in the MW but it won'd make it a living wage. We will see tax cuts for the wealthy, an increase in military operations (she has supported removing democratically elected leaders and replacing them with dictators...see Glenn Greenwald's report). She screwed up Libya and Syria and will keep the bombs dropping somewhere for Israel. She cannot be trusted because she waits to see what others tell her to do and lacks the compassion or passion for an issue to act. Bernie has been Bernie for the past 35 yrs bur Hillary changes yearly except when it comes to money. She is extremely condescending but her speech at the Israel lobbying pact where she joins hands with Netanyahu (forgetting how horrible he was to Obama) to support his war efforts showed me just how bad she will be for America as president. Better than any republican is not really a compliment. Just a reason to hold my nose while I vote for her...and I used to support her big time. I just don't trust her anymore.j It's the old saying "there are 2 things I dislike about Clinton...her face.

[PatrynXX]

43. ahh yes

thats why my 1998 computer was mostly made in India. not China. and we've been tryint to get India out of the Customer Service Dept for well over a decade. How did it get there?

[Baobab]

49. the next phase is putting entire back offices on the other side of the world

Cross border data flows are not just for customer service any more.

People can even operate machinery over the net

[ChairmanAgnostic]

27. Hillarians cannot.

Not in a fact based universe.

[Cobalt Violet]

31. Isn't that the truth.

I'm flabbergasted daily here.

[PatrynXX]

45. yeah. they seem to think the hate originated from Bernie's side

Not so. No basis in reality.

[kaleckim]

22. LOL!

Are you under the illusion that only Sanders supporters think these things? There is a reason why he does much better with independents, why she is seen as not being trustworthy, why she has insanely high net negatives in regards to favorability in polls. Pretend all you want that this is only a Sanders thing, not at all the case (and I think you know this).

She's a horrible candidate. Say, come back in a few months after the FBI gets done with her and her corrupt group. Let's see if you're posting any more of those smiley faces then.

[saturnsring]

15. ahahahahhahhahaahahahahhahhaa laughter is infectious

bernie bros are funny

[kaleckim]

33. So...

your response to these things is to mock people and call people names? Surely that will help your corrupt candidate come election time. It isn't as if only "berniebros" (what was the name for Obama's supporters in 2008, same exact, pathetic slander, "Obama's boys" I think) don't trust or like her, but oh well. I'm sure you'll win over everyone else by the stick the fingers in the ears and whistle strategy you got going there.

[saturnsring]

67. that post was for that poster at that time

bernie supporters arent interested in being won over they have their candidate and theyre sticking to him, and good for them it helps push hillary to the left.

[lewebley3]

38. Hillary stands for the Democratic party leadership: and the progressive party

Easy

[PatrynXX]

46. perhaps

but she doesn't stand for the Democratic Party and the Liberal Party so there

[lewebley3]

50. Their one in the same: but not every liberal is rep by her: (you for expample)

Its Obama that is leads the Dem's, and under him the elected
office holders (Senators etc).

The party pays for the ballot positions, convention, etc.
even though the Dem's never have much money.

Hillary, Obama, and other Dem's will be raising money for
other Dem races.

Sanders has not done anything for other Dem's that is why
Hillary will get more support from Dem's.

The Dem party is made up of people working together as a team:
this is something Sanders supporters don't get!

[kaleckim]

60. Yes

I admit, I do find it hard to get. Your party has supported a trade model, for decades now, that has de-industrialized the country. There is no debating this. The trade model has decimated unions and helped to reduce wages. Yet, union leadership continues to support her (I say this as a former UAW rep). That doesn't make logical sense, unless we factor in corruption. Your party has supported austerity, the WTO, the coming TPP, gutted New Deal financial regulations, has bailed out financial capital with over a year's worth of GDP (while doing nothing for students, homeowners, and local governments), has passed NAFTA, and the three trade deals under Obama. It has supported mass privatizations nationally, at the state and local level (I live in Chicago, try arguing otherwise). I could go on. Wages haven't grown in over a generation, de-industrialization has spread, inequality and private debt has exploded, infrastructure is crumbling, all of this has happened with either party in power (show that inequality hasn't exploded under Obama) and yet lots of working people continue to work within your party and the other corrupt party. Throw in the fact that we are marching towards ecological destruction and your party's likely nominee is announcing clear as day that any radical change is impossible and shouldn't be expected. So, we shouldn't expect to do anything about that.

Now, who (especially on the left), would want to change any of that?

[lewebley3]

69. Its does make logical sense: Hillary has long history with the union:

Democrats don't support austerity and never have: the GOP were and are in
power, we are living under the damage the GOP and Bush wrecked with
the country.
The low wagers and smaller middle class is the GOP doing, not the
Dem's

The Dem's did: ACA, made the unemployment go from 16% to 4%
and taxed the rich: protected SS and Medicare:

Remember Bush was going around trying get the votes to privatize
SS: had he succeeded the old people would not just have lost their
houses they would have been in the street without medicine.

You may not like the Dem party: but its all that is standing between the GOP
taking over and destroying everything we hold dear about this country.

So Three Cheers for the Dem's party: Hear Hear Hear : Go Obama: Go Hillary

[kaleckim]

71. Nope

The Democrats DID support austerity, how in the heck can you claim otherwise? In fact, Obama was very much open to cutting the big three, which would have yanked even more demand out of the economy. Why do you think that hundreds of thousands of public sector workers have lost their jobs under his presidency? It is true that some Democrats, and Sanders, want more spending, increased investment in infrastructure and the like, but it is absolutely not true that the Democrats opposed austerity. Obama in fact, right after taking office, supported a smaller stimulus than what the left was proposing (and it would have made a big difference).

The ACA is okay, but lets not kid ourselves about it. In my state, Illinois, Medicaid was expanded, which is great. However, they expanded Medicaid by privatizing it. It is now basically managed care. The rate of increase in health care costs has decreased, which is good. However, it still outpaces wages growth for most people. It is still not sustainable in the long run, and the reason is that private health care companies are at the center of the system. As long as that is the case, we will continue to pay more than other countries, and have endless people die and go into bankruptcy because of our system, and we'll continue to have far worse outcomes as a result of the system. The unemployment rate has come down (don't know where in the hell you get 4%, the official rate is 5.5% and everyone knows the real rate is much higher), which is good, but we were losing 750,000 jobs when he took office. We've improved in that regard (hard not to), but I challenge you to name me a single thing that caused the crash that has been truly addressed. Is private debt not much larger than when Reagan took office (yes, and it is much larger than public debt, kind of a problem in an economy that relies on consumer spending), have we changed our trade model (which has caused mass de-industrialization)? Are the too big to fail banks smaller or larger? Is inequality higher or lower than when Obama was president? Is infrastructure improving and not what it was when was elected, or is it continuing to crumble? The black community was destroyed by the crash of 2008. Have most in the black community recovered? Obama made most of Bush's tax cuts permanent, and most of that benefits the rich (carried interest, dividends, the estate tax, capital gains). Did he have to (no)? What have they really done to get at the root causes of all of this, stuff like inequality? Nothing, in fact Obama is trying hard to pass a complete disaster in the TPP. Have you read, or read about, that bill?

Your party is less bad than the Republicans, but that is all I'll give you. On non-economic issues, it is much better. On foreign policy and judicial nominations, better, same with the environment. However, isn't it kind of an easy thing to say when we are comparing your party to the modern Republican Party? The plague wasn't nearly as bad as that party, so what is it saying that your party is better than the Republicans? The left has to have a breaking point with the Democrats. If it doesn't have one and let it be known, it will remain the pathetic shadow of its former self nationally.

[Baobab]

68. "progressive" in the trade context means irreversible. Not in a good way, they want to privatize

public education and public health care irreversibly. Thats what progressive means - in that context, irreversible. As in - even if its a mistake it cannot be reversed. Liberalisation means privatization -

https://www.google.com/search?q="progressive+liberalisation"

its basically the bait they wave in front of developing countries which desperately need jobs. They hope to use them to lower wages, and in many cases replace workers in developed countries- due to the workers from elsewhere being cheaper.

they will do this by means of trade deals such as TiSA, GATS and TTIP forcing privatization of big chunks of the public sector and then putting it up for international bidding,

The schemes use restrictions barring whats now being framed as discrimination against foreign corporations in government spending to switch spending to use international procurement systems -

e-portals - competitive bidding where the lowest qualified bidder wins. By this means, desperate workers in the Third World's interest are pitted against workers in developed countries, allowing even the worst business models, such as health insurance that cannot work - to be prolonged indefinitely,

The Clintons, particularly Bill Clinton were a key figures in setting up this global scheme.

[lewebley3]

70. Who cares: progressive politics is about people: not semantics

[kaleckim]

72. Not sure how that helps your argument

The actual data on trade deals is horrible. Look at the US trade balance with Canada and Mexico before and after NAFTA, then look at the impact that has had on jobs, union organizing, wages, and the power differential between capital and labor. How about the other trade deals? What has the impact been with Obama's biggest trade deal, the South Korean deal? Horrible. What about the actual impact of the WTO, not only in regards to trade, but also sovereignty (the investor state disputes, also an issues in the trade deals) and our democracy. You know that the US just fought, at a time of climate change that may doom human civilization, and won a case at the WTO versus India over solar panels? It fought hard to make it so that India didn't support its local solar panel industry. Instead of saving the damn planet, our trade model wants to make sure to protect US solar panel producers. Shouldn't it be all hands on deck at this point?

Please explain what is "progressive" about that trade model? The word progressive is on its way to being useless, just like the word liberal. I think Assata Shakur nailed it.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/04/21/liberals-attacks-on-cornel-west-expose-their-political-bankruptcy/

I have never really understood exactly what a ‘liberal’ is, since I have heard ‘liberals’ express every conceivable opinion on every conceivable subject. As far as I can tell, you have the extreme right, who are fascist racist capitalist dogs like Ronald Reagan, who come right out and let you know where they’re coming from. And on the opposite end, you have the left, who are supposed to be committed to justice, equality, and human rights. And somewhere between those two points is the liberal.

As far as I’m concerned, ‘liberal’ is the most meaningless word in the dictionary.

[lewebley3]

86. The trade deals went bad because of the GOP: The Clintons had very

high employment and the country was in the black when
they left 16 years ago. Under Clinton were had peace
and prosperity for all: very few people were poor under the
Clinton's

Sorry trades deals went bad under the GOP not Clinton:
The GOP don't know how to govern themselves out of
a paper bag: That is why their party is a mess!

[AlbertCat]

6. Bernie supporters should stop telling us what we should be doing.

You guys have been telling us to drop out since the summer so...

tit for tat...


Besides, you didn't answer the question, of course. Just more deflection of important questionsy'all clearly don't want to think about.

[upaloopa]

11. see #9

[AlbertCat]

13. see #9

I did.

This is not a "game".

And that's a lame excuse for not being able to answer.

In fact, all "Clintonchicks" have are smiley faces and LOL's instead of answers.

It's kinda part of that "It's her turn" baloney, where examination is discouraged.... where actually caring about things and having big ideas is just so nerdy and uncool. Just look down your nose at those "not-real-Dems" and... "Hey.... the Hilster's got this! Just sit back and let Mama take care of everything."

Most undemocratic.

[upaloopa]

17. see #9

[ChairmanAgnostic]

28. not only do you sound like a broken record,

your refusal to give any facts speaks volumes.

[saturnsring]

16. "you started it"?

[AlbertCat]

18. "you started it"?

Well, ... "It's her turn" didn't come from Sanders' camp.

Hell, Hillary's been running since the 20th century!

[saturnsring]

19. omg the horror of it

[AlbertCat]

64. omg the horror of it

It's pretty lame.

[Baobab]

55. Stop telling us Hillary is the nominee or that she's a good person

or that she cares -

Its obvious to me what she thinks-

She thinks American wages are too high and corporate profits, which are at record highs, are too low.

Look at what she does and not at what she says.

Read this:

A Pulled Scoop Shows U.S. Fought to Keep Haitian Wages Down

[forest444]

2. Herself.

And of course her family interests. She is a family woman after all.

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/real-estate/chelsea-clinton-buys-10-5-million-article-1.1288710

[markpkessinger]

56. Ding! Ding! Ding! n/t

[forest444]

58. Thanks, Mark.

It is what it is.

[840high]

77. .+1

[antigop]

4. Corporations, especially the multinationals. nt

[HassleCat]

5. Winning!

She believes in winning. She wants to win. She needs to win. Her victory will be the greatest event humankind has experienced so far. We need her to win. If she does not win, we are all doomed. Winning is everything, and Hillary Clinton is a winner. Hope that clears it up.

[zentrum]

37. That's it exactly.

[AlbertCat]

7. Whatever she's told to stand for

She has no ideas or imagination. Still trying to ride in on her husband's name.

[Herman4747]

24. Exactly. n/t

[DhhD]

32. And New Democrats have been privzatizing everything they can, every since.

[stillwaiting]

52. Progressive liberalization. This has been pursued for the past few decades on a bipartisan basis.

I guess that's how Hillary can rationalize calling herself a "progressive".

Progressive liberalization is very, very far from an American progressive as understood within the ranks of the Democratic Party though.

[Gregorian]

8. Her bank account.

[polly7]

10. Wall Street, the MIC, Weapons makers, PNAC, and money, money, money ...... nt.

[LibDemAlways]

20. Easy...She stands for

corrupt Wall Street bankers, people being screwed over by insurance companies courtesy of the not so affordable care act, trade deals that export American jobs, H1-B visas that steal American jobs, fracking, making the ridiculous statement that tuition at public colleges shouldn't be free because the wealthy can afford it, and saber rattling Neo-con foreign policy...to name a few.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

21. $$$$$$

...

[happynewyear]

78. +1,000 !!!

That and Bill, the real president-elect, should it sadly come to that.

Enough already or is it ever enough when it comes to $10K speaking engagements and $2500 a pop dinners!

$$$$$$ is right!!!!

[SammyWinstonJack]

23. Obviously not the 99%. Hillary stands for anyone willing to pony the big $$$$$.

[bjobotts]

63. Only defensively not offensively. She didn't attack the Banks or Wall street or anything else

She only defends her actions from their attacks but never went after them for their misbehavior or their obstructionism.

[ZombieHorde]

76. Thanks for posting an answer.

Over 70 replies and your post is the only one I saw that answered the question, but I could have missed other answers as I skimmed over many of the posts that just seemed like infighting to me.

[ThePhilosopher04]

80. No she hasn't. It's all a game of good cop/bad cop. Wall Street walks away with the loot.

Open your eyes.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

26. The status quo

which is better than any Republican plans, but not good enough for me.

[Scuba]

29. Nothing, but she does have gravitas so there's that ...

[Spitfire of ATJ]

30. I remember the Beltway Media praising her for her ability to NOT take a position.

[procon]

34. Looking at the numbers, she stands for lots and lots of people.

As an aside, not everyone is so credulous to miss the conflict of interest at work for these daily anti-Hillary threads. Here, this OP references other people who share similar views to actively promote Sanders, urging viewers to believe the unilateral propaganda as if it was a legitimate and unbiased critique.

Fair enough... did you convince anyone yet?

[chervilant]

62. Let's go for the visual evidence...

Look at pictures of Bernie's rallies. Look at the pictures of long lines of people waiting to see him. Look at the deluge of posts on social media from people of all ages, all races, all religions and ALL political affiliations trumpeting their support for Senator Sanders.

Here's what I get from the Hi11ary campaign: she's not NEARLY as popular NOR as positive as Bernie Sanders, and that's gotta sting.

Furthermore, she'll NEVER be as popular as Bernie. And, if by hook or crook, she does win the Democratic Party's nomination, many millennials and quite a few Boomers are abandoning the Party, because for them it's no longer representative of the 99% when it pushes a corporatist, "moderate" candidate over the people's choice.

[procon]

65. Pictures are lovely, but only the numbers count, yeah?

Popularity polls are fantastic at ego stroking, but we all know that is not the single issue, or even the most important issue that voters choose in selecting their candidate. Ideological purity doesn't win elections any more than social networking or cute photos will convince people to drop the leading candidate and join the 2nd place candidate.

[chervilant]

66. The visual images I suggest you view

are far more accurately representative of Bernie's popularity, hence, the actual number of voters supporting him. Current polls, which may be your barometer of choice, show him ahead of Hi11ary, some by as much as twenty points.

Furthermore, he's gone from 60 points behind to AHEAD!

I think it's inaccurate of you to call Hi11ary "the leading candidate."

Go, BERNIE!!!

#NotMeUs

(Plus, I find it amusing that Hi11ary supporters avoid responding to the assertion "Bernie is far more popular!&quot

[kaleckim]

73. How is it about "ideological purity"?!

Last edited Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:38 PM - Edit history (1)

People are making these decisions based on the actual impact of policies. Students, for example, respond to Sanders' call for universal college education because they are massively in debt. Working people are flocking to Sanders, especially younger working people, because he opposes a horrible trade model that makes actual development and protecting the environment nearly impossible and because they are screwed in this economic system if there aren't radical changes. It isn't the left's fault that we have been right in our critiques of these policies, that our predictions came true, or that our alternatives are popular and would probably improve the situation. It seems that Clinton supporters feel outraged that they have to finally answer to the left, to address the left's critiques. Her husband was just used to ramming through NAFTA, the WTO, and gutting social programs that benefited the poor and basically telling the left that it had nowhere to go. Those days are over, and many Democrats seem to feel they don't need to answer to the record of policies they've supported. Well they do, or there will be short and long term consequences. The country has changed, and Clinton is deluded if she thinks we can continue on the path that started largely with Reagan without major consequences.

[Madmiddle]

35. She is not honest.

Senator Sanders has the experience and the know how. Hillary is a disaster. Feel the Bern!!!

[INdemo]

40. She stands for "I have wanted this for 30 years and by God its my turn"

"I have spent the last 20+ years sucking up to Goldman Sachs and I'm not letting this slip away"
" I know I don't talk about issues but what the hell Bernie Sanders has all the good ideas and my Wall St donors will not stand for me to talk about those progressive things"

All of the above is what Hillary stands for.

[Baobab]

51. No, thats just the cover story, its far worse than that

for example, virtually everything we've been told about health care is a lie.

to cover up a global trade deal thats basically making public health care impossible.

[curiouso]

44. Important questions

Lots of good questions raised here - perhaps they should be shared with the media, which seem more concerned about whether she smiles or talks too loud or too softly or how she dresses. They treat Sanders like their nutty uncle and treat Clinton the way society pages used to treat the girls who weren't invited to the debutante ball, while all the while providing an open mike anytime Donald Trump has something stupid to say. These days, the media are far more interested in ratings than issues and there's a tragic reason why - American voters have to be entertained or they won't tune in. The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars but in ourselves.

[jalan48]

47. She will tell us what she stands for after the election. She has already made this clear.

[Baobab]

53. please tell me thats you trying to be sarcastic

Because otherwise, its not funny.

We're taking about a crime against humanity thats been happening. because they hid their real reasons for giving us dysfunctional health care for 20 years was a trade deal.

A major crime against humanity.

[jalan48]

54. I'm a Bernie supporter so yes, I'm being sarcastic.

Hillary's answer when questioned about the Keystone pipeline early on (before polls told her she needed to take a side) was, "I'll give you my answer after I get elected President".

[grasswire]

57. It depends. nt

[Squaredeal]

59. Hilliary speaks like a typical attorney...

...making her untrustworthy.

[slipslidingaway]

74. I have no clue what she stands for :( nt

[Duckfan]

75. Except for all those conglomerate companies too numberous to mention

[ThePhilosopher04]

81. She stands for $153 million in speaking fees since her and Bill left office. She has to keep ...

the gravy train rolling for her and her posse. She uses the wedge issues as cover, as does her right wing buddies. It's all a shell game, though finally some are catching on.

[longship]

82. Ask the Hillary Clinton group.

That is if you haven't been banned. It is becoming a badge of honor to be banned from there.

I did not think so until I was banned and the banning message invited a PM which I sent and was ignored.

No wonder the candidate groups, especially the Hillary Clinton group have so many DUers banned. They don't care.

The candidate groups serve absolutely no purpose but to divide us. It is on that basis that I recommend that they be disbanded immediately.

United we stand; divided we fail. And as anybody here knows, there is no uniting with the candidate groups. They are universally petulant children who even the least bit of outreach across the aisle results in the boom being lowered. And no discussion about ones intent is allowed.

The candidate groups divide us. I don't know how we'll win in November like this. Especially the Hillary Clinton group which seems to have a nuclear bomb of banning. I tried to get along there. It didn't do any good. That the hosts won't even respond to my pleas attests to their ideological steel walls. And then they are fixated on BernieBros, and Jane abuse, and complaining about Bernie or Bust. Well, they banned a Hillary ally who supports Bernie.

Good work, Hillary group. If -- and I DO mean if -- Hillary gets the nod, don't you all wring your hands when you have a hard time getting the BernieBros, Jane abusers, non-black voters, etc. (all of which have been hideously used against us) to go to the polls and pull the Hillary lever.

I will. But don't cry to me if many won't.

You made this bed. You sleep in it.

As soon as the nominee is confirmed at the convention, GD.P and all the candidate groups should be killed. I would vote now. We unite or we lose. And the TOS should be enforced.